Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Sloth; Henrietta; Austin Willard Wright; My2Cents; onyx
Thanks, Sloth, for your attempt. I genuinely appreciate it. On your point #1, I agree. However, the argument over a weak vs. a strong central government was lost as early as the administration of George Washington. It's true. Then, what vestiges of the federal system envisioned by the founders still existed in 1860 were wiped away with the Civil War.

From the moment the states ratified the Constitution, there has never been a day when the federal government has ceased to grow and gain more and more power. In our time, we cannot overturn more than 225 years of history. We can only argue on the margins of debates settled long ago.

Re your point #2, respect for the Constitution isn't good enough. What's needed is a solid understanding of the Constitution, the historical context in which it was written and ratified, an understanding of just how far we have deviated from the Jeffersonian model, and an understanding of how to try to apply that early Constitutional framework to the world in which we find ourselves today.

To run around saying, "I'm a real conservative, and you're not," and "I'm the one with principles, not you," is unproductive and self-defeating. There are as many "flavors" of conservatives as there are in any ideology. They are all real, but different issues motivate different people at different times.

The one overriding hallmark of conservatism is protection of the nation. It is that very, very conservative impulse which motivates those of us who intend to vote for President Bush. If these were ordinary times, I could have more sympathy for the arguments you and others make about spending, immigration, etc. But these most definitely are NOT ordinary times. That is the fault line between those folks who share your point of view and those who share mine. It has nothing whatsoever to do with who has or doesn't have "real" conservative principles, but who has the correct vision of how best to preserve this nation.

108 posted on 02/11/2004 1:02:44 PM PST by Wolfstar (A self-confident cowboy nation, or a Kerrified nation. Your choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies ]


To: Wolfstar
#108 --- Hear, hear! Excellent.
110 posted on 02/11/2004 1:05:16 PM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]

To: Wolfstar
What's needed is a solid understanding of the Constitution, the historical context in which it was written and ratified, an understanding of just how far we have deviated from the Jeffersonian model, and an understanding of how to try to apply that early Constitutional framework to the world in which we find ourselves today.

Very well-said.

116 posted on 02/11/2004 1:12:14 PM PST by My2Cents ("Well...there you go again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]

To: Wolfstar
Then, what vestiges of the federal system envisioned by the founders still existed in 1860 were wiped away with the Civil War. From the moment the states ratified the Constitution, there has never been a day when the federal government has ceased to grow and gain more and more power. In our time, we cannot overturn more than 225 years of history. We can only argue on the margins of debates settled long ago.

If this is true (and I don't think it is) then I don't see any point in bothering anymore. It's seems to me you are saying a socialist system is inevitable... Marx would agree, I suppose.

For what it's worth, I don't mind a 'strong central government' one bit. I *want* one. I just want it to stay within its proper Constitutional bounds.

Re your point #2, respect for the Constitution isn't good enough. What's needed is a solid understanding of the Constitution, the historical context in which it was written and ratified,

One who respects the Constitution will, without exception, pursue such an understanding.

an understanding of just how far we have deviated from the Jeffersonian model, and an understanding of how to try to apply that early Constitutional framework to the world in which we find ourselves today.

This sounds suspiciously like the 'living document' crap to me.

The one overriding hallmark of conservatism is protection of the nation

I agree 100%. And giving in to domestic socialism is not how you go about it. (See my tagline) Bush has done a pretty good job of addressing foreign threats. But we have enemies *inside* this country's borders, many of them American citizens, and others coming across them. Is the administration ever going to do anything about protecting the nation from them?

131 posted on 02/11/2004 1:25:36 PM PST by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]

To: Wolfstar
Absolutely excellant, well-articulated, well-considered, historically accurate post.

Kudos!
217 posted on 02/11/2004 3:53:24 PM PST by reformedliberal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson