Comments on: Secession? No, try federalism

By: Carlos

Carlos — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:43:36 +0000

Actually, the dirty little secret of federalism is that, as great a person as he was in saving the nation, Abraham Lincoln destroyed the nation to save it. (Sound familiar? It should, at least to people who went through ‘Nam.)

Many attempts had been made before Lincoln, but his wholesale dismissal of the concept of federalism has led to the overbearing, tyrannical and chilling government we have today.

Disagree? Fine, but look at the facts (find some history books written before 1940) and try to be unbiased about your assessment before you blast me for being a heretic.

By: Brontefan

Brontefan — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 15:19:03 +0000

Although, this would not be considered… it is clear one important issue is the situation of the US Senate. It was designed by our founding fathers to contain two persons who would adequately represent the individual state governments–not the folks–the government of each state. The 17th Amendment skewed that situation and left Senators in a situation of an elite or royal club, commanding respect but not required to do nothing accountable to their respective state government. When you are elected by the populace, the folks, it becomes a popularity contest. Each Senator only needs to set up offices around his/her state and hire people to solve problems. Then, he/she can go to DC and be self-serving and hob-nob with lobbyists. Most send their children to private schools, getting the education–not indoctrination of public schools. They have off-shore bank accounts and promptly make themselves millionaires. It upset the balance of power in DC …and was done BEFORE the women had the vote! Term limits are called for across the nation, but the real solution is to Repeal the 17th Amendment. Senators would have to return home to their states when their state governments were in session and ACCOUNT for what they voted on. Because of shifts in power in the states–no Senator would be in DC for 30+ years, which is a good thing!

By: Dana

Dana — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 02:37:17 +0000

To revert to a respect for federalism, we would have to address the dirty little secret of the states. Most of our states have balanced budget requirements in their constitutions, but none of them actually have balanced budgets. Rather, all of them depend on large federal hand-outs to spend far more money than they are willing to take in in Taxes. They have, in effect, passed on their deficits to the federal government, which is not under a balanced budget restriction.

By: Drew the Infidel

Drew the Infidel — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 21:45:54 +0000

This piece was probably written more so with a smirk instead of a wink and a smile, especially that part about limiting the chance untested policies will be adopted at the national level. Obhammudcare is a case in point since it perverts the Federalist aims to an extreme, just like most of the policies (i.e. excessive regulations, selective enforcement of laws, etc.) of this twisted regime. Obhammud’s air of distraction cannnot mask his deficiencies as a leader.