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

Skip to comments.

A great New Year's resolution: Henry Lamb cheers on movement to repeal 17th Amendment
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | 1-1-2011 | Henry Lamb

Posted on 01/01/2011 12:14:15 AM PST by JohnHuang2

In hopes of returning to a previous, "better" condition, millions of Americans will resolve to: quit smoking, lose weight, or engage in some other activity to make their life better in some way. Suppose there were an activity in which Americans could engage that would make the entire world better, especially that portion of the world we call the United States of America. There is!

We can resolve to restore the original, unique republic created by our founders.

George Washington, Ben Franklin, James Madison and the handful of other great Americans who assembled in Philadelphia in the summer of 1787 used nearly half of the Convention time debating the single issue of representation in the new government. Shall the new government be a government of the states, or a government of the people?

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

1 posted on 01/01/2011 12:14:22 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Forgiven_Sinner; xm177e2; mercy; Wait4Truth; hole_n_one; GretchenEE; Clinton's a rapist; buffyt; ...

Happy New Year, y’all! Take care and God bless!


2 posted on 01/01/2011 12:15:50 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; fieldmarshaldj; Clintonfatigued; Impy
He's not the only waiting on baited breath for the repeal of the 17th. Witness a certain Massachuttes Attorney General who couldn't convince the voters that Obamacare is good for them:


Yessssssssss!!! Damn the will of the people! Screw them! WE career politicians in state government know what's best for you. I want POWER! Give me my lifetime federal job NOW!!!! DIE 17TH AMENDMENT!!

3 posted on 01/01/2011 12:19:01 AM PST by BillyBoy (Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Andrew Hamilton wanted a strong central government, with the president to be elected for life.

Andrew Hamilton?

4 posted on 01/01/2011 12:20:25 AM PST by iowamark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: iowamark

Yeah, Alex’s brother-in-law. He’s at the end of the bat at Fraunces Tavern, nursing his ale. He’ll talk your ear off about politics.


5 posted on 01/01/2011 12:36:39 AM PST by redpoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: redpoll

End of the BAR. Gee, I shouldn’t be up at this time of night. Happy New Year.


6 posted on 01/01/2011 12:37:40 AM PST by redpoll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

Both approaches have difficulties. Sinecures obtained by favors to the voters will be replaced with other sinecures obtained by cronyism in state governments.


7 posted on 01/01/2011 12:38:37 AM PST by HiTech RedNeck (I am in America but not of America (per bible: am in the world but not of it))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
>> We can resolve to restore the original, unique republic created by our founders. <<

Ironically, having an appointed upper house is much more common in nations that are NOT Republics. Prime examples today are the United KINGDOM and the DOMINION of Canada, both of whom have appointed upper houses, with the Queen as head of state.

When we declared independence from England and decided to put an appointed upper house into effect, we were retaining one of the old features of the old King George pre-Republic era. Other nations that abolished their monarchy and established Republics, like France, did away with the old arisocratic ways much quicker. Even the UK itself almost immediately did away with an appointed upper house when they were briefly a Republic in the 1600s. In their case, they simply abolished the upper house and let the House of Commons have sole legislative authority as the "rump parliment". Appointed upper houses in free republics are an oddity.

8 posted on 01/01/2011 12:44:07 AM PST by BillyBoy (Impeach Obama? Yes We Can!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: redpoll
End of the BAR. Gee, I shouldn’t be up at this time of night.

And here I am trying to figure out what B A R stands for...

:-))

Happy New Year

9 posted on 01/01/2011 1:32:20 AM PST by bigheadfred (As a rapturous voice escapes I will tremble a prayer and I'll ask for forgiveness...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: iowamark
Andrew Hamilton wanted a strong central government, with the president to be elected for life.

Andrew Hamilton?

ANY president elected for life is not a president, but a DICTATOR.

10 posted on 01/01/2011 2:10:12 AM PST by RetiredArmy (Read, learn, know: 1 Cor 15: 1-4; THAT IS ALL YOU NEED TO KNOW!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

As a Canadian, I’ll proudly point out that the term “Dominion of Canada”, a reference to Psalm 72:8 “He shall have Dominon from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth” - which is echoed in Canada’s national motto “Ad Mare Usque Ad Mare” (from sea to sea) - is no longer current.

It hasn’t been used officially since the 50’s and was essentially legally abolished by the Canada Act of 1982. Canada signs all of it’s international documents “Canada” and not “The Dominion of Canada”.

Also, our Senate, while appointed, hasn’t opposed an Act passed by our directly elected lower-house in my memory. If they did it would almost certainly result in an immediate change in our Constitution.


11 posted on 01/01/2011 2:21:43 AM PST by Behemothpanzer (You are entitled to your own opinion. You are not entitled to your own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

My New Year’s resolution is work towards reducing the behemoth in Versailles on the Potomac to pre-1849 size. 1849 was when the Department of the Interior was formed; some say unconstitutionally. It most certainly is NOT an enumerated power.

An ambitious, probably improbable, goal; but as in all compromises, start high and back off somewhat. An acceptable compromise would be 1862-size government(s).


12 posted on 01/01/2011 3:34:19 AM PST by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

Same to you JohnHuang@,
And keep up your usual good work.


13 posted on 01/01/2011 3:35:37 AM PST by Joe Boucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
A very good explanation with what is wrong with the 17th Amendment is found at:

 http://www.restorefederalism.org/?gclid=CLqQv4z9mKYCFcXD7Qod6VP0YQ

14 posted on 01/01/2011 4:21:33 AM PST by DH (The Second Amendment is the only protection for the First Amendment)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; Impy; Clintonfatigued; BillyBoy; Crichton; Clemenza; AuH2ORepublican; darkangel82

No way, no how, nuh uh. Forget it, kill it, bury it, make it go away. Say bye-bye, buh-bye, adios, hasta la vista, sayonara, auf wiedersehn, don’t come back now, y’hear ?

Keep your stinkin’ hands off my RIGHT to directly elect MY U.S. Senators, you damn dirty apes !


15 posted on 01/01/2011 4:27:12 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Amber Lamps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fieldmarshaldj

instead of a knee-jerk reaction you might consider the information at the link provided in the response just previous to yours.i believe we have been ill served by voting for our senators directly instead of allowing the state legislators choose.it was all part of the complex checks and balances system designed by some of the brightest pennies to have ever graced our planet.


16 posted on 01/01/2011 5:13:58 AM PST by Movemout (we are entering the event horizon. please adjust the frequency, Kenneth)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

My husband and I are definitely for the repeal of the 17th amendment. Hubby is definitely FOR the flat tax.


17 posted on 01/01/2011 5:14:26 AM PST by SumProVita (Cogito, ergo...Sum Pro Vita. (Modified Decartes))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillyBoy

The original intent of the founders was to have a weak central government, with the states retaining most of the political power. That is why the senate was appointed by the states. The house was the peoples house, and the senate was the states house. Now, both houses are run by political parties and special interest groups. With elected senators came campaigns with donations from special interest groups and political parties. The senate is no longer the states house. I say the only way to put the republic back and end this run on socialism, is to repeal the 17th....


18 posted on 01/01/2011 5:28:13 AM PST by joe fonebone (The House has oversight of the Judiciary...why are the rogue judges not being impeached?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Movemout; BillyBoy

I’ve been through this crap repeatedly with you guys and your pie-in-the-sky fantasies of what the Senate will be with its repeal, and you will never convince me of its soundness. All you’re doing is removing my right to directly elect a Senator (and don’t lecture me on influencing my state legislators — I’m in a VRA State Senate district and a perpetually Democrat State House and U.S. House district, meaning the only race I’ll have a say in is the Governorship and nothing else), and I will oppose that with every fiber of my being. There’s a damn good reason why the 17th was passed, and a good deal of it had to do with just how out of touch the Senators were becoming from their constituents and how more and more they were representing their own narrow personal interests and less with the Founding Fathers’ ideal of jealously standing up for their states. You’d also have a good number of states would be perpetually out of reach for electing Republican members (and even those where you’d have Republicans, the likelihood that they’d be RINOs is considerable — meaning more Lindsey Graham, McCain, Bob Bennett and Maine Twin types rather than DeMints or Coburns).


19 posted on 01/01/2011 5:34:49 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Amber Lamps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: SumProVita

I take it you’re in a non-Democrat legislative district in our state ? Because I will fight like hell to keep that repeal from becoming a reality. Unless you want the perpetual Senate elections of RINOs Lamar! and Corker.


20 posted on 01/01/2011 5:36:56 AM PST by fieldmarshaldj (~"This is what happens when you find a stranger in the Amber Lamps !"~~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-44 next last

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.

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