Posted on 04/13/2013 9:42:21 AM PDT by Jacquerie
Bump.
If it were up to me I would retain the right to vote for senators but give the win to whoever wins the most districts.
I’m at the point now where words or books have no substantive meaning in this battle between the evil we have come to confirm is Democrat and the last vestiges of freedom minded Americans. Words and books won’t cut it in this battle.
It wasn't a real good slathering, and mistakes were made where the Supreme Court ended up as its own judge.
The very same Founders did something very suspicious when they wrote up the rules for the Indiana Territory ~ the state Senate was turned into the chief court ~ boom boom ~ boom boom ~ boom boom ~ tympanic noise resounds in the hall.
Same guys; a dramatically different idea for a Senate. BTW, the Indiana legislature was still handling divorces in acts of the legislature in the late 1800s! That was after the reform of taking it out of the hands of the Senate alone.
The other territories and states that were laid out to rule the Old Northwest as it was carved up into states did pretty much the same thing ~ use the senate as a court ~
I think if we needed anything to give us a proper perspective on the Senate, it would be as a court with jurisdiction on all cases at law arising out of federal law. That would include any possible conflicts with state laws created by federal law.
He’s right. There’s a reason the Democrats worked so hard to retain control of the Senate. There are only about 33 races every two years there. They mass their resources and win. And when a Democrat wins a Senate race, he/she is there for six years advancing the Democrat party. Their leadership is smarter than the Republican leadership. And since the Democrats control the judicial branch, the legislative branch is moot anyway as the Democrats will challenge every Republican backed law in court and win the vast majority of the cases.
Those who have knowledge will understand this ~ we need a GRAND CANAL ~ impeachment just doesn’t work to discipline the federal judiciary.
Our form of government is unique and reflects what the States were doing at the time, more than the Brit system.
The Federal Senate was modeled on the existing Maryland Senate and retained State representation, in modified form from the Articles of Confederation.
Congress has plenty of power over courts. It doesn’t use them because the ruling class generally likes the results.
It was the Earl Warren SCOTUS that wrecked that representative communications track with Reynolds v. Sims and Baker v. Carr, two rulings for which they neither had the Constitutional authority, nor were consistent with its construction for State representation. By forcing the States to have direct elections of their State Senators, they were violating the exact principle under which the US Senate was ordained. The result was exactly the same as the 17th Amendment, placing rural areas at the mercy of the ignorant whims of urban voters and the media that herd them.
I can't see why guys like Mark Levin haven't made this simple and effective point.
So, it was the Maryland senate that was the model for the federal Senate. The NW Territorial Senate was clearly modeled on someone's idea of a high court and not the Maryland Senate ~ most likely because the Old Northwest was made up mostly of former Virginia land claims.
I think it's safe to say there were conflicting currents of thought ~ which is probably why the Federalists found it so easy to snake their Supreme Court into a position of equality ~ and even superiority.
We probably ought to undo that.
There is no way this would have happened if States had agency in the Senate.
I'll bet Mark eventually gets around to it.
You are absolutely correct. Words, books and talk show rants are not going to stop this MarxoFascist tyranny from subjugating us.
We are way past any peaceful political solution at this point. History more than teaches where we have arrived.
But because we are infected with Normacly Bias - the American people do not think the horrors of genocide and subjugation of the last century by similar Leftist Utopianists as what we have in power in this country now, can happen to them.
The brush moves both ways, Demo & Repub, when painting a picture about the attack on constitutional freedom. Go back to the late part of the 19th Century and the first decade of the 20th Century and see that Republicans were right there in the thick of Progressivism. Think Teddy Roosevelt here...
This is at the center of how we arrive at the 17th Amendment.
To restore the 10th Amendment, repeal the 17th.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3005581/posts
We do not have the power or ability to keep our own representatives from defacto abolishing the Second Amendment, or throwing in with the homosexual agenda. They are compromised and even the TEA Party is infiltrated.
We cannot get Congress to stand up for the Bill of Rights - how can anyone expect them to repeal the very Amendment that gives them limitless power??
What makes anyone think that a Con-Con would not also be twisted and perverted into a complete scrapping of the entire Constitution itself??
No my friend, if we take a hard look at history and human nature - you will find that there is no peaceful or political solution to where we now find ourselves in the effort of stopping what the Ruling Class is doing to us.
If liberty is precious, then war to preserve what is left of it is going to be the only solution. It has come to that. As soon as the vestige of liberty is removed, life itself becomes the target of those working to subjugate us.
Since the Ruling Class do not fear a Godly, moral people beholden to their faith and our Foundational documents - there is no bulwark against what they intend to do to us.
The only way to get them to stop - is to put fear of our resolve into them. Not even sure that will suffice at this point.
The fact is, most in this nation no longer share or have in common the very foundations that forged us in the first place.
Since we would not fight when the cost would have been bloodless, we are arrived at a point where we will have to fight a futile attempt to preserve our own lives, or live as slaves.
Tell me what war will accomplish.
Although I would support the repeal of 17A just to help reconnect patriots with the Constitution and its history, 17A is not the problem with the unconstitutionally big federal government imo. The problem is that constitutionally ignorant voters don't understand that most of the spending programs that candidates promise to get themselves elected as federal lawmakers are based on constitutionally nonexistent federal powers.
In fact, what you're not going to hear from Obama guard dog Fx News is the following. Practically the only federal program that Congress has the power to regulate, tax and spend for within state borders is the postal service as evidenced by the Constitution's Clause 7 of Section 8 of Article I. In other words, federal government has no power to tax and spend for most other government services within state borders.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States." --Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
Are you kidding me?
It TOOK WAR to establish our liberty from tyrants.
It will TAKE WAR to preserve what is left of our liberty from tyrants.
Or was Jefferson wrong when he discussed the absolute need of watering the Tree of Liberty?
If we’re not willing to do what it takes to keep what is left of essential liberty, then slavery and death is our near-term future, and a meager existence will be labeled ‘freedom’ - for the privilege to live as the State dictates.
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.