Posted on 03/02/2021 2:17:47 PM PST by Jacquerie
Such is the GOP elite’s fear of Trump that some would rather deal with the loathsome and high criminal Hillary Clinton as president. This alone is proof enough of the existence of a single political party, albeit with two wings, left and right. I don’t recall who was the first to use the term “Uniparty,” but it is certainly accurate.
Political parties traditionally represent the common interests of their members, and to this end the two wings of the Uniparty have far more in common than differences. Their rhetoric often contrasts, but their mutual interests are on display. Witness the sixth year of Obamacare, out of control spending, executive and judicial tyranny. Both wings despise the Tea Party movement more than each other.
The Framers’ Constitution wisely divided power and provided checks that reached across the branches. Congress can deny appropriations, congress can override presidential vetoes, the senate can refuse consent to presidential nominees, presidents can be impeached, and so forth. Unfortunately, these necessary checks have dissolved into practical uselessness. Gone are the contesting institutional interests between the branches which the framers relied upon to prevent tyranny.
The common interests of the Uniparty are avarice and ambition, money and power. All else, even at the cost of the destruction of our economy, civil institutions, cities . . . everything else plays a minor role if any in their deliberations.
This is precisely the form of tyranny warned of by James Madison, in which all power resides in the hands of a backslapping few.
Conservatives have variously called for a real opposition party. Well, one exists. It is right in front of us. Its members have interests distinct from the Uniparty. They have sovereign powers, generally those which they did not grant to the government they created in 1788. They are fully capable of policing their environment, dealing with labor unions, taking care of their poor, etc. without the heavy hand of a distant, detached, and hostile Washington, DC.
If free government is to be restored, a competing interest must be reintroduced to an ever encroaching and centralizing government. That interest resides in the states.
There is nothing radical in returning the states to the senate. To do so means the reversal of tyranny and restoration of republican freedom. There is no substitute. The 17th Amendment must go.
Article V.
The 17th Amendment made the New Deal, Wickard v. Filburn, the Great Society, Obama’s Transformation and pending totalitarianism all but inevitable.
Subtitle: Progressives Blow Up the Framers’ Constitution.
In continuance of the Senate of the States series, the next three squibs leave the Federal Convention and visit the decades leading to the destructive 17th Amendment (17A).
The 17A triggered a cascade of stunning downwind consequences, perhaps only second to the immediate post-Civil War amendments. As opposed to the 13th – 15th Amendments which reset society, the 17A reset our republican governing form. Overnight, the 17A transformed the Framers’ exquisite compound democratic/federal structure into a democratic form deadly to republics.
Why the 17th Amendment? What enormous forces convinced the people, states, and congress to trade a proven, stable governing form for an unstable and dangerous system?
As I wrote in the post: “There is nothing radical in returning the states to the senate.”
If free government is the goal (it is) there is no substitute to repeal of the 17th.
As one who posted the series of Repeal the 17th, some 18 years ago or so, I agree in principle that this would be useful. n However, the first thing we should be concentrated on is getting the State legislatures up and reclaiming integrity to our elections.
IF that does not happen in the next 20 months, NOTHING ELSE MATTERS.
Time to think holistically:
Suppose a Convention of States were called, and suppose a delegation is created by a state, say Texas, that consisted of a bunch of white guys and gals to represent the State of Texas at said convention.
What is the first thing the liberals are going to do before that convention even meets?
Can you now understand how the delegation to the convention just became mixed up? Can you see how state lines no longer matter?
The number of people on this site that naively believe a Convention of States will somehow ‘save’ the Republic is beyond me.
The last time a group of people got together to ‘fix’ the constitution (i.e. The Articles of Confederation), the entire thing was illegitimately thrown out, and a new constitution was written.
We tend to be conservative so we think law and order and rules will be obeyed. The left doesn’t think that way, and they will use this opportunity to destroy the republic, eliminate the states and the Senate, and we will have a Parliamentary System with a Prime Minister.
‘A Republic, if you can keep it.’
Prophetic words we should all mind very well.
Be warned and beware.
GOP poised for huge gains in Florida redistricting: ‘If you thought it couldn’t get worse for Dems...it can’
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3939013/posts
“Why do you think the Senate would survive any type of convention that tinkers with the constitution?”
Where do you see that in Article V?
“Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.”
The output can only be proposed amendments, nothing else. And each proposed amendment must then be ratified by 38(!) States to take effect.
It’s not a “Constitutional Convention,” or anything else. Just a meetingof states to propose ammendments. Because Congress won’t.
It would be about ten times easier to subvert an Article 5 convention that it was to make the steal on the last Election Day. Let’s get that fixed first. If we can’t do it then Article 5 is a death trap.
Snapshot of what our Founding Fathers did - updated for the current situation:
The path to freedom, if we must, is first thru the establishment of a new ship of state - by way of forming a new, the Third Continental Congress.
- - -
At all times, even in revolution, the construction of our forefathers’ efforts was to ensure lawful process and exercise authority under the rule of law. For example, contrary to the hysteria perpetrated in the “liberal press,” about the militia, the colonial militia were at all times answerable to civilian authority, in a chain of command reaching down from the Continental Congress and down from the Provincial Congresses of the colonies, often times through what were called Committees of Safety.
There is much in our American Heritage, in which we must seek to know and understand the construction of our country and Constitution, so that where we are going, we will ensure that we do so by a lawful process, and always keep upon the path toward our principle objectives: to restore our Constitution and rule of law over government ... instead of embarking upon a sea of rage because of our current unhappiness.
It will take all of our self-discipline, to not wander from the path. The secret of George Washington’s success, according to him, when asked by a correspondent, after the President’s retirement from public office, was this: “...the straight line.”
- - -
Sir Winston Churchill, upon the occasion of a visit to an American university after World War II, and feeling the infirmities of his age, was asked to give a speech; but he had to wait out a lengthy introduction.
At the end of this praise, Churchill stood up and approached the podium; and then said, no more than, “Never, never, never, never quit.”
- - -
You must not let go of our democratic-republic [principles]. You must not be “rattled.”
The Founding Fathers and Framers set up a structure for a government in waiting, the Continental Congress. During that decade prior to Lexington and Concord, the colonialists absorbed the principles of law, some of which were discussed in the “letters of correspondence.” There is much that the people knew -— enough people -— which is what will be needed if we are to win.
- - -
Edmund Burke said, in his March 22, 1775 “Speech on Conciliation With America”:
Permit me, Sir, to add another circumstance in our colonies, which contributes no mean part towards the growth and effect of this untractable spirit. I mean their education. In no country perhaps in the world is the law so general a study...
This study renders men acute, inquisitive, dexterous, prompt in attack, ready in defence, full of resources. In other countries, the people, more simple and of a less mercurial cast, judge of an ill principle in government only by an actual grievance; here they anticipate the evil, and judge of the pressure of the grievance by the badness of the principle. They augur misgovernment at a distance; and snuff the approach of tyranny in every tainted breeze.
- - -
The Third Continental Congress
To consist of 2 representatives from each state.
Those 2 (per state) are chosen by the RED CONSERVATIVE COUNTIES of their respective states.
The RED Conservative counties of each state, to have themselves chosen 2 representative - who convene with the other sets of 2 representives at the state level.
*That* state level convention for the purpose of choosing the 2 representives, who then proceed to the meeting of the Third Continental Congress.
Ha, ha. Good luck with that.
Once you throw a group of people in a room to propose ‘changes to the constitution’, anything goes.
I suggest you re-read the history behind the last Constitutional Convention. It certainly wasn’t called that at the time, and if many of delegates would have known that such would be the final outcome, they would not have gone. It was for Alexander Hamilton and James Madison to convince the other delegates that a new constitution was required.
As it was, The Articles of Confederation required the approval of ALL the states, and Rhode Island neither attended the convention nor ratified the document until after George Washington was inaugurated.
If Rhode Island can be left without a voice, so can the American Heartland. After all, liberals freely denigrate typical Red States and Red Counties as nothing more than ‘Flyover Country’.
Beware.
And THAT is where the entire ‘Article V’ stuff falls apart. You have to be VERY naive to believe that such a set of delegates will EVER be allowed.
Once the liberals have taken it to court, The SCOTUS will rule that such a convention is REQUIRED to have delegates weighted by population with such a diverse mix of political viewpoints that ALL citizens, protected by the 14th Amendment, will have equal representation.
It won’t be state vs. state, and it won’t be red vs. blue. It will be like a parliamentary system where factions band together to wield power. Once they discover that, the U.S. Constitution, and the Republic, are gone forever.
Prove me wrong.
Not an “Article V” proposal at all.
The proposal is, to repeat the worthy construction set forth by our Founding Fathers.
We would not be asking anybody’s permission; neither did they, to associate freely.
We tend to be conservative so we think law and order and rules will be obeyed. The left doesn’t think that way, and they will use this opportunity to destroy the republic
****************
We play nice; they play dirty. They also have a stronger will to win than we do. Unpleasant to say that but its pretty obvious they are more determined and fight a lot harder than we do. They get what they want.
Quite frankly, if I was a Dem I wouldn’t give a rat’s behind what the Republicans thought or wanted because they are weak and feckless. All they do is whine and appease. They don’t push back so why give in to them on anything?
We have to make them fear and respect us. If we don’t toughen up and start asserting ourselves — and play to win — its all over for what used to be the USA.
When I’m around liberals I don’t speak softly. I raise the volume level and dare them to say anything about it.
Facts, logic and the lessons of history mean nothing to liberals. The world is whatever they want it to be.
Constraints don’t apply to liberals, but they quickly apply them to their opponents.
That is the mind set that is turning this country into a dystopian nightmare.
Time is running out on what used to be the USA. It may already be too late to save it.
Because its easier to fool people than it is to get them to admit they’ve been fooled
How fundamentally true that is.
It’s also true that there’s a sucker born every minute.
And when they’re fooled they blame someone else for their own gullibility.
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.