I lament with them. Thank you so much, Hostage, for documenting this sad piece of California history.
You wrote:
I looked at a map of the USA years ago broken down geographically by county and colored blue or red, The number of red counties overwhelms and the map is almost everywhere red whereas the blue counties are as faint streaks in the map background.Jeepers, what time period did this map capture? What would a more up-to-date map look like?
If I had to guess, I'd say things haven't changed much, because human nature does not change much. You noted that the "blue counties" were merely faint streaks in an overwhelming sea of "red counties" (or words to that effect).
Well I suppose that's the good news. The bad news is, it seems the Framers were mainly worried about preventing a tyranny of the majority. So much so that they did not foresee the developments of our own time, culminating in what can only be called a tyranny of the minority. The county-by-county map graphically represents the problem.
But then the Framers believed (probably "hoped" is more accurate) that a virtuous people would hold their public officials, at all levels, accountable for the performance of their public duties. The "tyranny of the minority" can only get ground when the people fail to hold their representative or lawfully appointed institutions accountable for their failure to faithfully, punctiliously carry out the American rule of law. They all swore oaths (or affirmations) that they would do so, faithfully, while occupying office.
To me, an oath-breaker is a liar, and thus should be impeached (if applicable) or recalled. As the California and Massachusetts cases re: gay marriage make so crystal clear to anyone who isn't brain dead.
I so agree with you here: "We should pray and strive to give states every tool they can avail themselves of in their relations with the federal government."
I pray godspeed to the delegates at the ALEC conference in San Diego this coming weekend....
If you know of any news emanating from there, would you kindly ping me???
On the other hand, if the deliberations are secret, I can wait. Public disclosures only give a head's-up to people who want to beat you, seeking for tactical advantage.
May God continue to bless the United States of America.
Thank you, Hostage.
> “Jeepers, what time period did this map capture? What would a more up-to-date map look like?”
It’s a very recent map. Most counties as you mentioned are sparsely inhabited and many of them are greatly controlled as federal lands.
The blue ‘streaks’ have been described by Obama himself as an ‘Urban Archipelago’.
The good news is that state legislatures take into account counties no matter how sparsely populated they may be. Political Scientists know that in general state legislatures are more representative of rural interests and tend to tilt towards conservative issues and policies than would normally be the case given a straight population representation.
Although conservatives greatly outnumber liberals nationwide, the results of elections and referendums hinge greatly on turnout which in turn hinges on how well issues resonate with voters. For example, to ratchet up turn out from conservatives, issues such as same-sex marriage, illegal aliens and Obamacare taxes (emerging) are ‘emotional triggers’.
With respect to the structural ‘state focused’ amendments discussed in this thread, the issues are relatively ‘innocuous’ so that opposition in terms of emotional advocacy will be difficult to muster. On this note I’ve changed views just this past week that the term ‘States Rights’ can be used by the left and its MSM as a euphemism for ‘segregation’, ‘racism’ and ‘White Privilege’ with all the attendant symbols of rebel flags and so on. In other words ‘States Rights’ creates flak and noise that is not needed and COS does not need to utilize any emotional triggers like those used by Donald Trump for example. I like what Donald Trump is doing publicly on the national stage but I am thinking of an average calm low-key state legislator who is receptive to considering a COS focused on States and their role in the Constitution.
So maybe the single topic for COS could move from ‘States Rights and Control of States Rights’ to ‘A New Role for States in the US Constitution’; something along those lines. what do you think?
As for the ALEC Convention in San Diego, I’m in touch with the Media and Public Affairs group and have received a list of panelists and their contact info just this morning. So I expect to get more information on the presentation for that agenda item this week. The agenda item for “Article V – Proposed Rules for a Convention of States” takes place starting at 9:30 am and finishes shortly before Ted Cruz’ talk at the plenary lunch session on Friday July 24.
Here’s a link to the full agenda:
http://www.alec.org/annual-meeting/annual-meeting-agenda
The fact that COS is even on the agenda is a huge statement in itself and placing its time before Ted Cruz assures lots of exposure and participation. Some state legislators have been hearing from the grassroots but more legislators need to hear. The annual ALEC meeting usually has about 2000 state legislators in attendance which is a good portion of the 7,398 total. It would be good to get a Freeper or two to that Friday meeting’s Q&A. Cost will be about $1000 to $1400 per person with airfare and lodging. I can donate or I’m thinking of possibly flying down there on my own expense as it is only a 3 hour flight from where I’m at. But having the panelists names and contact info is probably enough to follow up on.