Posted on 06/25/2015 9:57:29 AM PDT by Hostage
THE SOLUTION
Now it is clear more than ever that the Federal Government needs to be checked BY THE PEOPLE AND THE STATES.
Neither morality nor common sense can be 'legislated' via Congress ***effectively***. It just cannot be done adequately.
We need our states to assert AS SOON AS POSSIBLE their Article V constitutional right to AMEND OUR US CONSTITUTION,
Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.
To understand what must NOW be done will require us to think deep and to think of something that as Mark Levin says “is a solution as big as the problem” meaning a solution that gets its hands around the ‘whole problem’. And it has to be quick because time is of the essence.
We should first take note to understand the following:
(1) It takes 3/4’s of states presently equal to 38 states to ratify a proposed amendment to the US Constitution thereby making the amendment a part of the US Constitution.
(2) THE MAIN REALITY: THE STATES HAVE NO POWER BEFORE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
Now some may think ... “but Congress can amend the Constitution”. Think about this. Will the present makeup of Congress amend anything to express the Will of the People? The answer is absolutely not, they won’t even get it into a committee.
Think about it some more in terms of the 10th Amendment. Is the 10th Amendment respected, observed, utilized? No, it is not. It has been subordinated by other amendments or ignored altogether.
Repeat the main reality:
THE STATES HAVE NO POWER BEFORE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
Understand why is this. Understand how this happened.
This lack of power is actually a loss of power as a direct result of the 17th Amendment extinguishing the power of state legislatures before Congress.
NOTE: the 16th, 17th and 18th Amendments were all from the year 1913. They were all a stain on the US Constitution and serve as a clear illustration of how ‘knee-jerk’ reactions to problems and conflicts of the day result in disaster. We must avoid these types of 'knee-jerk' mistakes by ensuring our amendment is both broad and specific AND IN THE SPIRIT OF THE FOUNDERS.
THEREFORE, if WE THE PEOPLE through our state legislatures are to consider amending our US Constitution by asserting Article V, then we must be very careful, very thorough, and we must understand the CORE OF THE PROBLEM. We must not be 'all over the map'. We must be united. In all likelihood we only get one shot at this in our lifetime.
The root of the problem is the 17th Amendment. We can propose to repeal it and some very respected FREEPERS advocate for doing just that. But in my opinion repealing the 17th Amendment takes too long and is not necessary to solve the problem. Also the 17th is laden with emotional symbolism because it gave a power to vote to the people. In effect, to repeal it will launch a debate and war in society that will end up following so many directions that it will smother the entire reason of why we needed to do it in the first place; we risk the reason for the repeal to getting lost in the noise and being forgotten.
Let’s look at the problem from a slightly different angle. If we can’t get at the root of the problem, can we get at the core of the problem?
The answer is yes.
An illustration is needed that shows how the power of Article V can be unlocked by the States to restore federalism thereby restoring our liberty and saving our Republic. Note this illustration condenses several of Mark Levin’s suggested Liberty Amendments and incorporates valuable input from concerned Freepers.
************************************************
AMENDMENT XXVIII
To redress the balance of powers between the federal government and the states and to restore effective suffrage of state legislatures to Congress, the following amendment is proposed:
************************************************
Section 1. A Senator in Congress shall be subject to recall by their respective state legislature or by voter referendum in their respective state.
Section 2. Term limits for Senators in Congress shall be set by vote in their respective state legislatures but in no case shall be set less than twelve years nor more than eighteen years.
Section 3. Upon a majority vote in three-fifths of state legislatures, specific federal statutes, specific federal court decisions and specific executive directives of any form shall be repealed and made void. ************************************************
Section 3 of the above illustration puts an end to the social tyranny of the federal government. The 28th Amendment can survive as a predominant amendment of the US Constitution when voters and state legislatures unite to fight together.
WHAT MUST WE DO TODAY?
(1) Strongly recommend the following must-see video of Mark Levin be watched, consumed and studied:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tdZuV8JnvvA
(2) Strongly recommend everyone to urge their respective state senators and state representatives, and the people that work for them, to view it also.
(3) Put it on your to-do list to find out who is your State Representative and who is your State Senator. Get their names, addresses and phone numbers. You will be astonished at how accessible and neighborly they can be.
(4) Sign up here as soon as possible:
http://www.conventionofstates.com
Excellent listing of present grievances.
I have considered much of what’s on your list and other items not on the list over several years. And I read amendment proposals of Mark Levin, of Constitutional Law Professor Randy Barnett and so many other fine scholars and personas.
And I thought could there be just one amendment that would address all the issues? I asked what is really the root of all this deterioration? And the answer became clear after countless discussions that the root is the 17th Amendment.
Amendment 28 is in the spirit of the Constitution before there was the 17th Amendment and hopefully improves upon it. And it addresses all your listed concerns. For example, lame duck sessions. Section 3 of Amendment 28 can void and repeal any specific action stemming from a lame duck session.
Do a favor please. Try to take your list, your thoughts and experience (which I see are considerable) and bounce them one-by-one off of Amendment 28. See if Amendment 28 can stand up to any abuse you imagine can be thrown against it.
Thanks very much in advance.
No problem Laz. I’m sure that many many others feel the same way.
As long as we have a breath in our body, we should keep fighting.
Never ever give up.
You might be right, I’m just sick to death of it all.
-PJ
You’re not alone!
I often get sick of it all. Then I take a hike in the mountains or a boat on the water or a drive through the country where I get lost for example in the vineyards and wineries of Lake Chelan, or take the ferry to one of the islands and visit friends so that I can get away from it all.
But then something will make me think, like maybe I will see the American flag or see a photo of a mother’s son who lost his life in Afghanistan, or a bunch of friends gathered at a table for dinner just carrying on, whatever...
And I think all that I do, all that I am allowed to do, is because of my ancestors and the people of my time that have sacrificed so much so that I can lose myself in whatever pursuit.
Then I kick myself for being so selfish and inconsiderate, for being a runaway from reality, and I get back in the fight.
The only way I can justify my down time is to know I need to recharge my batteries.
Sounds like you could use some down time to recharge yours.
You are SOOOO right.
All I can see is doom and death and blackness and voids.
When I posted the Adult Wednesday Adamms thread, I mostly identified with her morbid statements.
>>>Our course of action at this point is the same as it was for the Colonists in 1775: REFUSE TO COMPLY WITH TYRANNY.
RESIST.
IT IS TIME WE DO THAT.
If we refuse to comply - the true vicious nature of this burgeoning tyranny will be revealed, and then we will have THE MORAL AUTHORITY TO RESIST by every and all means as it was for the Colonists.<<<
True.
But.
With the computerization of surveillance and the weaponry of war, the government’s moves against its enemies would easily make Stalin blush. No need to obligate thousands of police when thousands of drones with face-recognition software and a GPS can do the same job. My guns are no defense against a small missile aimed at my house from a silent unmanned vehicle.
I think that’s the impetus behind the constant demonizing of right-wing “extremists” as the real terrorists. There’s already a large minority of people who insist that conservatives are dangerous. Actually fighting would tip those scales badly out of our favor.
Ayn Rand had it right. Each person can drop away and stop contributing to a corrupt system, silliness like canyons hidden behind force fields notwithstanding. It’s in the tradition of the Polish Solidarity movement, without the announcements about general strikes and a political organization. The overwhelming state that’s been built up can’t be defeated using Revolutionary War tactics. If the productive people stop working, though, the whole thing falls apart. I sometimes imagine that Rand understood what would happen when the left gained power in the United States and cleverly hid the winning strategy in plain sight.
Sort of a reverse Cloward-Piven. IMHO
+1
The founders gave it to us as the last backstop before the REALLY terrible stuff starts... Nullification, Secession & finally bullets...
I will not, because it happens to be 100% true. Got a problem with the truth? Why?
Such parasite enablers will destroy any nation if they are not controlled somehow.
I agree 100%. So instead of attempting to restrict freedom of speech, why not focus on the job itself, and work for an amendment that would make being a federally elected public servant a lot closer to jury duty - make it so that it's not something a pol would WANT to do as a career. As I pointed out previously, George Washington didn't WANT to be president - it was an imposition - a hardship even, but he believed it to be his civic duty.
Perhaps if we got back to that, we could effectively discourage these guys from becoming career pols.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Article V is a passive means to "alter or abolish" the abusive and despotic parts of the government without throwing off the whole thing. Should it come to the point of "throw[ing] off such government," we should look to the introduction of the Declaration.
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
Article V is the means for the several states "to declare the causes which impel them," if only for "a decent respect to the opinions of mankind" for whatever may follow.
-PJ
I say instead that we will answer to our God for the carnage we have already accepted by sitting idle while wickedness and sin devoured our culture and gave license to a people who made government their god.
I say we will already be held to account for the genocidal terrorism we have permitted being done to the unborn, the family and the entire nation by the abandonment of our foundational principles and religion to accept ideas anathema to both while deceiving ourselves that indulgence is freedom.
Things far worse than warfare against the wicked have been done because of our indifference to the harm done by the wicked to our foundations, while we practice insanity to make corrupt men who tell us what we want to hear, our rulers.
We will answer to God for our Abandonment of Him in our culture to men in power and a wicked people who demand He be put out. Indeed the Curses of Deuteronomy 28 are being played out before our eyes.
Before I burden my conscience in such a way, I want to make damn sure that all reasonable remedies have been exhausted.
I say that you cannot offer reasonable remedies to the unreasonable and the lawless. I'm amused that your conscience is burdened with the notion of resisting tyranny by force, but not with the implementation of tyranny itself.
We slaughtered an entire generation of countrymen in the womb while assuaging our consciences by telling ourselves the Satanic lie that it was more righteous for a woman to kill the consequence of adultery and fornication than in preserving an innocent life. Now suddenly we are squeamish when it comes to the thought of resisting those who would subjugate and kill us all without a thought because they think they do their gods of government and mother earth service?
You are proving what I have feared, that this people find nothing worth fighting for outside of whatever gibmedat goodies and imagined entitlements they now think belong to them, liberty be damned.
There are things far worse than killing tyrants who come against you. Just ask Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
At this point, I doubt a constitutional convention is likely to make things worse. That's about the only good thing you can say about it. I expect them to turn out a kludge, because it would appear the only good amendments were those produced by the Founders. All else since has been crap.
Yes, let's propose something complicated and difficult for the average voter to understand instead of something simple, and easy to understand. *That* will work better!
Minimum wage, no special medical benefits (send them through obolacare), no lifetime medical, no after service benefits - how is this complicated?
You think that will stop cronyism born of incumbency? Hello! These people get rich in office, but not from the pay or the perks. Again, Hello!
So find a way to address this WITHOUT restricting free speech. Term limits restrict free speech, period. When you can figure out how to end career politicians WITHOUT restricting free speech, I'll be all ears. Until then, quit attacking the 1st Amendment.
Just because you say something, does not make it so.
Freedom of Speech only works if the playing field is level. When one side has studios, amplifiers and speakers, and the other side has nothing, it can hardly be called "freedom of speech" for the guy with nothing because he can't be heard.
This is a microcosm of what we have with the modern media. Conservatives *HAVE* no freedom of speech because Liberals control all the microphones, cameras, satellites, and transmitters.
You can't argue "Freedom of Speech" when it is impossible for the other side to get heard, and in the case of incumbency, it *IS* impossible for the other guy to get heard.
What you are in favor of is a lopsided system where one guy gets heavy influence in persuading the public and the other guy does not.
That isn't "free speech" that is the very opposite of it. Here's what Benjamin Franklin had to say on the subject.
5. Printers are educated in the Belief, that when Men differ in Opinion, both Sides ought equally to have the Advantage of being heard by the Publick; and that when Truth and Error have fair Play, the former is always an overmatch for the latter:
That's the way the Framers intended for it to be. Your freedom of speech is preserved.
-PJ
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.