Friday December 13, 2013
Jump to content
There is nothing that brings a people together better than the stirring words of a rallying cry. The power of words to unite a people and a nation is unequaled.
Throughout history, men have marched to war with stirring words ringing in their ears. We are now engaged in a war, a war for liberty, a war to return to the people of this nation the right to say what kind of laws will govern them.
We are sick at heart, looking at a battered and broken system of government. We have reached a turning point. We can either continue down the same road, or we can fight back, taking the first small step back to constitutional government.
What does it take for a rallying cry to fill the air?
• The occurrence of a hated event.
• A nationwide sense of defeat.
• An opportunity to redress the wrong.
Do we have that today?
The hated event: The passage of a health care bill written behind closed doors, the refusal to even tell the people what was in it before it was signed into law, the shock wave that passed through the people of this nation at the discovery that Congress had illegally and immorally taken on the power to force every citizen in this nation to buy something whether or not he or she needed or wanted it.
The sense of defeat: A Supreme Court so out of touch with reality that it has made a decision that it is reasonable and proper for the government to dictate to the people that they must do something that 75% of the nation opposes.
The opportunity to redress the wrong: The election of 2012.
This election, if the GOP realizes the power that has been placed in its hands, will focus on a single issue: Obamacare.
The rallying cry writes itself:
What was a lackluster election year has suddenly and unexpectedly been turned into a fight for liberty and the return to constitutional government.
Give me liberty of give me death!
Remember the Alamo!
I for one, am looking forward to President Obama's 4th of July address. I will be counting the number of times he says I and not we, We but not all, I will be listening for the call for social justice and the end of inequality, and jobs coming back because he'll tax the job makers and spread it around to the jobless. I will listen for how we will end the indebtedness of our Country by spending more money on programs that help and among them the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare) and how we can now go forward with healtcare for everyone without an increasing tax.
I will count the number of times he references the sacrifice of our military, past and present, who gave us our freedom and protects us daily, I will listen for a call to come together while he gives us reason to stay divided.
It's been in each of his past speeches, I'd love to be wrong, but I bet I'm not.
OK, I get it. You guys don't like (mild term) the Affordable Health Care Act.
Have any of you read the 1200 pages? (:
Let me take it step further. In an earlier post Tom referred to States rights as did I and we didn't agree. The problem goes beyond that disagreement for me however, because I believe states rights ended one month and 99 years ago. It was the passage of the 17th ammendment to the Constitution of the United States.
When Tom referred to the clause that guaranteed that those rights guaranteed to the Fed were limited and those not enumerated were left to the states and the people, it was at a time when the people had a greater voice. On May 31, 1911 Secretary of State, Williams Jennings Bryan, declared the 17th ammendment to the constitution offical.
The Constitution declared that representation by the states in the Congress would be by population in the House. The Senate however, would be comprised of 2 Senators from each state which would be elected by the (here comes the rub) State legislature. The original concept was simple. The Senators in Washington would answer to the State and only the State and therefore could not be influenced by the rest of the Country. ( Anybody looked at campaign contributions lately and where they come from). That became a problem for growing Federal Government. A lack of being able to influence the vote. ( my opinion). There was talk and stories of corruption with the state legislatures. ( there may have been) It spurred a movement ( that actually started more than 50 years earlier) to take the election of Senators and put it in the hands of the people. That was the lie. The lie was told well. Corruption was enumerated in account after account in the press, not in the court.
The people were told that they and they alone should decide who there Senators should be, and not the duly elected state legislative body of their State. They bought the arguement and the 17th ammendment was passed by a 3/4 majority of the States and declared official.
This is what changed.
States no longer had a strong voice of support in the U.S. Senate.
Re-election contributions could come from other more powerful states who wanted to influence the Senator.
People could move to a state and meet the voting requirements (in most cases lax) and run for the Senate with backing from the powerful.
The arguement on the other side. After the passage of the 17th ammendment, senators could settle down and work on National issues. Ones that affected everyone not just their home states. Senators could deal with World issues because they could affect the country as whole but not necessarily be in the best interest of their State.
Worst of all. When the Senate election went to the people, the local influence in elections ended. The representatives of the people no longer had control. Under the Constitution the state had say over the Roads, and traffic laws. If you want to drive in any State, you must have a recognized license, have your vision tested, meet certain literacy requirement, pass a test of the rules, and meet the requirements of the state while on the road. How fast you go, When to stop, when to yield, whether or not to have certain safety equipment on your vehicle, be sober, have insurance to protect 'others' on the road.....(I hate this one) . If America hadn't bought into the propoganda of the progressives in the early part of the last century, than States rights and where we are now,.....would never have happened.
I for one am in favor of repealing the 17th Ammendment. While we're at it, we should take a strong look at the 14th ammendment as well. Some may say that I'm a bigot, Read the ammendment and then accuse. Every reason for granting it, was already guaranteed except......
Pat, you only read 1200 pages? You have 1500 pages to go. Wait til you get the property sales tax. A key element in 'health care'.
The sales tax will affect those individuals with adjusted gross incomes of over $200,000 and those couples with adjusted gross incomes of over $250,000. While I don't like any additional taxes, it is important to clarify that the tax will not affect most of us in Payson. (poor in $ but rich in other ways!)
Ok, here is a question for the Obamanation out there. How or will the Obama care bill impact, IF AT ALL, the current Gubmnt. health care medical programs for the Congress and federal employees? I haven't heard a peep about it, have you? ERrah, will they do their fair share and are they going to feel the pain? Yeah, you bet.
Some interesting stats. Did you know that the USA comprises 5% of world population, and 66% of the worlds lawyers! Now this is the big one. I won't give you the answer, you do a little web searching. How many National Democratic elected official's have law degrees as oposed to Republicans? The answer speaks volumes and may astound you at the disparity.
Time for some humor: What do they call toothless bears?
In truth, it is not so much the act itself which I dislike as the way it was done. I do, of course, feel that no branch or level of the government has the right to tell us what we must buy from a private individual. Government may tax us, and may require is to participate in a lawful program such as Social Security, but it may not make us buy from a private individual. That decision is left to us.
As to my comments on the rallying cry. They are simply to show what can be done with the ammunition which was fed to the people by the Supreme Court decision. There isn't one whit of anger in them. There have been one-issue elections in the past. This could be another of them.
I have to be perfectly honest. I do not find a great deal wrong with what President Obama has done outside of this Act and his failure to deal with illegals. Much of what he has done is the same thing anyone else would have done.
Pat, I like to read, but not that thing.
"Did you know that the USA comprises 5% of world population, and 66% of the worlds lawyers!"
Wow! If we have that kind of trash surplus my son David can quit looking for a new target for his bow. :-)
And what do you call a pregnant bear?
Or a drunk bear?
Or a fat bear?
Or a bear injected with novocain?
Or a bear wandering camp looking for a handout?
Or a stupid bear?
Or a crooning bear?
Or a tasty bear?
Mummy bear, rummy bear, tummy bear, numby bear, bummy bear, dummy bear, hummy bear, and--ta! ta!--yummy bear.
That's okay. It was inevitable that I would lose it some day.
Posting comments requires a free account