Posted on 04/04/2021 9:20:24 AM PDT by RandFan
@PeterSchiff
When our republic was formed voting was not a right. There is no "right to vote" in the Bill of Rights. Voting was a privilege restricted by age, poll taxes, literacy tests, property ownership, etc. The goal was an informed and responsible electorate, not maximum participation.
@PeterSchiff
The goal of an election is good government. It's better to have a good government elected by a minority, then a bad one elected by a majority. I'd rather not qualify to vote personally and have others elect a good government, then participate in the process of electing a bad one.
(Excerpt) Read more at twitter.com ...
Maybe you missed the lesson on the death of democracy albeit we have a republic allegedly. Maybe you also missed we are approaching 30 trillion in debt thanks to morons electing the reps who will give them free money.
Thanks for playing.
“To the Framers, consent of the governed in the form of a limited right to elect reps to the House comprised a just means to a desired end – free government. The limited franchise is both a right and the means to an end – free government.”
All to help prevent the tyranny of the majority (one man one vote pure “democracy”), and nothing is worse for a republic than the tyranny of a largely uninformed/misinformed politically indoctrinated majority.
“Controversial to say this but it’s true.”
Then you might want to read the United State Constitution and tell us why the word “elections” is mentioned so many times.
This also points toward the pre-17th Amendment Senate.
Having had plenty of experience with popular government, the Framers expected wild, levelling bills from the House of Reps.
Their Senate of the States admirably served its designed purposes; one of which was to stop tyrannical majoritarianism.
Rather than serve as a check on the House, the post-17th Senate is the enabler of majoritarian tyranny. Witness now Chuckie emboldens Nanzi. If we still had a senate of the states, an expansive franchise would present far less of a threat to liberty.
Article V.
Yes.
The 17th Amendment was advanced by Progressives and intended to result in a Senate more amendable to advancing Progressive agendas, to expand rule by administrative regulations with powers handed to the executive by a “progressive” thinking Congress, and not stopped by states with their own true representation in the Senate.
It was among the most Federal concepts that the Senate as a body was to be a body representing the states, as entities with a share in federal decisions, and not a body elected by individuals, representing individuals who elected them. The Senate was the “uniting” of the united states within a federal government.
You can see the march of Progressivism following the 17th Amendment.
The giant fallacy - and illogical and irrational hole - in progressivism is its belief in essentially “rule by the experts” - the executive administrative state. Like the founders progressives don’t trust the hoi polloi, but the want to use them (democracy) to establish agencies that once established don’t have to ask the hoi polloi what to do - the experts will tell them (a) what the experts will do and (b) what the hoi polloi must do, by law, because the experts say so.
Why irrational and illogical?
What is an “expert”, is their only one, or only one group?
Well, in government, on any one topic, there can only be one top expert or one top expert group - appointed and hired by the executive.
But in life is there only one possible best “expert” in anything? No.
The illogical irrational fallacy of “rule by the experts” is that it is like suggesting that by mere appointment or hired into the role of the OFFICIAL expert(s) that such persons are miraculously endowed with only the very best humanly possible expert opinions, which no one need question, merely obey.
Instead of Fauci, the nation needs to PUBLICLY hear from all sorts of experts OUTSIDE of government, as should the elected people in government. Decisions should not be made on some “official” opinion, but by learning, consulting and weighing multiple opinions from INDEPENDT experts in any field.
The PROGRESSIVES hate that latter point because it requires the politically uncertain process of elected representatives as the ones to weigh those opinions, after deciding if it is government that should act at all, or if the public has enough good informed opinions within its free institutions & enterprises, and the individual states, such that THE PEOPLE have the means to act without federal action. NO. Progressivism - rule by the experts - requires the constant expansion of federal power so that there is only one set of “official” positions that all lower “officials” in the states must follow.
It’s not only true but necessary to maintain a functioning society.
But how do you know that?
The wants you describe from women are of course best provided by a family and not government. The left has the goal of destroying the family and turning a mother’s children against her.
It was the responsibility of every Senator and Representative to object to the fraudulent elections and the invalid slates of electors.
Rand failed in his duty and his reasoning about the states is blatantly wrong.
The American people do not vote for the Senate Majority Leader and have a right to expect their Senators to do their duty in spite of a bad leader whether those Senators feel uncomfortable or not.
Doing the right thing is often uncomfotable.
With respect to what I have witnessed in various countries, I completely disagree. It’s always one person who gets in, takes it over with a bunch of no good people and start to abuse and steal things.
You also bring up the debt. I find that fascinating seeing most on this discussion board had no problem with Trump rocketing up the debt. Hopefully the GOP in the Senate will slow the domestic spending in the coming months.
So. No. I have not missed any lessons.
And he didn’t even include probably the most controversial restriction, in the times he is talking about, women weren’t allowed to vote at all!
Interesting points but first of all we are talking of apples and oranges. I am talking of a representative government and what occurs when the voters determine they can willy nilly vote them selves payments which seems to be the path we are on here. In your example some despot takes the coins, here the “despots” are happy having power while sprinkling worthless paper about.
Notwithstanding what others have avoided saying, I have been pointing out the debt problems for a long time but your point is well taken. Yes too many look the other way depending on whom is in charge.
Don’t close your lesson books, yet.
>and the invalid slates of electors.
They weren’t invalid though the legislatures sent them, GOP controlled.
Rand didn’t want to overturn it because he felt this would destroy the EC and set a terrible precedent.
That’s what he said, anyway.
Congress is not meant to pick the president.
The shoe could easily be on the other foot.
Also, from what I understand they didn’t have the numbers in the House so the whole thing would have been futile?
Correct. While that procedure has been done in the 19th century it is a rare event; since they would have overturned confirmed state returns it would need a bipartisan majority now.
There is no doubt in my mind that McConnell surrendered the Senate and that because his wife and he are well connected to China for big $$$. I believe that China was behind all this election fraud and the link I sent you for Georgia's Governor Brian Kemp and Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger is one excellent proof.
Sadly, nothing will come of all this. Treason is in season and the fate of the United States is in limbo. You might also want to watch Mike Lindell's Absolute Proof which near the end presents absolute proof of internet hacking of individual precincts and election results by China, Iran and other international enemies.
The people are going to have to kick the traitors like the Governor and Sec State out of office and demand proper investigations into treason. As you might imagine, that is a huge undertaking. Prayer could help also.
It is perilous times. IR
Thanks for your post and I am glad you have been staying consistent on your debt message for sometime.
I promise not to close my book lesson 👍
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.