The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: twyacht on March 23, 2010, 09:15:43 PM
-
Found this on Human Events, by Skip Corvell,,,, get to the second half of the article to hit the bullet points, but the whole article makes complete sense.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=36108
Small segment, but the entire article is well written and accurate:
So what does all this have to do with saber rattling, a threatening of war, or a menacing show of armed force?
Look at the present situation in America. Many say we are on the brink of economic collapse. Our elected officials exude an unprecedented arrogance, totally ignoring the will of the people, hell-bent on dragging us into a world we neither want for ourselves nor our children. In short, the pecking order has been established, and it’s 180 degrees out of phase. They are the ruling class and we are subservient to them.
Or are we?
I hear the clank of metal on metal in the distance.
All across the country, Americans are rising up and biting the hand that feeds them. In some cases, the hand is getting ripped clean off! In Virginia, in New Jersey, and even in Massachusetts. The chain is chafing their necks and they want it gone!
The politicians…they ignore us.
For the past year we’ve heard a lot about the TEA parties and the nine-twelvers. People like Glenn Beck (God bless him) continue to educate America on Freedom 101 and the original intent of our founding fathers. We the people have been exercising our First Amendment rights to the hilt. We’re screaming! We’re protesting! We’re faxing! We’re phoning and marching and yelling….
But still…they ignore us.
I hear the clank of metal on metal in the distance, but not so distant today as it was yesterday or the day before, or the day before, or the day before.
I have a feeling, just a feeling, that I’m not alone. There are a lot of people out there like me who will no longer tolerate the arrogance of politicians who ignore us. I’ve been told that there’s only one thing worse than being abused, and that’s being ignored. If you kick me, at least I know I exist. But if you ignore me, then I’m not even worth the trouble.
And here’s the million-dollar question: “What happens if the First Amendment fails?”
****
Much more at link. I recommend you take a few moments to read and realize, MANY in this country have had it, and in an articulate, intelligent manner, will not grab our ankles much longer.
A previous post regarding our intentions, were advised to "keep kinda quiet",,,,let it work out in the courts,,,etc,...
Well, when 3/4 of this country was just punched in the face, and ignored by what is supposed to be a "Representative Republic"
and OBTW, it ain't over yet.... I think some saber rattling is a good thing.
-
Let them hear the grind stones at night sharpening pitch forks, in order to stir their consciences, if that does not work use them. Thrust them like hay into the fire of God. For it is HE who caused birth to this country, born out of the very Abomination we see today. We became free and great just to have 600 people to put us back in chains? NEVER!
-
Listen to what Larry Pratt of the Gun Owners of America has to say about the 2nd Amendment March. By the way, we are less than 29 days and counting down to this historic event.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b7NiU1WUVt8
-
These bastards need to be tried by a court full of free God fearing American's who wouldn't be afraid to sentence them with treason. They have spit on the faces of people like you and me (assuming you are a hard working, tax paying, straight talking, red blooded American), all to serve their own purposes. It doesn't matter what the bill contains. 80% of us have said we don't want it. The other 20% can go to hell. People need to get angry. I am. I know you guys are. We just need to put that anger to good use.
-
Guys, lets be calm here. (everytime I say this I need to duck and cover BUT, sometimes it needs to be said.). This vote, or any other votelike it, has major implications as to what Congress is or should be. The Clinton Impeachment, where the vast majoriy (67% approval rating) didn't want him impeached is another. We have two choices.
Option 1, the democratic option- Congressmen are instructed delegates who vote the way their district wants, regardless of their own feelings, sort of like a lawyer who is payed to be your advocate.
Option 2, the republican one- Congressmen are trustees free to excersize their own judgement voting for the common good as they see it and then be held accountable in either 2 or 6 years to the voters for what they did.
Option one, you vote for them doing what they say, option 2, you vote for folks to act in your interest. The point being that if you vote for option 1, you will get the rule/tyranny of the majority. If you choose option 2, you get reps who will do what they please and then explain it to you. Neither is ideal, but lets hear which option you prefer before pointing fingers. Finger pointing is good, but we need to know what standard we should have before doing so.
FQ13
-
I don't hate you the way Eric seems to.
Times like now I wonder why.
They are paid with OUR money, to serve as our proxies in managing the business of Govt.
They are nothing more than administrators and sales reps. They are not elected to be smart, that ALWAYS leads to disaster. They are hired to do what they are told.
-
I don't hate you the way Eric seems to.
Times like now I wonder why.
They are paid with OUR money, to serve as our proxies in managing the business of Govt.
They are nothing more than administrators and sales reps. They are not elected to be smart, that ALWAYS leads to disaster. They are hired to do what they are told.
Thing is Tom, Madison and Hamilton disagreed with you. Jefferson did not. He wanted instructed delegates. Madison wanted folks to elect the best men in the community to use their judgement. Doubt me? Read the plain text of the Constitution. There is a reason only the House was directly elected. Hate, hell, I don't care much what Eric thinks, but its the founders you and he are arguing with here, not the Quaker. I have my own views, which I'm keeping to myself for now, but the fact is, that this nation has been torn between Jefferson and Hamilton since 1789. Don't blame me if you don't like your choices.
FQ13
-
I don't hate you the way Eric seems to.
Times like now I wonder why.
They are paid with OUR money, to serve as our proxies in managing the business of Govt.
They are nothing more than administrators and sales reps. They are not elected to be smart, that ALWAYS leads to disaster. They are hired to do what they are told.
They are paid with "OUR" money, Quaker's point is that "OUR" has become the minority. We are quickly reaching the tipping point of a working democracy, when the number of people that have there hands out for a free lunch out number the people that work.
-
They are paid with "OUR" money, Quaker's point is that "OUR" has become the minority. We are quickly reaching the tipping point of a working democracy, when the number of people that have there hands out for a free lunch out number the people that work.
Bingo! I forget the exact quote, but De Touqueville put it best when he said in "Democracy in America" that the republic would last until people realized that they could vote themselves an income out of the public purse. This is why you need to choose carefully between a Jeffersonian and Hamiltonian model. Do you expect your Reps to forgo the temptation of buying themselves life time tenure by bringing home the pork, or your neighbors from forgoing the temptation of enriching themselves at your expense? Hate or, don't hate, its the cold hard truth. Pick whichever system you think is most likely to make vice act as virtue, because vice ain't going away, and virtue is scarce on the ground. Cf. The Federalist Papaers.
FQ13
-
For those that spend a lot of time commuting I recommend the Librivox site for free audio books.
http://www.archive.org/details/federalist_papers_librivox
http://www.archive.org/details/antifederalist_0707_librivox
In the mean time I will keep hoarding ammo.
-
In a discussion over what our elected officials should do, I was asked what I would do if I were that official.
My answer then and now remain the same. (this discussion occurred while walking the streets in Chicago in 1976)
I could never vote for any issue that I felt was wrong, that violated the Constitution, no matter how many of my constituents were in favor of it.
A majority of 51% (or 99%) can not, in our Constitutional Republic, take away the rights of the other 49% (or 1%) of the citizens.
There are many issues that do not matter constitutionally, like perhaps, should the US convert to the metric system. There are pros and cons and I may feel one course is "better" in the long or short run for the country, but I would generally defer to the will of my constituents in this type of vote.
As I have heard on this forum several times, you must stand for something, and as an elected official, what I stand for will not be swayed by popular vote.
The person I with whom I was having this discussion said he would never vote for me.
That is fine. I would say to the voters, Know where I stand on the issues because that is how I will vote on them.
-
Guys, lets be calm here. (everytime I say this I need to duck and cover BUT, sometimes it needs to be said.). This vote, or any other votelike it, has major implications as to what Congress is or should be. The Clinton Impeachment, where the vast majoriy (67% approval rating) didn't want him impeached is another. We have two choices.
Option 1, the democratic option- Congressmen are instructed delegates who vote the way their district wants, regardless of their own feelings, sort of like a lawyer who is payed to be your advocate.
Option 2, the republican one- Congressmen are trustees free to excersize their own judgement voting for the common good as they see it and then be held accountable in either 2 or 6 years to the voters for what they did.
Option one, you vote for them doing what they say, option 2, you vote for folks to act in your interest. The point being that if you vote for option 1, you will get the rule/tyranny of the majority. If you choose option 2, you get reps who will do what they please and then explain it to you. Neither is ideal, but lets hear which option you prefer before pointing fingers. Finger pointing is good, but we need to know what standard we should have before doing so.
FQ13
Number 2 is the eight choice, as number 1 is mob rule. Unfortunately, things have changed radically in recent times. The Founding Fathers feared political parties, and now we see why. Our elected officials tow party lines to the extreme now, and tend not to vote for what they feel is in their constituent's best interests.
The 'other' legislative body, the Senate, was set up to be elected by the State Legislatures to protect the interest of their State, and negate any party line crap that might come from the House. In short, the Senate was intended to be free of national party interests, and watch out for the interest of their State.
The 17th amendment put the Senate elections into the hands of the Great Unwashed popular vote, removing the State legislatures from the picture. This was to 'end corruption in the process'. Oddly enough, it was corruption in Illinois that prompted this. The unwitting result is both bodies now fall heavily under national party pressures, and both are elected by a largely uncaring and ignorant population. I say 'ignorant' rather than 'stupid' because I consider our current situation a product of a primary and secondary education system that indoctrinates rather than teaches critical thinking.
Fix that, and we get our country back.
-
"As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms."
(Tench Coxe in ‘Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution' under the Pseudonym ‘A Pennsylvanian' in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1)
"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."
President Thomas Jefferson
"It is customary for republican governments to be bound by constitutions, and this is grand idea. The question does arise, however, about what recourse the citizen has when the government disregards its own constitution, as is the case with our own Tenth Amendment. What do you do if your government does not obey its own laws? Our Declaration declaims that when governments do not observe the God-given rights of man, it is not only the right but the duty of the people to alter or abolish them. The Declaration of Independence may not be the supreme law of the land - which is the Constitution - but it frames our philosophy of government and serves as a guide for those who respect our traditions. More people should."
Col. Jeff Cooper
"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
Thomas Jefferson Papers
"Our Founding Fathers, having endured the tyranny of the British Empire, wanted to guarantee our God-given liberties. They devised our three branches of government and our system of checks and balances. But they were still concerned that the system could fail, and that we might someday face a new tyranny from our own government. They wanted us to be able to defend ourselves, and that's why they gave us the Second Amendment."
Mike Huckabee
***last one is my favorite as it pertains to the OP ***
"You need only reflect that one of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the struggle for independence."
Charles Austin Beard, American Historian, 1874-1948