Replies

I don't think the United States can be returned to living under the Constitution. I think we are going to lose more freedoms, not recover the ones we have lost. I think government at every level is past the point of no return and completely out of control. I don't see an acceptable alternative country that presently exists anywhere in the world. I think the United States has become a tyrannical dinosaur, and its extinction should be brought about peacefully and quickly. If the United States is willing to murder its own citizens to prevent them from excercising their unalienable right of self determination in choosing their own form of government through the democratic process, then I know I am right.

Is FreeRepublic just a support group (form of group therapy) for burned-out or recovering conservatives much like the function served by AA for alcoholics?

1. We admitted that we were powerless over politics, and that our country had become unmanageable.

2. We came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us and the US to sanity.

3. We became willing to turn our lives, our nation, and our will over to the care of God as we understood him.

Sounds about right...many of us are taking inventory as we speak...

America has become a nation of sheep, tended by wolves. As long as the wolves only take one sheep at a time, the herd remains content. As long as the herd has their TV and government cheese, it will not care if the wolves take a sheep every now and then. By the time the herd realizes the danger, it will already be at the slaughterhouse.

The US is beyond hope. A revolution of the likes not see before is the only remedy.

Destructor will go out kickin'! My gear is packed, and my powder is dry.

God bless America. Looks like we're in the end times. We're in His Hands.

My thoughts are........The general population of the US finds that even thinking about depriving their families temporarity of security is just too horrible to consider. The man of the family refuses to discuss this subject with his friends at work because he will be labeled "weird". America will follow the route of the Jews in Germany, a small group will cause tremendous difficulties for the globalist enforcement group while the masses will quietly board the trains to their assigned positions.

Will add my dissertation FWIW (for what it's worth):

Untitled Normal Page

Is the United States broken? Yes
If it is broken, can it be fixed? Yes
If it can be fixed, how long will it take? This Nation is unique. It will always be in flux, swinging between the left and right. If, however, it goes too far in one direction for too long of a time, it is up to the populace to bring it back. That usually takes a full Presidential election cycle (i.e., 8 years). Most of the first term is in stopping the swing and bringing it back toward the center; the second term is in instituting new directional policies.
Who will fix it? The voters. When they get "fatigue" they tend to correct the ills. However, they usually have lengthy complacency, and they do not adopt change readily. Their foremost concern is their pocketbook. When politics affects the pocketbook, their insistence on change can be rapid.
Will there be opposition to fixing it? All those already in elected and appointed political power.
Can the opposition be defeated within a reasonable period of time? Yes, provided we never allow any single politician or political party to corrupt the system beyond reasonable repair. Defeating the opposition can occur in a single election if the people are willing and have a viable reason to work against the incumbent. But, assuming an incumbent is defeated, it takes the "new electee" probably 3 months just to familiarize him/herself with governmental procedures and another 3 months to observe and understand the intricacies of politicing. By the 6th month the new electee should be in a position to start developing political bedfellowism. Only then can the newbie start to have an impact. This question cannot be answered by a specific timeline because the opposition is a force, people, party; not a singular individual.
How long is reasonable? see #6
How realistic are your expectations about whether it can be fixed? First, the "problems" have to be identified. Second, they have to be prioritorized. Third, from the prioritized list, solutions have to be developed. Fourth, the highest priority items need to be selected and made the issue for the next election.
How realistic are your expectations with regard to time? see #8 and #3.
If it can't be fixed, have you considered other solutions regarding your disappointment with the present state of affairs in the United States? It is fixable, provided the majority wants it fixed. The people are still the power; they just have to use it.
Could other countries offer the freedom you seek? n/a
Are there other existing countries that offer more freedom than what is currently offered in the United States?
If one state were to secede and offer a Constitutional Republic like the one we had, would you consider living there? Lincoln demonstrated that the Federal Government would never allow this to happen. Nor should we ever want to see it attempted again. It is the Union that has made us a great Nation. If states start splitting off, first it would be regional, such as, the Southeastern, Southwestern, Northeastern, etc. Next, individual states would split from the regionals. Then, the continent would be a macro version of the Eurpoean Balkins. The results would be up to 50 little countries, each trying to survive. It would resemble feudalism. And it would last only a short while before a new superpower nation conquers the countries. The resulting government may not be representative democracy. More likely, it would be a communistic or socialistic dictatorship. We would lose much more than we would ever gain by splitting up the United States.
How would the United States respond to one state's elective and voluntary peaceable declaration of its own independence from the United States? see 13
Would the United States be willing to use military action including the killing of peaceful secessionists? Yes.
If a Boris Yeltsin took a stand in the state capitol, would the United States send in the tanks and kill him and/or his compatriots? I'm not sure what this question is asking. States Rights provides each state to determine its own state-level form of government. I suppose a state could change its constitution and allow a dictator, but that would require an election. If the questions means--what if someone dictatorially takes over a state, then yes, the Federal Government would act to restore the state's constitution.
If the United States were actually willing to use force to surpress a state's secession, would you still want to live in the United States? see 13
Would that be the final straw proving to any "doubting Thomas"es that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States are now empty meaningless words that no longer have validity as ideas? As long as the citizenry has the right to vote, they can change the direction of the government. If the citizenry allows the right to vote to be taken away, then maybe they don't deserve the right.
Would this be the proof to some that the United States is now no different from any other form of tyranny? This Nation is a long way from being a tyranny. Tyranny implies tyrant, dictator.
If one state successfully and peaceably seceded, would others follow? see 13
Would we see groups of states organizing as regional republics competeing for citizens by offering more freedom than their neighboring nation/states? see 13
Could our freedoms and liberties be restored more certainly and more quickly by forcing governments to compete with one another in an effort to please its citizens and/or prospective citizens? Doubtful. Fifty little countries fighting and treatying. This would be chaos. Consider just things like: passport to go from Oklahoma to Kansas; trains having to stop at every border, and cars, and trucks; different currencies; different standards; food supplies. States are so interwoven with commerce and culture, that separatism would be a nightmare. Then the invasion from the next superpower--China? Australia? somewhere there would be one. Could those old enough to remember the Cold War even think of separatism when the USSR was aiming hundreds of nukes at each major US city? Imagine what it would be like had the USA dissolved in to separatist states in, say 1960. No space program, no military superiority, probably not the computerization we know today. And talk about bureaucracies, each little country would have a whopping (comparatively) sized government to provide the services. Imagine the Department of Trade Negotiations -- one for each state/country each "independent" does business with.
Does the United States have a monopoly on government? No. Every nation has a government of some type, whether elected representation, dictatorship, monarchy.
Is the military superiority that the United States possesses over the rest of the world sufficient reason for its citizens to sacrifice their freedoms in the interests of security? Military superiority and citizens sacrificing freedoms is comparing apples and oranges. Security is related to the level or type of threat.
Could the military strength and superiority of the United States be obtained through the equivalent of a North American Nato? If we grant membership to the mighty military of Bermuda. The US and Canada are the only two nations in the Western Hemisphere that have significant military strength. Look at South America--most of the time their military are busy with revolts and revolutions and juntas. A North American Nato might happen 20 or 30 years from now, but look again at Central and South America--most of those nations are not stable enough to even keep a government (except dictatorships), so would they be very dependable as military allies? Now, if significant threat from some Eastern Hemisphere power occurred then the Latin American nations might participate out of self-survival.
How can we restore our freedoms without secession? With secession we lose more freedoms than we have now. What type of government would the seceded country have? Who decided that? Imagine, Illinois as a monarchy with King Daily, while Indiana might have an elected representative government, but Ohio was defeated by a tyrannical militia group who appointed General Smith as the dictator. Secession would not happen as a controlled environment.
That being said, restoration will occur only when the people are sufficiently prompted to pressure their elected representatives. The vote still counts. If enough people, for example, put pressure on the government representatives to ban green cars on the highways on Sunday, green cars would get banned.
The biggest problem is complacency and lack of knowledge. A vast number of people have no idea what the government does on a day-to-day basis. Consider that for each of the 80,000 Freepers, probably half or more simply don't have time to read 20% of the posts made here on any given day. Now consider that of the 100 million voters, maybe 10% have much idea what the government does on a day to day basis.
So, what are the issues? Always at the top of the list is the economy. When the economy is good and people have money to spend, they tend to show less concern about nearly all other issues. Occasionally, they are awakened, as with 9/11, and other issues become important. However, most soon return to their daily routine.
Gingritch had the right idea; he was just the wrong messenger. Create a list of the 10 most important issues facing the Nation. Let these be from the people, not from the party or some trumped up media poll. Hold the elected representatives feet to the fire to get most of these 10 in the next election period. Then another 10, etc. Abortion may be the hot topic for some, while prescription drugs may be for others. The issues have to represent the people. The trouble is, self-interest always takes top priority, with the voters and with the elected representatives. The representatives get elected on certain issues; then conveniently forget them once they settle in Washington, DC. Why? Because the people vote and then go back to their lives and assume the elected will "do the right thing."
It is difficult to keep people aware when the politicians and the media, each with their own agendas, work diligently to keep the voters back home from knowing the truth. Truth is dangerous for the politician. Ignorance is bliss for the politician. So, how do you keep people interested in what their government is "really" doing, and how do you keep them aware?
I suspect most Freepers share my frustrations, but have not let their thinking run as far afield as I have let mine. Quite frankly, I am not at all happy with my answers to these questions. And while this may prove to be a fool's errand, I assure you it is not intended as an April Fools. As is so common on this site, feel free to Freep This Poll.

bttt