Correct, and they really do seem to like it that way.
Posted on 08/18/2010 5:52:58 AM PDT by Kaslin
Democrat control of the White House, House of Representatives and the Senate has produced an unprecedented level of political brazenness and contempt for the limitations placed on the federal government by the U.S. Constitution. As such, it has raised a level of constitutional interest and anger against Washington's interference in our lives that has been dormant for far too long.
Part of this heightened interest and anger is seen in the strength of the tea party movement around the nation. Another is the angry reception that many congressmen receive when they return to their districts and at town hall meetings. According to the most recent Gallup poll, only 20 percent of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, but that's up from a March 2010 low of 16 percent.
The smart money suggests that there will be a Republican takeover of the House of Representatives and possibly the Senate. The question is what can liberty-minded Americans expect from a Republican majority? Maybe a good starting point for an answer might be to examine how Republicans have handled their majority in the past.
Democrat President Lyndon Johnson's term of office saw massive increases in federal spending. When Johnson was elected into office in 1964, federal spending was $118 billion. When he left office in 1968, federal spending was $178 billion, a 66 percent increase. Worse than the massive increase in federal spending, his administration and Democratically controlled Congress saddled us with two programs that have helped fuel today's fiscal disaster -- Medicare and Medicaid.
The 1994 elections gave Republican control of both the House and Senate. They held a majority for a decade. The 2000 election of George W. Bush as president gave Republicans what the Democrats have now, total control of the legislative and executive branches of government. When Bush came to office, federal spending was $1.788 trillion. When he left office, federal spending was $2.982 trillion. That's a 60 percent increase in federal spending, closely matching the profligacy of Lyndon Johnson's presidency.
During the Republican control, the nation was saddled with massive federal interference in education through No Child Left Behind. Prescription drug handouts became a part of the Republican-controlled Congress' legacy. And it was during this interval that Congress accelerated its interference, assisted by the Federal Reserve Bank, in the housing market in the name of homeownership that produced much of the financial meltdown that the nation suffered in 2008.
During the last two years, Democrats have amassed unprecedented growth of federal government power in the forms of bailouts, corporate takeovers, favors to their political allies and nationalization of our health care system. My question is how likely is it for Republicans to behave differently if they gain control? Their past behavior doesn't make one confident that they will behave much differently, but I could be wrong.
If Republicans win the House of Representatives, there are measures they should take in their first month of office, and that is to undo most of what the Democratically controlled Congress has done. If they don't win a veto-proof Senate, they can't undo Obamacare but the House alone can refuse to fund any part of it. There are numerous blocking tactics that a Republican-controlled House can take against those hell-bent on trampling on our Constitution. The question is whether they will have guts and principle to do it. After all, many Americans, including those who are Republicans, have a stake in big government control, special privileges and handouts.
Ultimately, we Americans must act to ensure that our liberty does not depend on personalities in Washington. Our founders tried to do that with our Constitution. Thomas Jefferson offered us a solution when he said, "The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions, that I wish it to be always kept alive. It will often be exercised when wrong, but better so than not to be exercised at all. I like a little rebellion now and then."
"And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor."
The Republican Party won't save us any more than the Democratic Party. They've all been bought off.
It will take at least 300 citizen-legislators to save this country, courageous people that will abide by the Constitution and reduce the scope of government in our lives.
WRT forcing O'Care on America---WH jerkoff David Axelrod said : "Americans Are Too Stupid To Care About Congressional Procedures"......
According to this idiot Axelrod, Ohaha was retreating from earlier demands that sweetheart deals be removed. Ohaha forced the bill down the throats of Americans by renegging on his word A-G-A-I-N.....by letting $$special deal$$ for $$enators Landrieu, Chris Dodd Max Baucus (who later renounced his deal) remain in the bill. SOURCE: associatedcontent.com ...
=================================
States Can Check Washington's Power; by directly proposing constitutional amendments
WSJ 12/21/09 | DAVID B. RIVKIN JR. AND LEE A. CASEY
FR Posted 12/2/09 by rhema
For nearly a hundred years, federal power has expanded at the expense of the states—to a point where the even the wages and hours of state employees are subject to federal control. Basic health and safety regulations that were long exercised by states under their "police power" are now dominated by Washington.
The courts have similarly distorted the Constitution by inventing new constitutional rights and failing to limit governmental power as provided for in the document. The aggrandizement of judicial power has been a particularly vexing challenge, since it is inherently incapable of correction through the normal political channels.
There is a way to deter further constitutional mischief from Congress and the federal courts, and restore some semblance of the proper federal-state balance. That is to give to states—and through them the people—a greater role in the constitutional amendment process.
The idea is simple, and is already being mooted in conservative legal circles. Today, only Congress can propose constitutional amendments—and Congress of course has little interest in proposing limits on its own power. Since the mid-19th century, no amendment has actually limited federal authority.
But what if a number of states, acting together, also could propose amendments? That has the potential to reinvigorate the states as a check on federal power. It could also return states to a more central policy-making role.
The Framers would have approved the idea of giving states a more direct role in the amendment process. They fully expected that the possibility of amendments originating with the states would deter federal aggrandizement, and provided in Article V that Congress must call a convention to consider amendments anytime two-thirds of the states demand it.(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Related Stories:
Randy Barnett: The Case for a Federalism Amendment
Clarence Thomas: How to Read the Constitution
There's a saying in Republican politics: when your opponent is committing political suicide, it's not polite to step in and help him.
I have my own philosophy. When you see your enemy falling, put a banana peel under his feet.
???? First you talk about holding Republicans feet to the fire. Then you tell us to stop complaining about Republicans. Then it appears you tell us elected Republicans will give us better 'results' than Democrats. Well, if your point is that Republicans must always be elected and we must support them blindly, whoever they are, so we must close our eyes and ears, then there is no holding their feet to the fire.
I saw some conservatives 'holding Bush's feet to the fire' in 2007 and 2008, it didnt work out too well. It was a complete party meltdown.
Mmmmm........effective of course.
But sounds too much like a Dem tactic (ugh).
Bears repeating with appropriate emphasis.
Correct, and they really do seem to like it that way.
And it is fun to watch too!
No they won’t save us, nor will the constitution ...
Once trust is lost it's almost impossible to get it back! Actions not words work for me.
No - republicans, as a brand, will not save us. They will only walk more slowly towards the same goals as the democrats. We need candidates interested in upholding the Constitution and representing the people who voted them into office. And we need a population constantly engaged in all the political processes, with a sharp eye for corruption. Then we need a true media - one not paid for by either party. Finally, and most importantly, what will save us is a true revival and for God to withhold His judgment upon this nation for a while longer.
Every day in every way Ohaha helps Americans understand that he shares nothing in common with them, and does not have the perspective of an American experience.
It gets even more politically dismal, thanks to his globe-trotting wife. Dem candidates don't want Ohaha campaigning with them so Plan B was to send Michele out (all rested and refreshed from lolling around Marbella).
We can only hope the Dems are stupid enough to have Mrs O campaign for them, maybe wearing her one-shoulder Jean Paul Gaultier top.
Images of Michele campaigning for Democrat (cough) values will reinforce the notion of Dems as an elite class with unmitigated contempt for working class Americans.
Bookmark
Thank you!
” There are numerous blocking tactics that a Republican-controlled House can take against those hell-bent on trampling on our Constitution. The question is whether they will have guts and principle to do it. After all, many Americans, including those who are Republicans, have a stake in big government control, special privileges and handouts “
I’ll believe it when I see it.
We'll save ourselves if we'll be saved at all.
ROFL. I was going to question the exact same thing.
Attempts to hold their feet to the fire are described as "whining about the Republicans."
Go figure.
The Chinese and Koreans are already making with the Marie Antoinette jokes. You yube.
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.
