Posted on 04/18/2024 5:48:07 AM PDT by Rev M. Bresciani
In Concord, Massachusetts on April 19, 1775, the “shot heard round the world” rang out, which was the very beginning of the American War for Independence. But, syndicated columnist Don Feder notes, that town recently “removed three historical markers, which had been in place since 1930, that commemorated the founding of the Massachusetts Bay Colony 300 years earlier,” lest the signs offend woke sensitivities.
(Excerpt) Read more at new.americanprophet.org ...
alas. what populist government has endured at all? This one probably had the best shot of any of them, but the “...moral and religious...” part has proven to be the achilles heel.
as it is in everything under the sun.
While our founders were clearly against the establishment of a state religion, they were also very clear in their mandate requiring federal office holders to take a solemn oath.
A devout person takes an oath with the understanding there may be existential, eternal repercussions for violating it. A person without moral compunction, views an oath as a mere formality and stepping stone to access power.
I suspect that if you asked any person in congress or any executive branch officer holder to repeat their oath, a very small percentage would be able to recall exactly what they were sworn to do.
Are you saying morals & religion are our problem, or the lack there of?
did you not call it a "representative" republic?
Are you saying morals & religion are our problem, or the lack there of?
Really? The.Lack.There.Of.
“When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe.” — Thomas Jefferson
The country worked when it still had a frontier spirit of moving on and starting over on your own. When the country got filled up and we got crowded together it became harder to do that, and people turned toward government to do things for them.
As our forefathers noted, our freedoms are only sustained by a virtuous people, and my how we've fallen.
Yes I said representative, however, I think the problem is that the people who vote may know nothing about the person they are voting for, so I see that as being more like blind representation, as opposed to a populist representative. Heck many of them could care less what their constituents want. 😋
I believe the country of Liberia has for the most part the identical Constitution as America does and is constitutional republic.
That country is a fail. Something about the citizenry comes into play.
Granted! But still supports the point. The idea of “power to the people” was supposed to be a panacea. For whatever reasons, the cold facts of history show otherwise.
The facts are quite evident, in that the founding concept has been hijacked, and the reason for that is also quite obvious.
Power corrupts & absolute power corrupts absolutely.
When you add in the capability of controlling elections via technology where there is no real paper audit trail, creates a fertile environment for corruption to flourish & grow.
That’s why the Founding Fathers did not give us a democracy! They gave us a Republic as Franklin said but we failed to keep because the siren song of democracy. Like all siren songs the end is crashing onto rocks to be eaten!
They typically last around 250 years.
2024-1776=248
Not sure what you mean? If you're saying only American citizens eligible to vote can contribute to a candidate, no PACS, etc - I agree. One problem in doing this would be tracking/auditing contributors against an 'American citizens eligible' data base.
In my opinion, another problem we have is super-rich Americans having too much influence over candidates through their immense contributions.
So, what changes to voting and campaign laws would support electing representatives who better represent the interests of the people they represent. God knows, with party politics, mega-donors and globalist control of our institutions - the people are not represented today.
Thoughts?
Taxation with representation is just as bad as without.
Let me in on who you think is representing us.
Only those who can vote for a candidate may contribute to their campaign for office.
Not sure what you mean? If you’re saying only American citizens eligible to vote can contribute to a candidate, no PACS, etc - I agree. One problem in doing this would be tracking/auditing contributors against an ‘American citizens eligible’ data base.
In my opinion, another problem we have is super-rich Americans having too much influence over candidates through their immense contributions.
So, what changes to voting and campaign laws would support electing representatives who better represent the interests of the people they represent. God knows, with party politics, mega-donors and globalist control of our institutions - the people are not represented today.
Thoughts?
Simple - only voting residents may contribute to the campaigns of those running for the geographical area they intend to represent. Contributions will be held to a maximum of $10,000 per resident. Strict bookkeeping on contributions. You wanna see some stuck-pig-squealing? Do that.
Also, remove party affiliation labels from all ballots.
I think you nailed it. Solutions can be simple - but simple, common-sense solutions are something politicians don't seem to get.
Maybe it's because most of them are lawyers. /s
“Simple - only voting residents may contribute to the campaigns of those running for the geographical area they intend to represent.”
More clearly stated, thank you.
“In my opinion, another problem we have is super-rich Americans having too much influence over candidates through their immense contributions.”
Agreed. This is perhaps the largest problem and is addressed in my original post as follows:
“The wealthy may not be involved in government nor politics. They’re too disconnected from the common man to be involved in their governance”
That’s why the Founding Fathers did not give us a democracy! They gave us a Republic as Franklin said but we failed to keep because the siren song of democracy. Like all siren songs the end is crashing onto rocks to be eaten!
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.