Posted on 06/10/2003 4:17:50 AM PDT by 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
What the GOP, when it cements its majority needs to do is to focus on the SIZE and SCOPE of government. WE have to take an ax to a large percentage of the Federal system. I remember in 94, the dream of abolishing the Dept of Education, to cite one example. Yet seven years later we find President Bush allowing Ted Kennedy to virtually write the administration's education bill. I'm not criticizing W..merely making the point. Yet, I see positive signs. The GOP, the CONSERVATIVE WING of the GOP is ascendant, and more importantly, is learning to exercise power, ruthlessly if need be. The House is solid conservative, and in good hands for many years to come under DeLay. And I think that the pubbies in the Senate are finally determined to stop the Dems on the issue of judicial nominations. I watched the Rules Committee hearing, and was most heartened. <P. But, as you say, our prime thrust has to be, this electoral cycle, on substantially increasing the GOP majority in the Senate, both so we can overcome any games the Dems play, and more importantly, to keep the so-called GOP moderates from exercising undue influence.
The will of the majority prevails. It matters not what is written on a piece of paper in a law. How many Supreme court decisions does it take to prove that the Constitution says whatever 5 of the 9 justices say it says... today. Next year it may say the opposite. When voters don't like what the Justices rule as they didn't in the first Roosevelt years, they will get new justices who rule as the people want.
It is very simple. Get a majority of the voters to agree with your views. Candidates will come out of the woodwork to support and enact those views. Fail to get majority support, and some candidates may promise you things, but when in office they will do what the majority wants. Does that sound familiar to anyone?
For too many, most, on both side of the isle, it's about power and percs.
I agree totally with this.
The question is, how do we change the mindsets? Part of the answer is in the Ben Franklin quote repeated by several other posters...as long as people can vote themselves money from the treasury, they have no incentive not to, and there's no incentive for the mindset to change; quite the opposite.
I'm not sure how to fix this, because whether it's Social Security, Medicare, prescription drugs, or any number of other perks, too many people now think it's their right to receive money from the government.
Dunno. A heroine of mine, Ayn Rand, came to consider the only appropriate political involvement was to vote. She thought until the philosophy of the country, as expressed by the 'intellectuals', was changed, we could not expect political results. I think she was generally correct and the best we can realistically hope for, regardless of JimRob's solution of destroying the Dems and liberals, is to slow the progression of statism.
Changing a culture will take a very long time....
Yes, yes, yes. !!!!
Thank you for thoughtfully expressing the reality of what we face today.
Marchin' orders!
It would also require them not to rock the consensus -- i.e. have the brains not to make an issue of legalizing crack cocaine or automatic weapons if the voters of the district aren't going to take to those issues.
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.
In the end Jim, the RINOs can be even more of a threat than the Hardcore Commies at the DNC. They inspire Third Party challenges who only take votes away from Republicans and in turn elect DUmmycrats. So we should spend equal focus taking these RINOs out in the primaries and putting conservative candidates on the ballot.
Never Forget
Good post, Jim. Where we can use the libertarians, constitutionalist etc. is in GOP Primary fights. That of course will require them to register as Pubbies. It's a sacrifice guys.
Bump for common sense.
When that becomes more important to them than the next election.
Let me tell you a very strange and telling story. I worked as a stringer for a local radio station during the 2000 election covering the local elections. I was set up at the courthouse to do interviews with the local candidates. We had access to television and the internet and were watching the national returns. Early in the evening Bush was winning the popular vote and Gore had a lead in the electoral college. The county is VERY conservative and VERY republican. At that moment many of the voters and office holders were blasting the antquitity of the electoral college and saying it should be done away with.......Gore was winning electorally . As the evening progressed and the results began turning, the mood swayed the other way.
At least among those conservatives and republicans (some who are lurk and post here) the wisdom of the founding fathers rested in the results that evening, not their wisdom in not founding a democracy but a republic.
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.