The fatal flaw in our constitutional republic: The founding fathers did not design a system that could withstand what Democrats are now doing to it.

American Thinker ^ | 11/18/2022 | D. Parker

[joshua c]

collectivists

the state is primary

what flavor?

doesnt matter

[Amendment10]

Original in post 60 is originate.

[Blue Collar Christian]

One of the foremost constitutional theorists of the founding generation, John Adams, observed, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious People.

[Blue Collar Christian]

From our precious Declaration of Independence: “Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.”

[Political Junkie Too]

The Founding Fathers expected transparency in how our government operates. That's why:

1. Congress must keep a daily record of its activities (Each House shall keep a Journal of its Proceedings, and from time to time publish the same, excepting such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy; and the Yeas and Nays of the Members of either House on any question shall, at the Desire of one fifth of those Present, be entered on the Journal.),
2. the President shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union,
3. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial.

The voter, too, should be held to some form of transparency, not in how they voted, but in who voted. As a civic duty, the voters should be made to assemble and publicly vote in a manner for all to see. No more mass mail-in voting, no internet voting, no anonymous voting. Anonymous votes, yes, but voting itself, no.

-PJ

[Hostage]

The 17th Amendment was more damaging than most can see, and for those that see, more damaging than can be imagined. Without the 17th, the US Senate would be much more conservative.

It's harder for lefty crooks to control the makeup of a state legislature than for statewide offices like Governor, Attorney General, Secretary of State. For example. Philadelphia can manufacture votes to control statewide offices, but the crooks in Philly can't easily gain control of the state’s representative districts.

Pennsylvania is blood red except for a couple of urban hellholes where cheaters manufacture outcomes.

The Founders arranged that state legislatures would choose their State's two US Senators. This ensured a republican arrangement to include a state's far-flung areas would have a say in who was to be their US Senators.

There are 18 states that similarly have an urban hellhole choosing/rigging who should be US Senators. If the 17th Amendment was kicked to the ground leaving the nation as it was originally founded, those 18 states could produce 18x2=36 US GOP Senators in addition to up to 50 retained in the Midterms, for a total of 86. Sounds crazy, but it's not.

More than 66 US GOP Senators could convict Biden and remove him from office.

And what was the Era called when the 17th slipped through?

Ans. The "Progressive" Era.

[Vaduz]

The founding fathers **did** design a system that could withstand what Democrats are now doing to it.

It’s those in D.C. who allow it to happen spines are few and far between there.

Pick a party any party if the founding fathers were alive they would strangle them they built the greatest country in the world.

[DesertRhino]

Agree….

[Albion Wilde]

The destruction of our system started almost immediately post-WW2 with the atheist rights and civil rights movements, veering hard left into feminism, anti-marriage and abortion in the 60s & 70s, followed by plummeting child development markers and child poverty and fatherlessness as a result. Those children are now adults, sending out more fatherless children into the streets, while their unchurched middle-class age-mates are producing spoiled, entitled slackers, pathological narcissists and media-indoctrinated screen addicts.

I hope enough people are now seeing clearly, and that it's not too late for the few to start dragging the many back to Godliness, common sense and concerted action to turn this wreck around. That said, I'm glad I'm old.

[Albion Wilde]

[Captain Peter Blood]

I disagree, the destruction started with the 17th Amendment and the beginnings of Progressive Liberal Politics in the late 19th Century. Culminating in the FDR being elected in 1932, there is your demarcation point when the this country crossed the Rubicon to where we are now.

[Captain Peter Blood]

In reality we have moved, via the Democrats, to a Quasi Stalinist State, where only one ideology is tolerated and everything else must be censored and eliminated.

if the Left had it’s way many of us would be sent to Re-Education Camps, straight to Gulag or a Death Camp. Only fear and threat of death to keep everyone in line.

[Dr.Deth]

The Democrats win because they always band together. Individually the sticks may be frail, rotten, cracked and brittle. Bring enough of them together in a bundle, and they form a mighty faggot.

[Albion Wilde]

You have valid points. Others say it was the Civil War, with Lincoln suspending habeas corpus to try to quell secession. Whatever is the case, the seeds were sown long ago.

[kiryandil]

I agree

Democrats ARE mighty faggots.

[Political Junkie Too]

Are you sure you meant this for me?

I don't disagree with what you said, but I didn't talk about the 17th amendment at all in my post.

-PJ

[GSWarrior]

For sake of discussion, let’s assume that the Supremes rule that student loan bailout is unconstitutional. But the Biden admin ignores ruling and starts sending out checks.

What happens then? Cuz I expect something like that will happen.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: the Supremes rule that student loan bailout is unconstitutional. But the Biden admin ignores ruling and starts sending out checks.

What SHOULD happen is IMPEACHMENT. But it’s a futile exercise because even if Congress votes to convict, we need 2/3 in the Senate to remove. Impossible even if the Republicans won in the midterms and got 54 seats ( the most optimistic estimate then ).