slug.com slug.com

2 0

The EU:

Brussels crisis: EU states revolt against von der Leyen's demands with border shutdown

[express.co.uk]

Activist4Truth 7 Mar 14
Share

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

2 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

Every study on group ethics shows that accountability utterly disappears in any group of human beings over a few thousand souls. What reasonable person believes it will improve in a global government??? Our own country is now far larger than envisioned by our founders, and accountability is nearly absent. In their incredibly insightful vision, our founders wrote into the Constitution that the States were supposed to be the center of power in the United States - hence the name. We are not named “ The Republic of America”. Democrats have ignored and in some cases changed the laws to subvert that concept. We must reverse that trend if we are to return to accountable government. The concept of the EU is exactly the wrong direction for better government accountability. COVID-19 is exposing that lack of accountability.

Well said, sir. Getting rid of the 17th Amendment should be top of everyone's list

@mardler, excellent insight sir!

@mardler please explain how getting rid of the 17th amendment would be a good thing. Thanks.

@iThink Well, it's really @TimTuolomne's point about this being the United States rather than the Republic of America. In the 107 years since it was passed, is there any doubt that the Senate has become more powerful, the senators themselves more powerful and the States less powerful. Consider how differently individual senators might have voted had they remembered their role as representatives of their States and subject to recall rather than elected for six years, almost completely independent from who sent them there. (I'm particularly thinking of recent examples like McCain and Obamacare, and Romney's awkwardnesses, but there are many other examples)
Now, I'm only an immigrant to this great land and I'm quite willing to listen to better arguments, but that's how it seems to me. I read Mark Levin's wonderful book on the Liberty Amendments and this is the single one that stood out for me personally

@mardler

ok thanks - makes sense.

I would love to see a polite discussion on the 17th amendment between experienced and knowledgeable people - pro and con. I want to hear how the 17th amendment has had an adverse effect and how it has been a good thing with examples from history - not theoretical but more or less anecdotal.

I am a fan of Mark Levin but he vehemently argues for an article 5 Convention with which I vehemently disagree.

My objection to the Article 5 idea is that the Constitution as it stand now is a near perfect as it could ever be and to open it up in that venue would be to see it butchered into something completely unrecognizable and unwelcome to everyone who dearly loves the Bill of Rights.

Better to leave it as it is and to work harder at enforcing the law as it stands. I have often opined that the "system" is not broken. The will and consent to live by it is what is broken.

And by the way as a native born American I welcome you. Think how much better off we would all be if all immigrants (or at least most immigrants) were to embrace the values and principles of the American way rather than trying to turn America into some version of the countries they left behind.

@iThink Thanks for the welcome and the pleasant dialog. I'd suggest you look again at the Article 5 idea. In the end, the protection against stupid or wrecking amendments is the same as the one we currently have, a 75% vote among the states. You have little to worry about.
The basic problem we have is that with liberal media and unthinking country-club Republicans, every day is a constitutional convention. The very point of Article 5 is that it allows the States to reclaim their voice. Washington DC is not going to fix itself. It needs a nudge.

@mardler I know I suffer from the syndrome of "the known evil is preferable to the unknown..." but when we get down to brass tacks we (American citizens - and really Canada and much of Western Europe) are extremely well fed, housed, entertained and educated. Therefore we can't really see where an Article 5 convention would bring meaningful improvement to our lives today and beyond for our progeny. No, I think we have much more to lose than most of us realize. But your point is well taken.

@iThink All due respect sir, the Constitution is not as written. The Commerce Clause was the first casualty in 1942. That gave Congress the right to tell farmers what to grow or not grow. As I'm sure you will agree, that is TOTALLY against the Framer's purposes stated in the Declaration and Bill of Rights. That was done illegally by FDR threatening to remove all 9 justices from the Supreme Court if they did not vote to vacate the Commerce Clause, which they did in Wickard v. Filburn, explicitly against the separation of powers written into the Constitution. ("A stitch in time saves nine" is an expression from that event.) That was the beginning of dozens of decisions removing the protection of our rights under the Constitution, culminating in Obamacare, which is also unconstitutional, which gives the FDA sweeping bureaucratic power over all Americans, as many have found out, with absolutely no recourse. Stalin would have been impressed.

And as the Constitution was also written in Article I, Section 3, the Senate was created as appointed by the States, and independent of the House, so it would be a slower-moving more conservative body to balance the flash-in-the-pan volatility of the voter-driven House. One weakness of pure Democracy is that actual mob rule is not productive. In ancient Greece, the legislature actually sank two Greek ships battling each other because each had orders issued different days that were in direct conflict. We have a form of it today in the 27 thousand federal regulations created by endless pandering to the latest voter fad. A Stable Senate would tend to moderate that. The 17th Amendment made Senators different only by tradition from House Reps.

Voters always complain that the US government is unresponsive. It was designed that way by the Framers to slow down the process and prevent bad decisions. “Gridlock is not a bug to be fixed, but a calculated feature of our Constitutional framework.” - Justice Antonin Scalia.

If you were a voter in 1800, and transported to the country today, you would think our Constitution had been completely abandoned for socialism. Even voters who remember what it was like are like the frog slowly boiled, that fails to notice. Now most people actually think the government is the answer to everything. In the days of King George, that thought would be heresy in the 13 Colonies. And yes, that is as relevant today as it was then.

0

The EU is worthless. Members pay them to monitor failure.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:83535
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.