The Briefing Room
Exclusive Content => Editorials => Topic started by: OfTheCross on September 23, 2019, 12:08:17 am
-
There's no way that all 50 States would have united as independent Nation-States.
There's no way that we'd have our current level of social freedoms with States imposing their will on the Federal government.
We need a strong National government to guarantee the Rights of the Constitution to all of us.
The Articles of Confederation failed because the States had too much independence. The Civil War happened because States wanted to be independent from the National government.
America, as we know it, simply wouldn't be a thing if the National government wasn't strong enough to tamp down the insurrection from the South and impose its will on the States to actually live up to the words of the Constitution and its Amendments.
-
We all agree that a Federal Government is a necessity. The question is how much.
After all, a Government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.
-
We all agree that a Federal Government is a necessity. The question is how much.
After all, a Government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take everything you have.
I like that. What would you say is the tipping point of our Federal government being able to take everything we have?
Given the limitations of each branch of government, it'd be a difficult haul
-
There's no way that all 50 States would have united as independent Nation-States.
There's no way that we'd have our current level of social freedoms with States imposing their will on the Federal government.
We need a strong National government to guarantee the Rights of the Constitution to all of us.
The Articles of Confederation failed because the States had too much independence. The Civil War happened because States wanted to be independent from the National government.
America, as we know it, simply wouldn't be a thing if the National government wasn't strong enough to tamp down the insurrection from the South and impose its will on the States to actually live up to the words of the Constitution and its Amendments.
You grant the federal gov. only as much power as is absolutely needed. If things can be done by the states, they should be.
Too much power in a central authority is a diseased recipe for an all-powerful dictatorship.
-
This is fine with me as long as the feds stick to their Constitutionally limited (not SCOTUS defined) roles.
-
I like that. What would you say is the tipping point of our Federal government being able to take everything we have?
Given the limitations of each branch of government, it'd be a difficult haul
The limitations are actually on the federal government, as its specific responsibilities are detailed within the Constitution.
One tipping point would be the taking of our guns.
-
There's no way that all 50 States would have united as independent Nation-States.
There's no way that we'd have our current level of social freedoms with States imposing their will on the Federal government.
We need a strong National government to guarantee the Rights of the Constitution to all of us.
The Articles of Confederation failed because the States had too much independence. The Civil War happened because States wanted to be independent from the National government.
America, as we know it, simply wouldn't be a thing if the National government wasn't strong enough to tamp down the insurrection from the South and impose its will on the States to actually live up to the words of the Constitution and its Amendments.
------------------------------
What on earth are you talking about???
The drivers behind both the Declaration and later the Constitution were Southerners, including
Rutledge, Hall, Lee, Jefferson, Madison, among dozens.
Their political impulses supported states rights, rejecting centralized government which was their heritage from the English Whigs who supported a constitutional Monarchy, opposing absolute rule. Recall the Colonies were ruled by Great Britain for some 200 years prior to our independence
The South, governed by the Agrarian and Rural Democrats, supported States Rights, decentralized government a well as free trade; which constituted our governing philosophy prior to the Civil War.
The North, following the Civil War, was governed by the Republican Party who supported trade protectionism and centralized government, encouraging judicial activism; their governing philosophy.
They were and remain the errand boys for the Mercantile Class which later morphed into our crony capitalist posse on daily display in DC.
-
------------------------------
What on earth are you talking about???
The drivers behind both the Declaration and later the Constitution were Southerners, including
Rutledge, Hall, Lee, Jefferson, Madison, among dozens.
Their political impulses supported states rights, rejecting centralized government which was their heritage from the English Whigs who supported a constitutional Monarchy, opposing absolute rule. Recall the Colonies were ruled by Great Britain for some 200 years prior to our independence
The South, governed by the Agrarian and Rural Democrats, supported States Rights, decentralized government a well as free trade; which constituted our governing philosophy prior to the Civil War.
The North, following the Civil War, was governed by the Republican Party who supported trade protectionism and centralized government, encouraging judicial activism; their governing philosophy.
They were and remain the errand boys for the Mercantile Class which later morphed into our crony capitalist posse on daily display in DC.
Yep!
-
We need a strong National government to guarantee the Rights of the Constitution to all of us.
Which is why what we've had for several generations---big government, metastasising big government, more properly called the State---is not the same as strong government.
A properly strong, properly construed government would have only two things as its sole legitimate business:
1) Protecting and defending us from enemies actual and provably iminent from abroad and predators (real predators, if you please, not mere vicemongers) at home.
2) Staying the hell out of your business, my business, everyone's business, until or unless one would obstruct or abrogate another's equivalent rights.
And from the look of the election field to come in 2020, we're not going to get even a real beginning toward the dismantling of the improperly construed State and the restoration of small and strong in the proper way government. Regardless of who captures or renews the lease on the White House; regardless of who does or doesn't become the Capitol Hill majority part.
-
There's no way that all 50 States would have united as independent Nation-States.
They were never supposed to be independent nation states. That was never the intent. Federalism.
There's no way that we'd have our current level of social freedoms with States imposing their will on the Federal government.
Utter nonsense - We would have more liberty with a Constitutionally proper federal government.
We need a strong National government to guarantee the Rights of the Constitution to all of us.
TRUE. But strong ONLY as enumerated, and otherwise limited. That is the purpose of that enumeration.
The Articles of Confederation failed because the States had too much independence. The Civil War happened because States wanted to be independent from the National government.
The reason they wanted to be independent was because of the illegal impositions being imposed from on high.
AND THEY WERE RIGHT.
America, as we know it, simply wouldn't be a thing if the National government wasn't strong enough to tamp down the insurrection from the South and impose its will on the States to actually live up to the words of the Constitution and its Amendments.
They do not live up to the words of the Constitution, nor the amendments, and are visibly and busily removing those features... To include our rights.
I believe we would have more liberty if it were otherwise. And less threat to our rights.
-
Horsecrap!