Posted on 09/08/2013 1:20:35 PM PDT by Da Bilge Troll
One hundred years ago, Woodrow Wilson was leading a counterrevolution against the Constitution. Unfortunately, he was doing it from the White House, as President of the United States. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Wilson was one of the early leaders of the so-called Progressive Movement, which was an open conspiracy against the Constitution from the start. Former President of Princeton University, he had the haughty attitude of superiority that marks so-called “Progressives” to this day. He was so sure he was so much smarter than the Founding Fathers, who laid the careful foundations of the most successful country in the history of the world. He displayed the contempt for the average American Progressives exhibit to this day as well, successfully running for reelection in 1916 on the Slogan “He kept us out of war,” before he led America into World War I the next year.
Wilson’s handiwork as President bedevils the nation to this day. That includes the federal income tax, and the Federal Reserve Board. Posterity is finally beginning to recognize the rotten seeds Wilson planted that have grown to ensnarl America in vines that now threaten to bring the whole nation down.
But now comes the most effective response to Wilson, and the whole Progressive Movement, since Ronald Reagan, in the new book from former Reagan Justice Dept. official, Landmark Legal Foundation President, and nationally syndicated talk radio host Mark Levin, The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic.
(Excerpt) Read more at forbes.com ...
Ping.
Roll them back.
Fight damn it! Fight!
This is the 11th hour.
Interesting.. T’was only a hundred years ago or so when California set sail on a sea of reforms.. T
he FEd was born , the progressive income tax sprouted forth to level the playing field.
CHange, major change ensued,, and so did world wars.. And entitlement programs..
There’s a lesson there.
And recall that Wilson was in very poor health the latter part of his term.
Actually Wilson suffered a stroke and his wife took over and wasn’t able to continue implementing all of Woodrows BS. That’s what saved us from more damage.
The CBS Sunday Morning Show had a segment this morning on a book about Wilson that was written more like a hagiography than reliable history. It noted the reality of his wife running things during his incapacitation but failed to note this was with the obvious complicity of the media. That incident eventually led to a constitutional amendment to cover the situation.
The more I learn about Wilson, the more I loathe him.
The wages of sin is death.
Ping
Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:
Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.
Glenn Beck covered the history of WW when he was on Fox. He was one of the worst presidents ever, next to Obama.
C-SPAN’s “Book TV” this weekend had someone on who had written a book about when Woodrow Wilson sent troops to Siberia during the Russian Civil War. His name is Carl Richard. One of those ideas that might have been a good idea if it had worked (like Carter trying to rescue the hostages in Tehran).
We also need:
(1) A Supreme Court that obeys the Constitution.
(2) A president who enforces the Law.
First, state legislatures will once again appoint senators. Regardless of the state, it is doubtful their senators will consent to the appointment of judges hostile to the 10th amendment.
Second, the state will have the power to override scotus decisions by two thirds vote.
As for presidential powers, states will also be able to override federal regulations by two thirds vote and congress will have to approve regulations whose lifetime cost is more than $100 million.
These are significant checks on scotus and the executive.
Mark's proposed amendments would make the government even more federal than the design of 1787.
Bad idea.
The Massachusetts legislature has bad breath. I do not want them choosing Massachusetts senators.
Of course, admittedly, Masshole voters do little better.
Oh, and Mark's amendment allows for state recall of senators who get stupid and forget for whom they work.
The 17th amendment was no small tweak to our constitution. It fundamentally screwed up the careful system of our framers.
Booting the states from the senate not only allowed, but our framers KNEW it would result in consolidated, oppressive government.
While I agree putting the senate back under the control of the states is a core goal, there is no guarantee that a future congress won’t again try to freelance. I think another critical addition would be a prohibition on federal mandates on the states and localities regarding both spending and taxing. The federal government must not be allowed to continue to give money for programs that then compel revenue generation on the part of the recipient government.
Pre-17th, the federal government was largely kept to its enumerated powers, . . . by the states.
The leap into statism took a little time, but accelerated under FDR, when his personal appeal overwhelmed a popularly elected senate, (sound familiar?) and by 1944 he had appointed eight of the nine scotus judges.
I doubt there would be another unfunded mandate with return to state appointed senators. Why would a senator risk screwing the people who appointed him?
We are witnessing popular, majoritarian tyranny, with which the framers were very familiar and the senate was designed to prevent.
I'm not promising rainbows and cute puppy dogs with repeal of the 17th, but I know there is no chance we can avoid Cloward-Piven hell without repeal.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.