President appoints, Senate confirms

Status
Not open for further replies.
By the same token, politicians who are truly interested in grabbing power can't be held accountable by a public that votes . . . unless there is some other mechanism to hold the politicians accountable.

Athens TN in 1948 comes to mind. The politicians weren't interested in the vote counts (which they controlled) but they were interested in staying alive.
 
Those events occurred because the people allowed them to occur. Like anything else, a right that isn't excercised is useless.
 
It seems to me that americans are quite willing to give up their rights... all it takes is a raised "terror" alert, and a couple foiled "plots" and they apparently can take away all the rights they want with our support. I do find it somewhat ironic, on a site called "the high road" that I can find so many people that are willing to give up their rights, ignore the constitution by not seeing the forest through the trees, and condone torture. BigFatKen has stated that he's willing to allow ALL his other rights to be infringed to protect the 2nd amendment... I'd ask him... did he go to war to protect just the 2nd amendment?
 
Shay's Rebellion was 1786 try this

Even the whisky rebellion was 1794

The Battle of Athens, Tenn
2 AUGUST 1946

see: http://www.constitution.org/mil/tn/batathen.htm
On 2 August 1946, some Americans, brutalized by their county government, used armed force to overturn it. These Americans wanted honest, open elections. For years they had asked for state or Federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud -- forged ballots, secret ballot counts, and intimidation by armed sheriff's deputies -- by the local political boss. They got no help.

These Americans' absolute refusal to knuckle-under had been hardened by service in World War II. Having fought to free other countries from murderous regimes, they rejected vicious abuse by their county government. These Americans had a choice. Their state's Constitution - Article 1, Section 26 - recorded their right to keep and bear arms for the common defense. Few "gun control" laws had been enacted.
 
These Americans wanted honest, open elections. For years they had asked for state or Federal election monitors to prevent vote fraud -- forged ballots, secret ballot counts, and intimidation by armed sheriff's deputies -- by the local political boss. They got no help.

some things never change.
 
I don’t support the Republican control of the senate because the senate has given Bush a blank check to erode civil liberties. The senate and president signed the patriot act which allows the government to monitor you, the “torture” bill which allows the government to use “alternative” interrogation techniques and protects the interrogators from civil liability, and now the Military Commissions Act which can be interpreted to detain US citizens. We don’t know what the criteria the commission is using to determine who is an enemy combatant, thus it would be used against politically active RKBA folks.

In the context of Wacko and Ruby Ridge, a military commission appointed by the president could determine that any group or individual that has “illegal” weapons and doesn’t like the federal government (obtained via illegal wire taps) could be declared and enemy combatant (courtesy of the Military Commissions Act) thus held indefinitely without trial, and possibly use torture to obtain a confession.

The combination of these three laws gives any president, Republican or Democrat, too much leeway through ambiguity. In effect a gun grabbing Democrat president could appoint a commission that could use these laws against RKBA. Who is to say that the 2nd Amendment is safe when the passing of these laws easily circumvents the 4th and 5th Amendments.

The only protection we have left against these unconstitutional laws is SCOTUS and Bush himself appointed 2 people to SCOTUS. If he appoints a third, there will effectively be a loss of the separation of powers. This is how republics turn into dictatorships without firing a shot.
 
The only protection we have left against these unconstitutional laws is SCOTUS and Bush himself appointed 2 people to SCOTUS. If he appoints a third, there will effectively be a loss of the separation of powers. This is how republics turn into dictatorships without firing a shot.

That is just plain silly.
 
Winners write the history books

Most of America is told that that the Civil War was fought over slavery. Why is it not pointed out that if the CSA just wanted to keep their slaves, they could have voted against any amendment like the 14th? The Southern States easily had 25% +1 to defeat any amentment which requires 75% of the several States to pass. The Civil War was far more complicated. Men took up arms against an oppressive government. We do not have an ERA because it did not pass, not because it may be right.

Suppose the Terminator movies are real. Now, the systems desiger who invents the new chip and then blows up the Cyberdyne building would be a domestic terrorist. A hundred years from now, in the movies, he would be a hero who took the first big action against "the machines".

In the real world we have the feds under Janet Reno, killing ~90 men, womem and children in Waco, TX over what started as a tax violation. A year later, Timothy McVeigh kills over a hundred of the same in Oklahoma City. Today, he is an executed terrorist. If an armed revolution comes, and the citizens take back their government by force, will he be seen in a hundred years to be a hero or a villian?

I am not advcating a revolution. Just pointing out some things.
Only time will tell.
 
Likewise, John Brown was hanged as a terrorist and a few short years later the general who hanged him was leading a rebellion, while the Army of the Republic was marching into battle singing, "John Brown's body lies a-mouldrin in the grave, his truth is marching on..."

I'm probably the only person in the world who would have joined the insurrection with Brown and the rebellion with Lee.

I'm not sure exactly what point you were trying to make about the election, though.
 
If we can license and register cars, we can license and register guns.

ACLU POLICY
"the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected."

This is what you liberals stand for. You are no friend of gun owners or the Constitution.
 
From what I had learned, John Brown and his family did some pretty despicable things in the Missiouri/Kansas border wars. I am sure he wasn't the only one, but I don't think I'd want to follow him or have anything to do with him.
 
As far as this election, I'll stick with what I said earlier. I don't really care for the Repubs right now, but the Democrat leadership really disgusts me. I can't see myself doing anything that would put them in power.


If the Dems get control of the House, there would be gridlock on some things, but not on funding. You would just see spending increased across the board so everybody can get theirs.
 
IMO, the Demcrats just plain are not worthy of consideration.

Unfortunately, choice usually ends with the Republican primary, where you may have a contest between what some might call a RINO or moderate GOPer (with views similar to, say, Harry Truman & patriotic Democrats of the post-WW2 party) and a conservative GOPer. GWB would be the former, IMO, due to his spendy ways and the triumph of idealism over hard-nosed realism in his foreign & domestic policies.

Contemporary Democrats lack a love of country that they repeatedly demonstrate by blaming all the problems of the world on the USA. Their love of "international" institutions that erode American soveriegty is the other half of their problem. UN, ICC, Kyoto, whatever, they are willing to sell out America to fellow lefties overseas. There are notable exceptions, but they are the exception, NOT the rule.

I wish it weren't so. I wish we still had two major parties worthy of consideration. The lack of a pro-American major party to challenge the GOP is good for no citizen, save those who are heavily invested as being (capital "R") Republicans over all else.
 
I don't really care for the Repubs right now, but the Democrat leadership really disgusts me. I can't see myself doing anything that would put them in power.
Same here. To me, staying at home is a vote for the Dems to be in power.
I will vote Republican even if I have to throw up afterwards. If there was a Libertarian running as a Republican I would vote for them.

I did vote against Bush in the primary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top