Posted on 05/31/2015 11:59:54 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I love how the left is touting Bernie Sanders’ position against big money in politics. That this big money in politics has brought great harm to the government’s ability to represent the people. That it has created a ruling class that produces lifetime positions for the politicians! You know, politicians like Bernie Sanders!
Yet they despise the Tea Party and Constitutionalism!
Because obviously, you knuckle dragging conservative morons, The United states needs to be more like Venezuela,Bolivia and Ecuador. Duh! /s
The founders did make a major mistake in setting up the judicuary in such an unaccountable way. For every good decision on “constitutional”, i.e. social issues that they have issued, they have issued 10 bad ones, by my estimate.
That being said, I have no wish to be ruled by a majority of idiots
I’m so glad for people like you fighting the fight everyday. Thank you for your comment and your work.
Thanks for the ping, Publius.
The American people are thoroughly represented up and down and sideways across DC in congress and the presidency.
Yet we are on the cusp of a police state. How can that be?
It doesn't make sense until one realizes our governing institutions no longer serve their designed purposes. Does congress actually legislate or does it enable the executive to make arbitrary regs/law? Does it conduct oversight of the agencies it created? Does congress serve to secure our inalienable rights? Does congress or Obama determine spending? The senate has voted to give Obama the treaty power.
Institutions designed for free government have been corrupted into forms that do the opposite; they serve to enable and condone tyranny.
Article V to reform our institutions before we can't.
Here is the reality:
Many of today’s establishment republicans (GOPe) are former democrats who switched parties for expediency when the Reagan Revolution came full swing. They are in truth neither democrats nor republicans but rather power brokers.
The important dollar-influence fact to note is to distinguish between the following two attributes:
RICH v. WEALTHY
A simplistic way to understand the difference is that the so-called ‘rich’ are persons that are able to live on the interest or return of their principle assets. Call this 1ST ORDER ECONOMIC POWER.
And the ‘wealthy’ are able to live off at least the interest of the interest (or return on the return) of their principle assets. Call this 2ND ORDER or HIGHER ORDER ECONOMIC POWER.
You can think of the 1ST ORDER as retired Surgeons or lawyers on the golf courses or the successful local businesses that amass 1ST ORDER power. You can think of the HIGHER ORDER as billionaires mostly created by Wall St. Investment Banks sucking on the teats of the Federal Reserve System.
In order for HIGHER ORDER ECONOMIC POWER to curb the influence of the 1ST ORDER, the HIGHER ORDER purchases and deploys the Democrat Party to create class warfare against the 1ST ORDER while at the same time preserving the tax infrastructure that accommodates billionaires. For example, billionaires always set up private foundations for which they are the controlling shareholder drawing paltry salaries. Then their wealth managers take out a combination of low-interest loans or whole-life insurance policies for themselves against their foundation and pay zero tax rates on proceeds. This only works well if the economic power is of HIGHER ORDER. It is very difficult for professional wealth managers to pull off if the economic power is only 1ST ORDER. This is BY DESIGN.
This scheme of RULING is nothing new. It has been carried out throughout history as the greatest threats to the ruling status quo came not from peasantry but from competing Barons who would use the peasant classes to revolt or who would ally themselves with other kingdoms to bring down the ruling families. The present day HIGHER ORDER power has found it expedient to use the democrat party and the tax infrastructure to keep their grip on power. That has also entailed having paid-for members controlling the so-called opposition party known as the Republicans; this would be the GOPe.
In my view, many of our current problems lead right back to the “progressive” amendments such as the Income Tax, and popular election of the US Senators, thus destroying the influence of individual state governments on the Federal Government through the Senators.
The onerous Income Tax and other Federal Tax Withholding, w take from every individual part of the wages they have earned. And who receives the money? Favored constituent groups - bribing the voters in other words.
South American Countries? Where armed revolution is frequent and determined at the point of a gun rather than the ballot box. NO THANKS.
America's political stability is what has helped make us a super power. Property rights is very important to individual freedom. Our system was one of the best at providing for upward mobility.
It still does pretty good, but is hampered by the “progressive” changes this author thinks are so great.
Is there a system of government where there are no “elites”?
It seems to me that each country now and in the past has had those in power, those near to power, and those whose power was slim to none.
Rather than bring everyone down to a miserable level by stealing all the “elites” possessions, why not let the impoverished rise to an elite position through hard work?
As to the slavery thing, that's a standard liberal misrepresentation of the actual situation. The founders had abolitionists and slave owners, and a compromise was made to ensure that the Southern States would join the Union.
The civil rights progress for “people of color” in the past century was in large part due to the efforts of those on the right - not the socialists.
Well, I could go on for pages and pages of how misguided, misrepresented, and down right mistaken this author is, but nuff said.
The founders did a great job end of story.
“Authoritarian document?” To the looney bin with this guy.
Oh wait, the communists had those closed...
“in their minds, liberty was not linked not to democracy but to property.”
It certainly was, and is, for republican government stems from res publica, the public riches, or people’s property, and as John Adams wrote:
“The word res, as everyone knows, signified in the Roman language, wealth, riches, property; the word publicus, quasi populicus, and per syncope poplicus, signified public, common, belonging to the people; res publica, therefore, was publica res, the wealth, riches, or property of the people.
Res populi, and the original meaning of the word republic could be no other than a government in which the property of the people predominated and governed; and it had more relation to property than liberty. It signified a government in which the property of the public, or people, and of every one of them, was secured and protected by law. This idea, indeed, implies liberty because property cannot be secure unless the man be at liberty to acquire, use, or part with it, at his discretion, and unless he have his personal liberty of life and limb, motion and rest, for that purpose.
It implies, moreover, that the property and the liberty of all men, not merely of a majority, should be safe. For the people, or public, comprehends more than a majority, it comprehends all and every individual; and the property of every citizen is part of the public property, as each citizen is part of the public, people or community. The property, therefore, of every man has a share in government, and is more powerful than any citizen, or party of citizens. It is governed only by the law.”
A republic, not a democracy!
Leftists like “democracy” because they know they can vote away the rights of their opponents. This is why tehy HATE the Constitution.
“Democracy is not an ideal to be striven for, and despite the Founders’ biases, it’s a fact that a lot of the masses are too poorly informed to govern themselves.”
I fear that if we limited government participation to those who are well informed in this day of massive disinformation campaigns there might not be enough to fill all the superflous government positions. We have millions who don’t have a clue that George Wallace was NOT a Republican as some are trying to claim now. It is astounding how many actually believe Lincoln was a Democrat and an online multiple choice quiz on history and civics asked the question what form of government did the United States Constitution give to the country and claimed that the correct answer was “representative democracy”. At the current rate we will soon reach the point when only two or three obscure and unknown historians of very advanced age will have a clue about the truth concerning anything that happened more than thirty minutes ago.
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.