Vanity: Free Republic Priority One: Defending the Constitution

Free Republic | June 10, 2003 | Jim Robinson

[Jim Robinson]

One thing I've learned during the last six years or so of hanging around Free Republic is that politics is a dirty game. It may qualify as a runner-up for the understatement of the year, but it seems to me that one of the worst things about politics is that it is made up of politicians. These guys seem to be desperate to get into office and once they've had a taste of power they're even more desperate to hang onto it. Doesn't matter what the Founders had in mind for our Republic and or what they wrote into the Constitution, if the elected politicians feel that they can create or expand another give-away program or cater to the demands of one special interest group or another, and it will help them get re-elected next time, well, why not? Constitution be damned.

The House represents the people. Sure, the Congressmen are supposed to be sensitive to the wants, needs, desires and demands of their constituents and they are and should be swayed by popular opinion and they should be passionate in their representation of the people. That's the name of the game and that's what the Founders intended. But when the people demand more than the Constitution allows, then what? Well, for one, you've got to get by the Senate. Then by the President, and perhaps by any Supreme Court challenges.

It's my understanding, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the Founders established the Senate as the senior body of the bicameral legislature and set higher qualifications, higher standards and longer terms for its members. The Senators were to be experienced, wizened senior statesmen, insulated from swaying popular opinion, and the Senate as a body was to serve as a check on the hotheads in the House.

I also believe that one of the primary responsibilities of the Senate was to defend the Constitution and to guard over the longevity and continuity of the Republic. To this end, the Senate was designed to confirm judicial and high level executive appointments, ratify treaties and conduct impeachment trials--all highly essential elements to the maintenance of our constitutional republic, our national sovereignty and our Liberty.

To ensure that the Senators were truly insulated from swaying public opinion the Founders intended them to be appointed by the state legislatures rather than elected by the populace. It was hoped that only the very best statesmen, men of unimpeachable personal character, would rise to the top of the state legislatures and be considered to serve as U.S. Senators. Hmmmm... Hillary Clinton? Well, so much for high hopes.

I also understand that the three branches of the federal government were established as co-equal partners, with checks and balances designed so that no branch could control another and none could subvert the Constitution. The terms of the members of each branch were varied and staggered and the methods of election or appointment were different for each branch. The only members elected by the populace were to be the members of the House of Representatives. The Senators were to be appointed by the state legislatures, the President elected by the Electoral College and the Judiciary and high officers appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate.

The members of the House serve for two years, the President four years, the Senators six years and the Judiciary for life. The number of representatives for each state is determined by the number of people in each state, each state was guaranteed representation by two senators, and the number of electoral college members for each state determined by the number of congressional representatives, etc.

The state governments were intended to remain sovereign and all rights and powers not expressly delegated by the Constitution were to be left to the states and to the people. The central government was restricted to only about a dozen and a half enumerated powers and functions and was never intended to be the absolute ruling authority over the states or the people that it is today.

The primary functions of the federal government was to defend our national borders, maintain the federal judiciary, run the post office, the weights and standards office, the patent office, etc., and to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution and our individual rights.

Well, we all know that this is not how it ended up. What went wrong? For one thing, the balance of power was upset with the ratification of the seventeenth amendment. This amendment allowed for the popular election of the Senators instead of having them appointed by the state legislatures. At first glance, this looks like it would be more democratic. In fact, it is. However, as we conservatives love to point out, our Founders did not establish a democracy, they established a Republic.

With the popular election of both the House and the Senate, we are now one step closer to being a democracy where the mob rules rather than the rule of law. Also, the states essentially lost their representatives to the federal government and now, four-score and some odd years later, the result is that most of their states rights and powers have been eroded away. And we're now seeing where the democrats are wanting to do away with the electoral college. Al Gore won the popular vote in the last election, due mostly to the large highly populated liberal states, but President Bush obviously won in the electoral college. Thank God for the wisdom of the Founding Fathers! If Hillary and her mob have their way, the electoral college is history and so is the Republic. That's what happens when you allow mob rule and we're only one amendment and one step away from that sorry end now.

The liberals rule the land. They control the education systems. They control the media. They control the judiciary. Regardless of the party in executive or legislative power, the career liberals control the more or less permanent bureaucracy, the regulatory agencies and the courts. In defending the Constitution from all enemies foreign and domestic, I count the liberals (lumping in the greenies, the socialists, the anarchists, and other assorted un-American types, etc.) as our primary domestic enemy number one. I count the left-leaning moderates and RINOs as domestic enemy number two.

Pretty basic and simple so far, but here's where it gets tricky. Like it or not, we have a two party system. Our good friends, the Libertarians, Constitutionalists, Reformers, Buchananites, paleocons, and other right-wingers, etc., may have some pretty good ideas about constitutionality, freedom, Liberty, etc., however, they are weak numerically, and will probably never get much stronger. Let's face it. The general populace has been indoctrinated for decades (make that several generations) by the liberal state controlled education system, brain-washed by the liberal controlled media and conditioned by the liberal controlled judiciary to accept whatever mushy touchy-feely liberal policy or concept that comes down the pike.

Where are the libertarian, reformist or strict constructionist parties ever going to find enough voters to overcome the Democrats and Republicans? Answer is they can't. It's an impossibility. Perhaps they can draw from the conservatives or Republicans, but they can hope to draw almost no liberal or Democrat voters. So, even if they can draw away from the conservative parties, it will only serve to strengthen the liberals and we will only reinstall Democrats to the majority. Happens every time. We flop back and forth between the Democrats and the Republicans and we continue to make zero progress, but the head-long slide into socialism continues on.

My conclusion is we will never, ever regain constitutional government until we completely demolish the liberal stranglehold on the bureaucracy, the education institutions, the media and especially, the judiciary. How do we do that? The most straightforward way, IMHO, is to vote out the Democrats. Ensure that we maintain as large a Republican majority as we possibly can. Ensure that the most conservative judges as can be found are appointed by the Republican president and confirmed by the Republican Senate. Why do you think Daschle and the Democrats are fighting so hard to block Bush's judicial appointments? They see the handwriting on the wall. As we begin replacing the liberal judiciary. the socialist welfare state is going to fall. The socialist bureaucracy will begin to crumble. We will withdraw from the U.N. and begin rescinding international treaties not in our best interests. We will be defending America and America's interests first.

Who knows? We may even get to the point we can overturn Roe vs Wade, repeal the 16th and 17th amendments, abolish the slave tax, privatize social security and medicare, repeal the unconstitutional gun control laws, dismantle the welfare state and reestablish the American Republic. These are my dreams, my goals and my reasons for Free Republic. If sometimes my actions seem a bit odd, please remember that my ultimate goals are to restore constitutional government and I see the total destruction of the Democrat Party and liberalism in general as the only possible solution to the problem. I don't care if people call me a neo-con, a bushbot, a blind Republican, a statist or whatever. I've asked many times but there has been no Libertarian or Buchananite or Reformer or Rockwellian or paleocon who has documented and presented a better plan or one that has any prayer of success, so I'm committed to this one.

As we move forward into the next election cycle, the FR battle cry will be: Restore the Republic! Vote out the RATs!

See you at the Free Republic George Bush Second Inaugural Ball in January '05!

Jim

[Prospero]

Thank you, Jim!

[Movemout]

Sometimes in the middle of all the fluff it is easy to lose track of the meta-message. Thanks for the reminder. Stompin' liberals is the highest priority, even if some of them call themselves republicans.

[FairWitness]

Thanks for the refresher course. Some things bear constant reminder. You've outlined enough work for several lifetimes. I don't say that in a pessimistic way meaning we'll never get it done. I mean it in the sense that "forming a more perfect union", under the Constitution, is and always will be an ongoing fight against those who would rather we be a socialist "democracy".

[risk]

We also need to...

I think Jim's point is that we need to focus. There so much wrong with our law making. Much of that is because it doesn't center around adherence to the Consitution. With the Constitution in effect, much good would follow. More so than sticking to 20-30 annoyances. Some of them are related, but not all.

Heading back to a Constitutional republic would be a big win because it'll be easier to work on the other things that bother us patriots every day. I do like the idea of abolishing the 14th amendment; Representational government won us President Bush's election! That's just one good example.

[Lazamataz]

I guess this is as good a place as any: You and I didn't see things the same for a long time. You kept advocating the election of Republicans, RINO or not. I kept saying that the election of a RINO is actually more damaging to our cause than the election of a DemWit. Your argument was that the RINO could be pressured to vote conservatively, for judiciary and other important issues. Mine was that a RINO in the midst could do more damage, Trojan Horse-like, than a standard enemy like a Dem (and I had seen it in action).

Well, my touchstone issue is the renewel or sunset of the Assault Weapon ban. We got a lot of RINO's last election, this was going to make or break your theory.

The fat lady ain't sung yet, but it appears your theory holds. It looks like the AW ban will sunset. RINO's caved on this issue.

So I must subscribe to your theory, because it is the operational one. I don't like being wrong, and I like admitting it even less. But I'm man enough to admit it when I am.

No, I won't gush how you are the savior of the Republic, or how great and wonderful you are, or any of that stuff. :o) I will merely observe that your theory appears to be right, and that mine appears to be wrong.

[William McKinley]

I love it.

But I do get to quibble in one place:

I count the liberals (lumping in the greenies, the socialists, the anarchists, and other assorted un-American types, etc.) as our primary domestic enemy number one.

I count the domestic terrorists as domestic enemy number one. Then the liberals, then the RINOs. :-)

[gypsy-joker]

the day your great nation handed control of its money over to the bankers,contrary to your constitution( no one but the american gov. shall print or produce legal tender)your people and your republic was doomed......signed a lowly canadian......god help the republic

[Carolinamom]

I agree w/EVERY thing you've written! Why not make this a permanent part (link) on the FR opening page?

[firewalk]

.

[wimpycat]

Vote 'em out BUMP!

[wgeorge2001]

"These are my dreams, my goals and my reasons for Free Republic. If sometimes my actions seem a bit odd, please remember that my ultimate goals are to restore constitutional government and I see the total destruction of the Democrat Party and liberalism in general as the only possible solution to the problem."

I too pray for these things, LORD and Saviour Jesus Christ willing, to return America to it's senses and save our crumbling society from the chaos and anarchy of liberalism and the death culture thereof.
Believing that there may be 30,000,000 bible believing conservative Christians left in America is not a small number,however. Working together, we may yet return sanity to America by replacing politicians with people at all levels of government; which requires people to vote liberals out of all government positions, which requires awareness of the neo communist agenda of the left wing agenda, which to this day has not been recognized.

[section9]

Jim, I'm compelled to write.

Your statement shows that you are quite a profoundly incisive political thinker. You get to the point of the business: we cannot restore the Republic unless Republicans win.

Most liberals, not the clever ones who actually control the apparatus, adore the concept of "democracy" and parrot it as a totem. What they do not realize is that the Framers understood the danger that democracy poses to the liberties of the citizen. Democracy leads to the rule of the mob. The Rule of the Mob leads to the Man on the White Horse, and Fascism.

Democracy is the handmaiden of fascism, nothing more, nothing less. The Framers understood the dangers of the imposition of a tyrrany by the will of the People: that's why they set up a system of checks and balances.

I have very little tolerance for Brigadiers and Paleocons who don't understand the essential two-party nature of the American people. God knows how many states we might have won had the Libertarians and the Brigadiers stuck with George W. Bush. There would have been no Recount Hell, that's for damn sure.

Anyway, great post. The essential thing to remember is that we live in a constitutional Republic, but only if we can keep it.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Vigilantcitizen]

As long as the laws and bills being put into place by our legislators are being motivated by "He who has the most money", we the people aren't in the equation.

[Tijeras_Slim]

Excellent writing.

Many splinter conservative groups, despite comendable motives, want immediate solutions to the problems liberals have caused and used to further their agenda, and when these solutions are not forthcoming, they withdraw from the larger political arena.

The Founders created a system that would move slow, that contained checks and balances, that forced debate. What has been taken from us over decades, will only be restored over decades, and with mighty effort. This may dishearten many.

Though we will probably not see the restoration of proper constitutional government in our lives, does that make it any less worthy a goal?

Even if we hand over a country to those who follow that is more free, we will have done more than the several previous generations, and can be justly proud.

[risk]

the day your great nation handed control of its money over to the bankers...your republic was doomed.

I understand your sentiments. Benjamin Franklin said:

"When the people find they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."

This is certainly the case today. At this point, resistance to taxation is the best I can do. Voting Republican will accomplish that, I hope. But I will say that a return to the Constitution as it is written today would be a good step to take. We can decide how the government should fund itself once that is done. Jim is right: it's the Constitution! All else follows.

Thanks for your concerns about our nation's future, Canadian brother.

[cricket]

Thanks Jim for the Inspiring call to Reason and Action. . . The time has long past that ANYone should say; I vote for the 'person'; not the Party. . .

. . .a strong Republican body politic is the only way out of the Liberal/Socialist paradise that is being created in a 'heaven's name'. . .

. . . and one we know that in reality, is a living hell.

[Uncle Fud]

We may even get to the point we can overturn Roe vs Wade, repeal the 16th and 17th amendments, abolish the slave tax, privatize social security and medicare, repeal the unconstitutional gun control laws, dismantle the welfare state and reestablish the American Republic.

Jim, do you know of any Republicans on the national stage who are willing to endorse all the above policies? I'll be happy to contribute to their campaigns and work for them. Heck, if I live in their state I'll change my registration back to GOP.

I'm not unsympathetic to your comments. I can understand the point of view that if slowing down the drift to socialism is the best we can do, then that's what we have to do.

But if the GOP's victory strategy is basically to buy votes using my money (and in the absence of the 9-11 event that's exactly what it would have been) then please, let's not delude ourselves that we are replacing a bad thing with its opposite.

[risk]

bump

[PGalt]

Well stated. I am with you 100%. The Democratic Crime Syndicate should be extinct as a political force in this country. We the people...in order to form a more perfect union...can do it. Thanks for your efforts and all who contribute, link, lurk and think.

[RJayneJ]

Terrific essay Jim. We have a basically healthy and strong two party system. What usually happens, eventually, one of the major parties will adopt the causes that creates the splinter off parties like Ross Perot's 3rd party has practically vanished with the help of Pat Buchanan.

Once the budget got balanced the leading reason for the party vanished. The same will happen with the greenies and the Libertarians. One of the unfortunate things like electing Bill Clinton is the result of a strong third party, and with that he wound up being elected even though almost 2/3rds of the American electorate did not want him to be president, making it very hard to govern.