Excellent Call, Ben

[Votto]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

Not so. When it comes to issues they want that Trump does not, like sanctuary cities, they will fight to the death for state rights and win in court. But when Obama was in power and Arizona tried to implement federal laws on immigration that the Federal government was not, then Obama sued them and again won in a court of law.

Being a Democrat means never having to say your are sorry or ever wrong.

 

[progressive hunter]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

Not so. When it comes to issues they want that Trump does not, like sanctuary cities, they will fight to the death for state rights and win in court. But when Obama was in power and Arizona tried to implement federal laws on immigration that the Federal government was not, then Obama sued them and again won in a court of law.

Being a Democrat means never having to say your are sorry or ever wrong.

fed law over rides state law,,and immigration is fed law, so states rights arent an issue,,,

 

[kaz]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

No one has ever been as overtly America hating as the Democrat party is now. I hope you're right, but if people don't see it this time, we really are lost

 

[Votto]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

 

[Votto]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

 

[Coyote]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

 

[kaz]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

So much for the first amendment. We still have nine more in the Bill of Rights, right? Oh wait, you don't support the second or the fourth either. Or the ninth or tenth. Or the fifth.

Well, at least people will have to be compensating for soldiers sleeping at their house ...

 

[Coyote]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

Bad idea. I wouldn't trust anyone to have forsight and wisdom to do it well. Dont mess with it.

 

[kaz]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

Bad idea. I wouldn't trust anyone to have forsight and wisdom to do it well. Dont mess with it.

Yes, you have the perfect mob rule now. Don't want to mess with that

 

[Coyote]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

So much for the first amendment. We still have nine more in the Bill of Rights, right? Oh wait, you don't support the second or the fourth either. Or the ninth or tenth. Or the fifth.

Well, at least people will have to be compensating for soldiers sleeping at their house ...

I think equating money with speech, and its lack of yrandparency, is right there with corporate personhood in the destruction of democracy.

 

[Coyote]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

Bad idea. I wouldn't trust anyone to have forsight and wisdom to do it well. Dont mess with it.

Yes, you have the perfect mob rule now. Don't want to mess with that

Dumb response.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

Bad idea. I wouldn't trust anyone to have forsight and wisdom to do it well. Dont mess with it.

I agree. I don't want any current politicians getting their nose-picking fingers on the Constitution.

 

[kaz]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

So much for the first amendment. We still have nine more in the Bill of Rights, right? Oh wait, you don't support the second or the fourth either. Or the ninth or tenth. Or the fifth.

Well, at least people will have to be compensating for soldiers sleeping at their house ...

I think equating money with speech, and its lack of yrandparency, is right there with corporate personhood in the destruction of democracy.

So to you free speech only means that people can hear me who are in personal, physical earshot? That's ridiculous. Once we go on the Internet, on the airwaves, or other electronic media, then free speech ends? How authoritarian of you

 

[kaz]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

Bad idea. I wouldn't trust anyone to have forsight and wisdom to do it well. Dont mess with it.

Yes, you have the perfect mob rule now. Don't want to mess with that

Dumb response.

Dumb response.

You like majority vote because it's mob rule. What about that is inaccurate or unclear? Power divided is power checked. Now the States have no power, which is why the Federal government is unchecked

 

[Votto]

For those interested, the Article V movement is a movement whereby states can amend the Constitutional. It has NEVER been done before, but was placed there in case the Federal government became too corrupt and powerful which it has become today.

A New Strategy for the Article V Convention of States Movement

Where are matters today with the Article V (AV) Convention of States (COS) movement to propose urgently needed amendments to the U.S. Constitution?

patriotpost.us

We need 2/3 of the states to join, currently about 15 have joined.

The key amendments would be like limiting terms in Congress for career, corrupt, politicians, and placing some sort of cap on spending, two things that the Federal Congress would never do because they have no interest in anyone curbing their power. The Article V movement is the only way to get it done.

The only question becomes, is the Federal government too powerful and corrupt to allow the process to happen?

About 80% of Americans want term limits for Congress and some sort of spending limit on Congress.

So where are all the Lefty democracy lovers? They seem to be woefully absent here.

Well I reckon they could care less about democracy, just like they could care less about blacks. It's all about centralized power.

Bad idea. I wouldn't trust anyone to have forsight and wisdom to do it well. Dont mess with it.

So even if 80% of the people want it don't let them have their way?

Is that what you are saying?

 

[Votto]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

Take all the money out of what? My guess is that you would just take corporate money out of the elections cycle, in which case not even corporations would have a voice.

I'm sure you are not suggesting we put a cap on spending that Congress does, especially since passing the 16th amendment for a Federal income tax that was declared unconstitutional decades before by SCOTUS, essentially tilted the power towards total Federal domination of the states. No, people like you want even more spending like $100 trillion to fight the naturally occurring gas carbon dioxide and for free everything costing God only knows how much.

 

[Coyote]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

So much for the first amendment. We still have nine more in the Bill of Rights, right? Oh wait, you don't support the second or the fourth either. Or the ninth or tenth. Or the fifth.

Well, at least people will have to be compensating for soldiers sleeping at their house ...

I think equating money with speech, and its lack of yrandparency, is right there with corporate personhood in the destruction of democracy.

So to you free speech only means that people can hear me who are in personal, physical earshot? That's ridiculous. Once we go on the Internet, on the airwaves, or other electronic media, then free speech ends? How authoritarian of you

Nice strawman.

 

[Coyote]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

Take all the money out of what? My guess is that you would just take corporate money out of the elections cycle, in which case not even corporations would have a voice.

I'm sure you are not suggesting we put a cap on spending that Congress does, especially since passing the 16th amendment for a Federal income tax that was declared unconstitutional decades before by SCOTUS, essentially tilted the power towards total Federal domination of the states. No, people like you want even more spending like $100 trillion to fight the naturally occurring gas carbon dioxide and for free everything costing God only knows how much.

corperations are not people. Why should they have a voice? Same with unions.

 

[progressive hunter]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

Take all the money out of what? My guess is that you would just take corporate money out of the elections cycle, in which case not even corporations would have a voice.

I'm sure you are not suggesting we put a cap on spending that Congress does, especially since passing the 16th amendment for a Federal income tax that was declared unconstitutional decades before by SCOTUS, essentially tilted the power towards total Federal domination of the states. No, people like you want even more spending like $100 trillion to fight the naturally occurring gas carbon dioxide and for free everything costing God only knows how much.

corperations are not people. Why should they have a voice? Same with unions.

just a suggestion for a new vote finance law,,

if you dont have a legal right to vote for the candidate you cant give them money in any form either directly or indirectly,,,

what say you???

 

[kaz]

Not seeing how that is a good thing. Given the extreme gerrymandering in state legislatures, that could potentially cement control of entire states under one party for representation. Could also open the door to more corruption and cronyism....

Senators are bound to represent the states, not a political party. That's how it was for the first 113 years.

Ya. But that is no longer the case. We are not the same now as we were then.

how are we not the same???

I have to agree with Coyote on that. When we were founded, Americans were loyal to their State first. If Virginia had stayed with the Union, Robert E. Lee would have been General of the Union army.

Now politics is all national. We are a central government controlled country, not a distributed country.

It's unfortunate but true.

Some of us want to go back to that. But it's not going to happen

it will never happen if we sit back and do nothing,,,and ben is doing something,,,

IMO anyone that speaks against a return to that is a POS that needs confronted everytime they open their mouth,,,

I agree and I'm in. I'm just expressing doubt that State rights will happen again. Democrats will fight to the death to prevent it. Their whole justification for power is mob rule and State rights are an anathema to mob rule

they seem to call for states rights when a republican is president,,,

Yes. Democrats call for State rights when they want to override legitimate Constitutional Federal powers, like immigration. Then they ignore State rights for things the Federal government doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do. It's an f'd up party

someday the people will wake up and see its the partys themselves that are the problem dividing us,,,

Politics is the art of division. You pit one group against the other, and yes, both parties are experts at it because that is all they do all day. After all, if both parties said they would treat everyone the same, who would send them all their money and support? People give their time and money to these people to get a leg up on their fellow citizen.

As for what is wrong today, it has to do with centralized power. Power corrupts so the more power is centralized the more corrupt it becomes. So subverting Federalism and distribution of power into the model we have now where the President controls about everything from what doctor we see or who educates our children and how, is one of the main issues.

If so, then the party system has NOTHING to do with our problems. Decentralizing power is the key

Would it not be nice for states to get back to governing themselves, so that blue and red states can tend to their own affairs and half the country does not want to secede every Presidential election? It's like when Obama ran on Obamacare. Of all states that opposed it, Massachusetts voted for Scott Brown to stop it because they liked their Romneycare, but the democrats schemed and bypassed Scott Brown to shove it through anyway.

And the 17th amendment is part of the subverting of power as states lose a vote for the Senate.

What if we just took the money out of it? Make all elections publically funded.

So much for the first amendment. We still have nine more in the Bill of Rights, right? Oh wait, you don't support the second or the fourth either. Or the ninth or tenth. Or the fifth.

Well, at least people will have to be compensating for soldiers sleeping at their house ...

I think equating money with speech, and its lack of yrandparency, is right there with corporate personhood in the destruction of democracy.

So to you free speech only means that people can hear me who are in personal, physical earshot? That's ridiculous. Once we go on the Internet, on the airwaves, or other electronic media, then free speech ends? How authoritarian of you

Nice strawman.

Typical Democrat response. You said what you didn't say you said you said when you didn't say what you said you didn't say.

That you're claiming you said nothing is as shallow and obvious as it seems.

Coyote: Free speech means you can't spend money on it, it has to cost nothing to be free speech

Coyote: I didn't say what I said