Articles Comments

SENTRY JOURNAL » 10th Amendment, capitalism, federal government, Federalism, States Rights » States’ Rights: Restoring the balance of power

States’ Rights: Restoring the balance of power

As many of you know I’m a huge proponent of “States’ Rights.”  I have always believed that the solutions to our problems can be found at the local not the federal level of government.  In fact most of our current problems can be traced back to some sort of federal regulation, policy, or law that has been implemented to make things “better” for the masses.  This interference has led to the over regulation of the free market system; a free market system that can no longer correct course during its natural downturns because it’s so weighted down by bureaucratic red tape.  So the government resolves itself to find more solutions to the flawed solutions they have already implemented resulting in more problems for the republic and for the States.

We have all witnessed and felt firsthand the insatiable appetite of the government’s desire to control every aspect of our lives in the name of safety, security, border enforcement, health care, internet fairness, unemployment payouts, and education.  They have imposed a type of nationalistic will upon the States and have justified their actions by declaring that the supremacy clause gives them unlimited authority over the States.  This has only been made easier by funneling federal tax dollars to the States; buying their silence at the expense of liberty and freedom.  With the election of Barack Obama and the Democratic super-majority he enjoyed during the last two years a new and aggressive round of government interference and expansion has sounded an alarm for many States.

States felt betrayed by their own Senators as special interest groups wrote bill after bill to benefit the Washington elite while at the same time burdening the States with additional federal mandates.  From the EPA implementing carbon emission rules to ObamaCare States began to push back against this federal leviathan.  For the first time in a long time States started to wake up from their long sleep and brush up on the constitution.  They soon realized that they had a great deal of power and authority granted to them by the constitution and began to question the constitutionality of the government’s mandates and power grab.  They sued to remove the individual mandate from ObamaCare on the grounds it was unconstitutional.  They passed legislation to enforce federal immigration laws.  They are just now beginning to push back against the EPA.  These are all positive steps in the right direction; however I believe that if the States truly want to send a message to the federal government they need to call an Article V convention and address one issue.

The issue I recommend that the States should address is the commerce clause of the constitution.  After all a great deal of republic destroying legislation has been passed under the guise of the commerce clause.  I also believe this is an issue the States could rally around.  Perhaps the agenda of the convention would be clarification of the clause and limiting the government ability to use it as a sledgehammer against the American people.  There has been talk of repealing the 17th amendment and giving power back to the States in regards to appointing Senators by State legislators.  I agree this would be a huge deal in terms of restoring the balance of power back to the States, but I’m just not sure it’s a big enough issue for 33 states to rally around.  I have also heard of the notion being kicked around about repealing the 16th amendment and completely abolishing the government’s ability to collect income taxes from the people.  Although this would be very popular, I believe there are other avenues we can take to accomplish the same goal without a convention.   A new idea that is gaining some traction is an amendment that would permit the States to repeal any law or regulation of the United States.  The following is the wording of the proposed amendment:  “Any provision of law or regulation of the United States may be repealed by the several states, and such repeal shall be effective when the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states approve resolutions for this purpose that particularly describe the same provision or provisions of law or regulation to be repealed.

This is a very intriguing proposal; one I believe the States can find common ground on.  No matter what amendment the convention takes up I believe it needs to be one and only one.  It would be extremely difficult for 33 states to come together, hold a convention, and propose a number of amendments that all could agree upon.  I envision many backroom deals going on with the delegates from each state to get their respective amendments to the convention floor and we would end up with the same environment we are so tired of in Washington D.C.  This is a path we don’t want the States walking down.

The key to all this is the States need to start talking with one another and working together.  Think of how the climate in Washington D.C. would change with just one amendment, one convention, and 33 States speaking in one voice.  I believe this is all it would take to send a powerful message D.C.; a message proclaiming, we’ve had enough!

Lastly I believe that Tea Party organizations across the nation can play a crucial roll in their respective states in getting their state legislators and governors on board with this initiative.  I also believe it’s the States turn to drive the national conversation while  at the same time addressing the concerns of their citizens, and in my opinion this would be the one surefire way to do it.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Share
Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Filed under: 10th Amendment, capitalism, federal government, Federalism, States Rights · Tags:

opinions powered by SendLove.to
Comments
  • LD Jackson December 29, 2010 at 4:19 AM

    This is an intriguing idea, John. Whatever issue the convention decided to take up, it should deal with limiting the power of the federal government. That appears to be the overriding problem in our country right now. If that happens, I will make a prediction. Many people in this country will be up in arms, figuratively speaking, accusing the states of trying to usurp the authority that resides in Washington, D.C. That wouldn’t be the case, but I guarantee you the rhetoric will be there and it will be championed by the powers that be in the capitol.

    Are you aware of the existence of a movement to call a convention?
    LD Jackson recently posted..President Obama And The Rising Price Of GasolineMy Profile

    • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 12:57 AM

      Larry the states are already starting to push back and yes there are various minor movements trying to push for an article V convention. So far there is not a great deal of traction for a convention. I don’t think the States are actually there yet bit there are indeed rumblings. I think we need to play our part and continue to educate the public on the importance of this and why the constitution granted this authority to the States.
      John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

  • Steve Dennis December 29, 2010 at 5:33 AM

    I may be wrong, but didn’t Calhoun get South Carolina to pass a law that would let the state nullify federal law before the civil war?

    I think that you are right about the commerce clause, it needs to be addressed because I feel it is probably the most abused clause in the constitution. It has taken on an importance far greater than what its original intent was and it has been molded to fit just about any situation. If the states were to call for a convention this would be the issue that I would most like to see them take up.

    The states have been silent too long because they hae grown fat on federal monies coming in but now we are seeing the states awaken and fight back against the federal government–is it too little, too late?
    Steve Dennis recently posted..Merry Christmas everybody!My Profile

    • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 1:08 AM

      South Carolina did act on this in the 1830s but pulled back from it after there was a compromise on a tariff imposed by the government. Throughout our history the talk of nullification by the states has been an ongoing conversation; however nothing concrete has ever really been attempted by the States.

      The commerce clause is the one area of our constitution that I feel has been the most abused by the federal government to pass oppressive, liberty stealing, freedom crushing legislation.
      John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

  • Bunkerville December 29, 2010 at 9:13 AM

    I am not clear about what would happen if a Convention was held. Would it be limited to the clause as mentioned? Or could it expand, and as you say, back room deals could abound. I have heard it could be a dangerous move.
    Bunkerville recently posted..Sotomayor Leads Liberal Justices – keeping up with expectationsMy Profile

    • innominatus December 29, 2010 at 2:19 PM

      I’ve read similar things – that if we convene a Con-Con, then everything would be “on the table” and up for grabs. It might be tricky to get the delegates to stick with those things we need. But I think the nation is in the mood to take that risk.

    • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 1:13 AM

      There would have to be some sort of structure and charter for the convention. I say set the convention up with one goal in mind, clarify the commerce clause and limit the government’s ability to use it as a sledgehammer against us. It’s one issue. Yes there might indeed be some dangerous ideas proposed at the convention but anything proposed would need the be approved by the 33 states and then ratified by three-fourths of the States and this is the safety net to prevent something crazy from be passed.
      John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

  • Trestin Meacham December 29, 2010 at 10:43 AM

    I think we are on the same page with this post and my last post.
    Trestin Meacham recently posted..WHY SOCIALISM FAILS 3My Profile

  • Jim Gourdie December 29, 2010 at 1:28 PM

    I like your idea of a constitutional amendment to fix the commerce clause. And, there has never been a better time to attempt it than right now. Getting 36 states singing the same tune won’t be easy but I do think it is doable.
    Jim Gourdie recently posted..Democrats Deserve A Place In The Guinness Book Of World RecordsMy Profile

    • RightHandMan
      RightHandMan December 29, 2010 at 5:38 PM

      It’s only doable if we HAVE the convention. The most important element here is having the convention in order to show initiative and power. This is a power struggle. If the states can’t even form together without the fed then what power do they have? Secondly, getting only 35+ states is a huge statement not only to the fed, but to those states who don’t come. Those states will be forced to pick sides – one that empowers the fed or their own state. I think the choice will eventually be an easy one for ALL states.

      • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 1:36 AM

        I agree. The whole point is for the States to come together and in one voice speak to the federal government. This would be enough in my opinion for the federal government to take notice of the States and perhaps start constitutionally policing themselves. This is my hope.
        John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

  • Infidel de Manahatta December 29, 2010 at 1:43 PM

    A good idea. Of course nothing will work as long as the States keep accepting federal money in return for submission.

    And repealing the 17th amendment would be a great idea.

    And let’s invite the British back and tell them to burn Washington D.C. to the ground again, only this time do a better job of it.
    Infidel de Manahatta recently posted..Long Island- Los Angeles Vie for Title of Serial Killer Capital of United StatesMy Profile

    • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 1:51 AM

      I agree, the States need to get their house in order and correct their course in terms of spending. They need to prioritize in terms of spending and stop money tree.

      I do agree that repealing the 17th amendment would be a huge step in the right direction, however I question whether we would get enough buy in from enough States to do this.

      Lastly we don’t need the British to come back and burn Washington down, the politicians in Washington are doing the job themselves.
      John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

  • RightHandMan
    RightHandMan December 29, 2010 at 5:34 PM

    After months of talking about it the ball is now out there and in play. We need to stay on this. Instead of just posting on our blogs, we need to push the agenda in real forums and write to our elected officials. If we want states to get their power back, we need to start at the state level. We need to elect governors and attorneys general who are willing to take on the fed and state legislatures that will take a state first approach. It is time.

  • Doomed December 30, 2010 at 6:59 AM

    I am on record as totally and unequivocably opposed to a Constitutional Convention.

    My reasoning is simple…..there is absolutely NO FRAMEWORK IN PLACE to run such a convention.

    Meaning that the powers that be could invent their own rules, then change them on the fly and by the time the convention was over we could have Federally funded Death panels, Gay Marriage…..Amnesty for anyone that can sneak into our country…….the list is endless. We could redo the 10th amendment and say the states must kiss the feds arse.

    The list is endless…….Proponents say….nah….x,y and z will happen……..

    yeah? Says who? We’ve never had one…..never had the outline written up, never had George Soros in charge of a constitutional convention push millions into the pockets of willing voters.

    There is no precedent….no legally binding, spelled out and written format for holding a convention. It simply says you can have one in the Constitution.

    Count me out….I could easily see the progressives turning this country communist overnight be rewriting 1/2 the constitution and then changing the rules……..you know like Harry Reids been doing lately to get his agenda in place.

    • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 8:48 AM

      Doomed I understand your concerns but the fact is just as you stated above that our elected representatives are no longer listening to the will of the people and they go to Washington with good intentions but in the end are corrupted by power. We are voting these buffoons into office, crossing our fingers, and hoping they will reduces the size and scope of government and it has failed over and over again. We have slowly over the last 80 years been marching towards tyranny and nothing has slowed it down or reversed it. Not even Ronald Reagan cold reverse the trend.

      As for structure and the charter of the convention the States can reach some sort of contractual agreement before they agree to meet to limit the scope of the convention. They can also lock out any type of outside influence that might look to poison their efforts; however they should not lock out different ideologies or points of view. Our Founders differed greatly in their political views. Some actually wanted to go back to a monarchical style government, while some wanted no government and desired the States to rein supreme. Things have not changed that much and we still are having the same argument using different terms. I trust the people in my neighborhood more than I trust the politicians in Washington and even though there will be attempts to influence and steer this convention by dark forces, I believe minds of reason will prevail in the end and expose the left for what they are.

      We must make an attempt to restore the power back to the States and get back to the basics that are Founders crafted in our constitution. I do not subscribe to the idea that the States will come together, conspire to abolish the constitution, and throw us into a socialistic system of centralized planning and rule. The reason I don’t see it that way is because we are already there with economic central planning and socialistic concepts like our progressive tax code, government ownership of companies, and the redistribution of wealth. What do we have to lose Doomed. If we don’t reverse our course soon then your greatest fears will be fulfilled even without a convention. Getting the States talking and working together cannot be a bad thing in my opinion and who knows maybe just the act of this will get the federal government to rethink its charter and reverse course.
      John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

      • Doomed December 30, 2010 at 1:46 PM

        Actually no they cant. There is no constitutional binding rules that could iron clad anything the states work up. Additonally it would take decades for states like NY to give States like Wyoming or South Dakota the same pull as they have. 500k people vs 35 million.

        Additionally any rules that the senate passes just seem to be irrevlevant……the fact that we cannot trust the people we send to D.C. is PRECISELY why I am opposed to any convention whatsoever.

        They could have iron clad rules in place…everyones happy then when they all show up start voting to change em….tweak em….oh and by the way now that were here lets look at the 10th Amendment………2nd amendment.

        I trust this bastards about as far as I can throw them which is about 1 inch….putting the true life of the nation in their hands is a huge no no in my opinion.

        • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 5:40 PM

          Doomed they can set it up however they see fit. The Constitution gives them this latitude. My guess is they will follow the blueprint established during the 1787 convention and each state would provide delegates or they could choose to do something completely different to ensure smaller States are not steamrolled by larger. Once the rules are set, they can indeed be binding. What would bind the States to these rules would be the threat of a walk out. Sat if larger States want to change the rules of the game after the convention starts then the smaller States can exercise their option to walk away from the convention and so endeth the convention. After all it takes 33 states to call and convene a convention. So there definitely would be a fine line that would need to be walked in order to not scare away smaller States.

          I know you may think I’m being a bit naïve here, but I really see an opportunity for the States to start working together to push back against the federal government’s encroachment on our liberties. The same concerns you have about the States and changing rules currently exist in the Senate. The only difference is the Senate has a proven track record of expanding the power and role of government through the amendment process; whereas the States do not. Senators do not have to go home and live with the decisions they make, while State legislators do. It’s tougher to face your constituents when they’re your neighbor. This is why I do not believe there will be some sinister plot to usurp the Constitution. There will be more than enough checks and balances because each State will have its own set of unique circumstances that they will be looking out for. Additionally this brings the amendment process to the people. If you are concerned about back door deals and what they “might” do I’m sure the States can broadcast on CSPAN or something to make it more transparent.

          My question to you is if you know we’re heading down the wrong path and marching towards tyranny what solutions would you offer to rein in this government? The Constitution was crafted to be a wall between the people and the government and over the lifetime of the republic, the federal government has managed to successful knock down parts of the wall using the amendment process. How do we repair the wall? If not the federal government and not the States, what other options are there. And revolution is not an option in my book. Our Founders already fought and shed blood so we would not have to. What is the answer Doomed?
          John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

          • RightHandMan
            RightHandMan December 30, 2010 at 5:55 PM

            Can I piggy back that by reiterating that the Constitution allows for the convention in order to amend and therefore needs nothing more than that to be binding?

            Also, the point about New York not jumping in is a moot point. New York doesn’t need to come…only 33 need to show up. If Cali, New York, and hand full of other states stay away it will be their loss. Frankly, I don’t see it happening. If the states see a convention is about to take place they will want a piece of that rerouted power.

          • Doomed December 30, 2010 at 7:40 PM

            Again show me the framework guys. The states could simply agree to the rules and then vote to change them once the convention is convened….there is no ironclad constitutional law that says it must be done this way or that.

            The point is simple…what governs laws in the US today is…….do they pass constitutional muster…..the Supreme court ultimately can decide….yes or no.

            But convene a constitutional convention and it could be the wild west with NO Checks or Balances. No supreme court to decide the ultimate merit of what comes out of the CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION…..its ratified…its in the constitution now…..its the supreme law of the land….good, bad or indifferent there is NO ONE that can object…..you cant, I cant, Judge Roberts cant….no one can…its is now in the constitution.

            Sorry but this is like asking for open heart surgery to be performed while riding on a horse drawn buggy over mountainous terrain……..its certain to not end well.

  • Doomed December 30, 2010 at 7:04 AM

    I had a friend who was a nice guy….he became a police officer……after about a year his attitude really changed a lot….

    One day he said to me…….in all seriousness……..”I AM THE LAW”

    That is what happens when your elected to congress or the senate…you leave with good intentions, suddenly feel the power, are kissed up to and suddenly, in a short time………our congressmen and senators are saying…..

    “I AM THE LAW” hence the states lose power time after time when sending people to D.C. These reps no longer serve their states but rather serve the anti-christ U.S. Government and tell their real constitutents….the states…….to go to hell.

    WHY?…………..because………THEY ARE THE LAW!!!

  • […] States’ Rights: Restoring the balance of power We have all witnessed and felt firsthand the insatiable appetite of the government’s desire to control every aspect of our lives in the name of safety, security, border enforcement, health care, internet fairness, unemployment payouts, and education. They have imposed a type of nationalistic will upon the States and have justified their actions by declaring that the supremacy clause gives them unlimited authority over the States. This has only been made easier by funneling federal tax dollars to the States; buying their silence at the expense of liberty and freedom. With the election of Barack Obama and the Democratic super-majority he enjoyed during the last two years a new and aggressive round of government interference and expansion has sounded an alarm for many States. […]

  • Teresa December 30, 2010 at 5:02 PM

    Great idea, John! The States definitely need to address both the ever expansive and huge size of government. Focusing on and clarifying the commerce clause would be a huge first step in reducing the size of the federal government.
    Teresa recently posted..Gandolfini &amp 50 Cent Come to Travelers Aid After East Coast BlizzardMy Profile

    • John Carey December 30, 2010 at 5:46 PM

      I believe it’s something we need to explore Teresa. I know there are many out there that are scared to death of a convention and what might come out of it; but I say that what they fear is already happening with the federal government. So what do we have to lose?
      John Carey recently posted..States’ Rights- Restoring the balance of powerMy Profile

  • Matt December 30, 2010 at 11:46 PM

    Great post, and great discussion. I understand the concerns that Doomed had mentioned. There is some uncertainty in the structure of a convention. However, state legislatures all over the US are a sea of red. Now might just be the right time for such a convention, as the delegates from the state level would share our views, and the delegates would likely set the format and the proceedings. Given the composition, there would be a real debate, based on ideas. Blue states might join, but they will be so outnumbered that they would not be able to ruin it.

    • John Carey December 31, 2010 at 7:00 AM

      Thanks Matt and I agree that the wind has shifted towards the right in State houses. Perhaps there is not better time for this than now. Trust me I share Doomed concerns. This is a scary notion, one that we should not take lightly. But it is also a safety net for the States; a safety net designed to put the brakes on an out of control federal government. This is the place where we are at right now; an out of control federal government, trampling our rights and freedoms. Doing nothing is not an option.

    • Doomed December 31, 2010 at 7:58 AM

      Red states. Blue States. Liberal. Conservative. Progressive. The constitution was not nor should it be written to favor one class of people over the other.

      Once again the mindset that is prevalent in left and right today was exactly mirrored by the 1850’s Union leading up to the election of Abraham Lincoln and the secession of the south and the resulting civil war.

      I do not want the constitution rewritten. I want our elected officials to convey to the Beast our wishes. I guess this is why I am so adamantly opposed to a constitutional convention…..

      Let me quote something that was written long ago which drives my foundation for government in this nation………

      “””Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; “”” John Hancock and a part of the Declaration of Independence.

      It is the progressive and liberals who are always wanting to radically change stuff. Many would just like to throw out the constitution and just wing it. I for one like the fact that this nation has struggled mightily to change the constitution through a long and laborious process that sometimes takes decades to accomplish as each state takes up the ratification of the current amendment.

      Should not be changed for light and transient causes….means to me that lets give pause…lets give time for the government to right this ship….to correct the abuses it has undertaken…….

      The second part of that sentence reads……………

      “””.and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.””””

      Hancock and the founders understood….we need to understand as welll…..prudence….and while I respect those calling for a constitutional convention as being sincere in their desires to end suffering they also want the convention to end in a way that befits them and that is just not how this nation works……

      I am afraid that Hancocks warning would go out the window with a constitutional convention….33 red states lording it over 17 blue states……Sounds a lot like 1850’s America all over again.

      • John Carey December 31, 2010 at 10:27 AM

        My point Doomed is they are changing or transforming the constitution and the republic by interpreting the constitution using the court systems to validate their interpretations. And they are doing it by getting around the amendment process. They are changing the constitution every day with the court system and THIS is not what our founders envisioned. THIS goes against everything our founders stood for and this is why they include the Article V Convention clause in the constitution. Doomed look at how far they have advanced their agenda in the last two years by bypassing the constitution. They are breaching the constitutional wall and stealing our liberties and freedoms without amendments and this is unacceptable.

        • Doomed January 1, 2011 at 4:57 AM

          I absolutely agree with your point John that they are indeed using the courts against this nation. But how is changing the constitution going to prevent that?

          What amendment do we write and pass that will prevent regulations from becoming political correctness? What amendment will be written that says no to higher taxes or regulating the internet or Passing health care or more welfare or no religious shrines in courtyards or no prayer in schools or no citing the pledge.

          How are we going to guarantee that no more progressive judges sit on the supreme court? No constitutional amendment or convention is going to change a mindset of Americans who use the courts to defend their political agenda.

          The problem is that we would have to undo 150 years of progress…….good or bad…..in order to undo much of what the left/progressive/communists/unions and those we disagree with have accomplished using the courts and the law to defend their agenda.

          Any constitutional convention would simply pit left against right………and thats just not what the constitution is all about.

          If we want to fight fire with fire then we need to get shrewd legislators in congress and cities and states that will legislate conservative agendas into law that negates the progressive lefts agenda…..

          I just dont see a convention changing a mindset that runs deep in this country without starting a civil war.

  • Doomed January 1, 2011 at 5:08 AM

    John I can emphasize enough how much I agree with your premise that they have raped this country using the courts. I have been on the legislate and regulate bandwagon since about 2003 when it struck me one day that by god this is what the left is doing to get their agenda into place.

    In 2007 When Barak Obama began contemplating running for office I was shouting from the mountain tops on dozens of blogs that he was unqualified and way to far left…..I was met with a landslide of HE IS A MODERATE….HE IS MORE QUALIFIED THEN BUSH….etc…etc…etc.

    Alinsky treatment….they then would demonize me….demonize even Hillary Clinton which really threw me for a loop….Hillary…she was the darling…the heir in waiting….the ONE….

    I was so beaten up and demonized that after several months I literally quit posting on blogs for about 6 months and was so demoralized and unsure of my political convictions that I was just drowning. So I began reading and suddenly one day I found where Hillary Clinton did her POLY SCI thesis in College on Saul Alinsky.

    Who the hell is that I thought….So I read about him….which led me to RULES FOR RADICALS and voilla………..

    The rest as they say is history………it was all so clear…I began shouting Alinsky from the rooftops again…..unfortunately it was about 2 months before Obama was elected.

    Im not going to say that I discovered and exposed Saul Alinsky to the the right for their understanding but by the GODS I was one of the first shouting it all over the internet…..so much so that within a couple months I began seeing it written about all over the place as people began to grasp the HOODWINKING the left has been putting on the right for 5 decades.

    John Im on your side…..but I just dont see how changing the constitution would prevent Saul Alinsky or political correctness….that is a mindset, that is taught in schools from kindergarten on.

    My wife is an elementary school teacher….she tells me all the time….she spends 80 percent of her day being politically correct and the other 20 percent trying to figure out how the hell to teach anything to the kids.

    • LD Jackson January 1, 2011 at 7:29 AM

      You have the right idea, Doomed. So many people ignored the fact that Barack Obama was a far left liberal and that is one reason he was able to win the election in 2008. As well informed as you are about these subjects, maybe you should start your own blog.

      One thing I would like to request of you. Can you drop me a line through my contact form at Political Realities? I would like to correspond with you, but the email address I have for you at my blog doesn’t seem to work.

      I don’t mean to hijack the comments, John.
      LD Jackson recently posted..Federal Land GrabMy Profile

      • John Carey January 1, 2011 at 8:38 AM

        No problem Larry. We’re all friends here working for the same cause. Happy New Year.
        John Carey recently posted..Abortion’s VictimsMy Profile

    • John Carey January 1, 2011 at 8:37 AM

      I agree that many Americans can be easily duped in this process because they simply do not have the knowledge that our grandparents’ generation had about the constitution and the founders. Over the years the left has infiltrated our institutions of higher education and peddled their progressive snake oil shaping the opinion of the youth. This flawed ideology had indeed eroded the spirit of liberty and freedom and replaced it with a more nanny state mindset. I know there are very real concerns calling a convention when a large segment of our society has been infected with this poison. I share those same concerns with you DOOMED. I also believe that Washington has become so corrupt that the fix cannot be found within a system that has become a safe haven for charlatans and corrupters. No matter who we vote into office, no matter how well their intentions, they all eventually end up in the same place.

      We have tried this over and over again and we are still violating the constitution, stealing liberties, creating a crisis via bad regulation, and marching towards tyranny with a smile on our face. A convention may accomplish nothing in terms of amending it; however perhaps the threat of one might just remind the federal government that they serve the people and the States and not the other way around. The article V clause was included as a safety net for the States in case we ended up in a place where government officials and the court system were disregarding our constitution and encroaching on the freedoms and liberties of the sovereign States and people.

      I appreciate your passion and concern and you are always welcome here. I agree with Larry that you should really think about creating a blog. If you need any help I would be more than happy to work with you. I’m not an expert, but I had help from great conservative bloggers like Larry over at Political Realities and Matt from Conservative Hideout. Or perhaps you can become a contributor to one of the already established blogs. I think you have something important to say and it needs to be heard.

      Thank you for stopping by DOOMED. You are always welcome at the SENTRY JOURNAL. I love debate and discussion. I’m a bit stubborn, but I’m working on that. Happy New Year.
      John Carey recently posted..Abortion’s VictimsMy Profile

  • Doomed January 1, 2011 at 12:04 PM

    John I agree with your analysis. The problem I continue to have is how you fix that. We are talking about vague policy that is rooted in law. We are talking about regulation that is rooted in sound legal precedent. Its why the progressives stopped debating their agenda and went to work regulating us into progressive socialism.

    Its legal. I have to continue to point out………so we call a convention……….then what?

    What are we going to change?

    A constitutional amendment making it illegal to be a progressive? Illegal to being an atheist?

    Stalin, Lenin and Khruschev all understood that they must remove GOD from their country in order to replace GOD with the state. It is what the progressives are trying to do. The problem is that we have a nation that says religion and government must be seperate………

    So they realized that the constitution gave them more power then it gave religions because they could use the constitution to defend their godless agenda while those in response could not use the constitution to push back.

    So the key is to fight fire with fire. We must push back with shrewd legislation on the state and local level that has lots of unintended consequences.

    Private schools….School vouchers. Tax relief for private schools that push back against the GODLESS AGENDA of the left.

    We have to start with the kids….we cant start with the constitution…we have to start with the mindset….we have to regulate God and liberty and freedom BACK INTO OUR state and local governments….

    It is there…the roots…the foundation….the rock…the anchor of our nation that will see true results and push back against the progressive communism that is working its way thru our nation.

    STATE and LOCAL governments folks. The threat of a convention…the call of one might or might not work but lets be honest…..

    As soon as the GOP won….they went into seclusion….promised this that or the other and then promptly voted for START while North Korea is firing artillery shells at the south and promising to build more missiles.

    If you read Bob Woodwards book you will realize that Our congressmen know about the evolving ability of the north and Iran to getting missiles that will hit the USA or Europe….so why did they vote for it…….

    Because the bastards are in the hip pocket of corporations that stand to gain by the promised increase in spending to modernize our existing stockpiles.

    We need a third party…the problem is that any third party will escalate the left into power that will see the ultimate demise of this nation.

    So we must start and the local level…seep out into the state level………

    In other words we have to do exactly what the progressives did in the 60’s……

    As Alinsky said…You do not change congress by beating on the walls…You put on a suit and tie and join them.

  • Doomed January 1, 2011 at 12:20 PM

    Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.
    Vladimir Lenin

    Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.
    Vladimir Lenin

    Education is a weapon whose effects depend on who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed.
    Joseph Stalin

    WHY do you think JIMMY CARTER founded the department of Education….Why do you think the left so adamantly defends our current education system and refuses to even consider school vouchers…..

    They know it is here……….THERE AGENDA STARTS…………it is here OUR PUSH BACK MUST START………….

    Schools are the key…always have been…I just cant seem to get anyone to listen to this.

    • LD Jackson January 1, 2011 at 12:55 PM

      I suspect you are right about the schools, Doomed. That is one reason my wife homeschooled our daughters.

      One more thing. I received your email through my contact form, but I have no way of replying, since your email address is hidden. It says the email is from myself. I understand your concerns about remaining anonymous, but let’s give it one more try, shall we. Try sending me an email to the address I have listed on the line below. You should be able to make it out.

      admin at ldjackson dot net

      Once again John, I am sorry to hijack your comments.
      LD Jackson recently posted..Federal Land GrabMy Profile