The US Constitution used to be a document of enumerated powers, now it is a document of enumerated liberties with only the Bill of Rights left as a backstop. Every 3rd grader once knew this. The Commerce Clause decisions emasculated it. Wickard v Filburn in particular.
Competition between the states was key and hopefully it will be again.
Competition in the world is now key which is why the Biden Admin and similar elites around the world want a worldwide tax and worldwide rules. No competition means no escape from their boot.
One hopes that Alex and others are waking up to this, based on this post, perhaps he is.
It could equally be said that no one should have been reliant on our Founding Fathers to form the ideas and eventually the documents that defined our new nation. But I'm glad they were there and did what they did. Like it or not, we need, but lack leaders with integrity. Elon Musk may not be what we are looking for, but neither are you or I. I pray that a real leader steps up to the plate.
Amen. Here are some ideas to to get us back on track:
1. Repeal the 16th Amendment to eliminate the Federal government’s ability to tax income, thus starving the beast. (If the states want to keep their respective income taxes, that’s their business).
2. Repeal the 17th Amendment and return the principles of a *republic* (vs. mob democracy) back to the states and, by extension, the US Senate. The perennial battles over the filibuster would be similarly eliminated.
3. As a compromise for repealing the 17th Amendment, separately amend Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 (“The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand,…”) to read “The number of Representatives shall be *at least*, but not exceed, one for every thirty thousand.” In doing so, the people’s house would swell from 435 to more than 10,000 (which seems like a lot, but that only shows how far removed we’ve become from representative democracy. Besides, modern technology has made the logistics of coordinating such large numbers of people possible, thus eliminating the original statutory rationale for capping the Representatives to 435.)
I think the largest thing that could be done to reduce the size of government is very simple and perhaps could even be done by executive order: eliminate the concept of withholding taxes. It wouldn't change rates or revenues, but everyone would pay April 15th - or perhaps quarterly. The concept of "take home pay" hides the true cost of government and is corrosive to a free society that wants to remain so.
Personally, I tend to trust the wisdom of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay over the “progressives” of the late 19th and early 20th century that gave us the income tax. If memory serves me, an excise tax (tax at the moment of manufacture) was the system advocated in the Federalist Papers. A little reflection demonstrates the wisdom of a system that 1) limits the government’s income to genuine domestic economic activity, while 2) incentivizes the promotion of manufacturing here, at home, in our blessed land.
I wouldn’t look at it as a dilution of power from a few to many. If political power were the sole issue, then practically speaking each citizen would hardly gain from having their one representative who is necessarily more aligned with their interest compete against 9,999 other representatives of different interests. On the other side of the scale, however, how much true representation does a citizen receive from the current arrangement where each Congressman represents roughly 750,000 separate interests?
So why my proposal? What’s to gain? In a word: money. All other things being equal, the corrupting influence of money in politics walks hand in hand with the “size” of the office, i.e. the numbers of citizens and power factions at stake (with the presidency being the most extreme example). The cost and incentive for “buying” an elected office is diluted when there are 1) more offices to buy, and 2) the value of buying that office is diluted because there are more of them, respectively. The logical extreme of this principle is of course pure democracy where every single voter’s vote would have to be “bought.” However, no sane person, certainly not the Founding Fathers or even Socrates, would invite that form of tyranny. 30,000 was the agreed number at the signing and, like everything in our Constitution, was well-considered and not arbitrary. Unfortunately, the country’s growing population presented logistical challenges for housing ever increasing numbers of representatives in a chamber of fixed size, thus Congress (shortsightedly, IMO) capped itself at 435 by statute a century ago. Thanks for your feedback.
Wickard v Filburn seems as awful as Roe v Wade with regards to inventing law for the benefit of the federal leviathan. In my humble opinion FDR did the most damage to the Constitution than any other individual in history.
Perhaps the most egregious example of this is Wickard v. Filburn. In this case, Roscoe Filburn was fined for growing twice the ‘legal’ limit of wheat. (The Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1938 and its 1941 amendments established quotas for wheat production) Filburn argued that this extra wheat was simply to to feed his own animals and wasn’t going to be sold, therefore he couldn’t be fined under the commerce clause. In a crazy ruling, the Supreme Court stated that Filburn growing extra wheat meant he didn’t have to BUY extra wheat, therefore interstate commerce WAS impacted and Congress could regulate.
Growing your own wheat on your own land could be regulated by the federal government via the commerce clause.
The simple fact is that if the Constitution meant what the Supreme Court found it to mean in Wickard v. Filburn, there would be no need for a Constitution at all. Just a note that says “Yep, the federal government can do that, too.”
….and he did it by convincing a majority of Americans, like Esau in the Old Testament, to sell their birthright for a bowl of porridge. The sins of the fathers are visited upon the third and fourth generation, and here we are.
I'll also add re the abortion stuff: I think 90% of the people would agree that having an abortion after, say, 32 weeks could be legally proscribed and that having one before X (8? 12? 16?) weeks is not an issue and that a limit somewhere between those points with some exceptions (e.g. the life of the mother) would be reasonable.
Using USSUP to decide was a conscious tactic though by the left to avoid the discussion in order to divide people in yet another way. There was then no discussion, just a winner take all, fight to the death election. The problem is that with the all-or-nothing approach there was never any legislative compromise about what the limits can be. Some states might say 39 weeks is fine, others might say 12 weeks.
The lack of many limits to the Constitution, it results in the kind of partisanship we see now because everyone knows that if we don't win, the left is coming for your liberties and the left presents the abortion issue as "win or no one will have an abortion ever again." (Given it has decimated the democrat voter base growth given the numbers by various groups, it is unsurprising they need to have open borders.)
Certainly hope so too! In today's age "they" want 3rd graders to know an infinite amount of pronouns and gender identity parts..... sickening for sure.
I just wrote a stack on how massive government is eating the American Dream. The dream was small government regulating the worlds most powerful machine of small businesses. We are now an oligarchy trampling civil liberties in the name of massive government and over regulation. Berenson is absolutely right, we cannot rely on having good oligarchs… we need to deconstruct the largest bureaucracy in human history and return the power to the people - and that requires that the Bill of Rights once again mean something
In preparation to the BofR meaning something, it must first be taught in schools. Full discussions on why each right is included and why it is very important. Anyone else remember civics class in high school??
I'm on a big kick in my small town to teach a statistics class in high school that will function like a debate class. Pick a topic, research facts for both sides since you won't know which side you'll be asked to argue. I took a law class in high school that worked that way and it was one of the defining classes I've taken in high school, college, or grad school.
I also believe that government should take near the end of high school rather than in grade school/middle school. Introducing the concepts in early school is great, but it's important kids learn and understand the constitution, what it means, and what it represents, as they near voting age. Most kids have completely forgotten civics by the time they're asked to actually use it.
I had it senior year of HS. Teacher was a Socialist but I didn’t realize that then. Textbook skewed liberal, I do remember that. I was a young Conservative but not knowing at that time what that really meant. I was the only student to go head to head with the teacher, the other students just sat there, bored. I just knew the ideas he was espousing made absolutely zero sense to me. Voted for Reagan my 1st Presidential election and never looked back. But I was 1 in a sea of Democrats and what I would today call sheep. I do follow some of my HS class on FB and I have been pleasantly surprised that now, more than a few have come over to Team Reality.
I was 20 and so proud to pull that lever. It's unfortunate its not the same anymore. I'm not even sure my true vote was counted in 2020. I waited 100+ people deep to vote and it seemed to be all Trumpers in line, it was like a party. I've never experienced anything like that before. Usually 5 people max at any time. I was sure he had it in the bag. But voting fraud runs deep in this country. I was so naive. And sad.
Do it! You will be giving these students an everlasting gift. I had a genius prof in middle school—Yale phd. He was also the head of the middle school (now head of the school) Parents made him keep teaching as they knew what he could give to kids. We studied current topics, fictional wars etc…some days we pulled a marble out of a hat: Red marbles had to argue one side and purple the other. He would occasionally interject a pithy comment but otherwise he spoke little. That exercise (and teacher) is fundamental to how I still think today.
High School has changed drastically since the 70’s and before. Generally speaking, the students have zero idea of what the Bill of Rights say and how they came to be. For anyone out there who cares, take an online free civics course. A refresher for us all, and perhaps for some a first time, could be one way to save us from looming tyranny. We the People have inalienable rights given to us by our Creator.
Absolutely agree! In high school, a course required for graduation (can't remember the name but had the word Governments in it) taught the details of how American govt works and then overviews of other world govt systems for comparison (parliamentary , monarchical, socialist, communist, oligarchy, etc.).
I graduated in 1976 which was THE COOLEST - we had special Bicentennial events, our tassels were red, white, and blue and the whole class of over 700 was so patriotic and joyful as one. We were about 1/3 black and nobody cared what color you were.
Since I didn't have kids, until recent years I had no idea what a bullet I dodged in K-12 and at my university.
P.S. I had civics class in 8th grade and the Govt class was for HS juniors or seniors only.
You have it exactly right. Government isn't the solution, government is the problem. That's why government is always pushing big government and nanny government. Government doubled in size just a few years after Sept 2001, and as Afghanistan proves, bigger is not better, in fact I'd venture to say that the size of government in WWII led to better results, and happier people (eventually) on both sides of the conflict.
Government is self justifying and self perpetuating.
It has to be cut back unless you want the American Dream cut back. It has ALREADY cut back on the American Dream, and the CUTTING BACK has been blamed on LACK OF SUFFICIENT GOVERNMENT.
obama made health care worse, we can argue over whether it was deliberate, but it is unambiguously worse (and much more expensive)
Was any government involved in laser eye surgery FOR YEARS? Yet it continued to improve and get cheaper!
There is a argument that if government was involved (for instance) of getting bananas to the US, that they would be multiple dollars each. There are a lot of logistics involved, and bananas have a very limited shelf life. They are labor intensive, and only grow in certain areas of the world.
And since the government is involved in printing of currency, and the FED, they've totally screwed it up (or political reasons) We have yet to see the worst of inflation, it will be here for some time.
"To err is human, but to REALLY screw something up, it takes a government"
That's the value of the free market and competition!
Competition makes things better, from people in athletics, to free markets for pricing, and too efficiency in general.
We should be using government on a very limited basis, because it is so inefficient. For national defense, and a few other things.
That was beautifully said... especially the part about government being self-justifying and self-perpetuating. There is a reason that "crisis reporting" is so critical to our government - they absolutely require hysteria to justify their existence. If people simply looked at performance of government vs free market, everyone would see the truth. So they must, instead, look at outlier's (that are usually fake), amplify them, and pretend that represents reality in order to justify greater regulation and control.
And to your final point, there is a reason the US, at founding, created a federal government for three things - defending our borders, defending our currency, and regulating international trade. That was it. My post focuses primarily on the introduction of federal taxes - something most people forget didn't get ratified until 1916 and didn't become anywhere near the market or social burden they are today until the 1940's and 1950's to pay down the debt of WWII - and how their rapid expansion in the 1970's and 1980's officially swallowed the free market whole.
Article V Convention of States is I think, our last hope of a peaceful resolution to the madness that is our runaway federal government but they need our support and they need it now!
Alex, you realize this battle you're waging isn't just for your right to free speech, it's for all of America. I don't think that I'm overstating that. You have the ammunition and the smarts to pluck the little bird and you have the support of those of us that love our country, no matter what the media or the Marxist try to propagandize on the issue. We stand with you; I want to wish you the best of luck but really right is on your side so a little luck can't hurt but you got this. Kick their ass.
Alex is fighting for American values and Western values, which spring from Judeo-Christian morality and Greek, Roman, and Enlightenment thought. Respect for the individual, freedom of speech, freedom of press, limited government, etc. Alex, the Founding Fathers would be proud!
You are so correct. The sad fact is our children, our future, are lied to in schools, have ideologies forced upon them that are divisive, and haven't been given the tools they need, the very things you've written here, to prosper and make true and productive change in this once great nation. The anecdote of the frog that is slowly boiled to death comes to mind. I'll be 70 this year and I feel so compelled to give some truth to kids. For no other reason than to prepare them and strengthen them against the trails to come. Perhaps that is our generation's obligation.
Pro Elon people are treating him as some sort of freedom of speech God. Anti Muskers thought Twitter was a bastion of democracy before he bought it - you know when it was controlled by dodgy hedge funds and investors. The reality is, it's a business and is being used to make money and harvest your data. You may be able to say more what you want with Elon in charge but harvesters gonna harvest.
Maybe. But it's undeniably pretty crappy as a business if you look at any metric applied to normal companies. It has a ludicrous number of users, which would imply that they would have been making tons of money in their 16 years of existence. But that simply has not been the case.
One billionaire like Musk can’t protect our constitutional rights but he can definitely help in the fight when you consider dozen’s of billionaires are using their money and subsequent powers to decimate our constitutional rights. We need more billionaires like Musk willing to stand up for us. Taking on the communists is a high dollar endeavor and if Musks intent is as he has stated we should all be grateful for him and his actions. It’s quite ironic a foreign born person is stepping up like no other to help save America, unlike the greedy American billionaires
Have you seen the articles on Obama and Clinton pushing the Digital Services Act Package through the United Nations?, which would create several EU regulations on the Internet, including a law to forbid alleged disinformation. Ironic, the two biggest purveyors of misinformation pushing for so called democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic.
If this goes through none of us will be protected from the speech police. Twitter followers have been losing their minds because we might be able to debate, criticize the regime, ask questions and god forbid use our own minds to see what is true and is not. What is more ironic, their very actions have caused millions of us to lose whatever trust we had in the very organizations that are supposed to protect us.
I'm liberal and let me tell you, the nutbags in San Francisco who call themselves liberals are not liberals anymore. They are brain-dead, mentally ill misfit toys.
Yep. That's why I call them "Leftists." Free speech is fundamental to liberalism. When you abandon it, you're no longer "liberal." I refuse to concede to their attempts to redefine English!
First, those White Men who wrote the Constitution--the ones whose statutes are being removed, vandalized, and otherwise desecrated--were geniuses. The Constitution stands the test of time.
Second, I seem to recall that the federal medical bureaucrats, back in early 2020, attempted to impose "pandemic" restrictions and some states slapped back. Others not only played along but in same cases were more ridiculous. But that's on them--and those voters need to slap 'em down. That is also why the Chief Medical Midget needs to be ridiculed, exposed, and ignored.
Third, never in my lifetime have I seen such a clear demarcation between states--red/blue; liberal/conservation; screwball/sensible. The problem exists for those of us whose politics are incompatible with our ZIP codes. Relocating is not always an option, but at least it's Out There.
Wishing you much luck! And since I am in CA and Nextdoor is also in CA, I am wishing I had taken Nextdoor to court for censoring my 100% accurate statistics about the low risk of Covid to children. Either way, when you win, I will be happy to forward the news to Nextdoor informing it that it broke the law when it violated my right of free speech on its platform.
The US Constitution used to be a document of enumerated powers, now it is a document of enumerated liberties with only the Bill of Rights left as a backstop. Every 3rd grader once knew this. The Commerce Clause decisions emasculated it. Wickard v Filburn in particular.
Competition between the states was key and hopefully it will be again.
Competition in the world is now key which is why the Biden Admin and similar elites around the world want a worldwide tax and worldwide rules. No competition means no escape from their boot.
One hopes that Alex is waking up to this, based on this post, perhaps he is.
The way I see it, we have a garden of power to protect our constitutional rights. It is our national politicians.
Today though that garden is filled with garbage and weeds preventing the flowering of protection that the American people need. We have Kevin MaCarthy quoted as demanding that social media ban Republicans he sees as somehow supporting the "insurrection". Until we rid ourselves of these DC swampy bits of garbage and weeds we will continue to have this problem.
It seems to me that we are going to need a convention of the states. There are 24 states that are solid Republican with 7 a toss-up. 34 states are required. So with a couple of moderate Dem states, or even hard liberal states that have items they want to see addressed, we can get this done. And term limits needs to be front and center. I also think we need a commission that reports to a panel of governors elected by the governors that is like a grand jury that investigates conflicts of interest of federal politicians and senior federal government employees.
If our national politicians are not protecting our constitutional rights, then we should throw the bums out.
With you on this! Best wishes from everyone who values the right to speak up.
The US Constitution used to be a document of enumerated powers, now it is a document of enumerated liberties with only the Bill of Rights left as a backstop. Every 3rd grader once knew this. The Commerce Clause decisions emasculated it. Wickard v Filburn in particular.
Competition between the states was key and hopefully it will be again.
Competition in the world is now key which is why the Biden Admin and similar elites around the world want a worldwide tax and worldwide rules. No competition means no escape from their boot.
One hopes that Alex and others are waking up to this, based on this post, perhaps he is.
Imagine voters getting all the information. No wonder Dems are in full panic. AOC may never come out from under her desk.
Agreed. No one should be reliant upon an Elon Musk to come along and save free speech and yet we are somewhat that way now. Hopefully not for long.
This is why Berenson case is so very important it will set Precendent and policies for case law and for historical value as well.
Yes. Alex's lawsuit is extremely important!
precedent (not President)
I am sorry about that I will fix it. Thank you.
It could equally be said that no one should have been reliant on our Founding Fathers to form the ideas and eventually the documents that defined our new nation. But I'm glad they were there and did what they did. Like it or not, we need, but lack leaders with integrity. Elon Musk may not be what we are looking for, but neither are you or I. I pray that a real leader steps up to the plate.
Amen. Here are some ideas to to get us back on track:
1. Repeal the 16th Amendment to eliminate the Federal government’s ability to tax income, thus starving the beast. (If the states want to keep their respective income taxes, that’s their business).
2. Repeal the 17th Amendment and return the principles of a *republic* (vs. mob democracy) back to the states and, by extension, the US Senate. The perennial battles over the filibuster would be similarly eliminated.
3. As a compromise for repealing the 17th Amendment, separately amend Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 (“The number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand,…”) to read “The number of Representatives shall be *at least*, but not exceed, one for every thirty thousand.” In doing so, the people’s house would swell from 435 to more than 10,000 (which seems like a lot, but that only shows how far removed we’ve become from representative democracy. Besides, modern technology has made the logistics of coordinating such large numbers of people possible, thus eliminating the original statutory rationale for capping the Representatives to 435.)
I think the largest thing that could be done to reduce the size of government is very simple and perhaps could even be done by executive order: eliminate the concept of withholding taxes. It wouldn't change rates or revenues, but everyone would pay April 15th - or perhaps quarterly. The concept of "take home pay" hides the true cost of government and is corrosive to a free society that wants to remain so.
Personally, I tend to trust the wisdom of Hamilton, Madison, and Jay over the “progressives” of the late 19th and early 20th century that gave us the income tax. If memory serves me, an excise tax (tax at the moment of manufacture) was the system advocated in the Federalist Papers. A little reflection demonstrates the wisdom of a system that 1) limits the government’s income to genuine domestic economic activity, while 2) incentivizes the promotion of manufacturing here, at home, in our blessed land.
No question point 1, taxation, is primary problem as the source of the gov’s massive “revenue”.
Point 3 that you make is a fascinating idea. Dilution of the power from a few to many is very intriguing… thanks for sharing that idea.
I wouldn’t look at it as a dilution of power from a few to many. If political power were the sole issue, then practically speaking each citizen would hardly gain from having their one representative who is necessarily more aligned with their interest compete against 9,999 other representatives of different interests. On the other side of the scale, however, how much true representation does a citizen receive from the current arrangement where each Congressman represents roughly 750,000 separate interests?
So why my proposal? What’s to gain? In a word: money. All other things being equal, the corrupting influence of money in politics walks hand in hand with the “size” of the office, i.e. the numbers of citizens and power factions at stake (with the presidency being the most extreme example). The cost and incentive for “buying” an elected office is diluted when there are 1) more offices to buy, and 2) the value of buying that office is diluted because there are more of them, respectively. The logical extreme of this principle is of course pure democracy where every single voter’s vote would have to be “bought.” However, no sane person, certainly not the Founding Fathers or even Socrates, would invite that form of tyranny. 30,000 was the agreed number at the signing and, like everything in our Constitution, was well-considered and not arbitrary. Unfortunately, the country’s growing population presented logistical challenges for housing ever increasing numbers of representatives in a chamber of fixed size, thus Congress (shortsightedly, IMO) capped itself at 435 by statute a century ago. Thanks for your feedback.
Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
LOL
Wickard v Filburn seems as awful as Roe v Wade with regards to inventing law for the benefit of the federal leviathan. In my humble opinion FDR did the most damage to the Constitution than any other individual in history.
I hope Alex prevails.
You are correct. Like the switch in time that saved nine, the New Deal and commerce clause cases inverted the constitution's protections.
EXACTLY!!!
--------------------------
Perhaps the most egregious example of this is Wickard v. Filburn. In this case, Roscoe Filburn was fined for growing twice the ‘legal’ limit of wheat. (The Agriculture Adjustment Act of 1938 and its 1941 amendments established quotas for wheat production) Filburn argued that this extra wheat was simply to to feed his own animals and wasn’t going to be sold, therefore he couldn’t be fined under the commerce clause. In a crazy ruling, the Supreme Court stated that Filburn growing extra wheat meant he didn’t have to BUY extra wheat, therefore interstate commerce WAS impacted and Congress could regulate.
Growing your own wheat on your own land could be regulated by the federal government via the commerce clause.
The simple fact is that if the Constitution meant what the Supreme Court found it to mean in Wickard v. Filburn, there would be no need for a Constitution at all. Just a note that says “Yep, the federal government can do that, too.”
-----------------
https://simulationcommander.substack.com/p/my-freedom-protects-you-your-freedom?s=w
….and he did it by convincing a majority of Americans, like Esau in the Old Testament, to sell their birthright for a bowl of porridge. The sins of the fathers are visited upon the third and fourth generation, and here we are.
I'll also add re the abortion stuff: I think 90% of the people would agree that having an abortion after, say, 32 weeks could be legally proscribed and that having one before X (8? 12? 16?) weeks is not an issue and that a limit somewhere between those points with some exceptions (e.g. the life of the mother) would be reasonable.
Using USSUP to decide was a conscious tactic though by the left to avoid the discussion in order to divide people in yet another way. There was then no discussion, just a winner take all, fight to the death election. The problem is that with the all-or-nothing approach there was never any legislative compromise about what the limits can be. Some states might say 39 weeks is fine, others might say 12 weeks.
The lack of many limits to the Constitution, it results in the kind of partisanship we see now because everyone knows that if we don't win, the left is coming for your liberties and the left presents the abortion issue as "win or no one will have an abortion ever again." (Given it has decimated the democrat voter base growth given the numbers by various groups, it is unsurprising they need to have open borders.)
Certainly hope so too! In today's age "they" want 3rd graders to know an infinite amount of pronouns and gender identity parts..... sickening for sure.
Can't wait to read all the media coverage. Should be a hot, trending Elon Musk, Twitter news story!
Nail the windows shut at Twitter HQ. Don't want anyone on the ground getting hurt.
No one hated free speech as much as Harvey Weinstein and his media friends. Catch and Kill.
I just wrote a stack on how massive government is eating the American Dream. The dream was small government regulating the worlds most powerful machine of small businesses. We are now an oligarchy trampling civil liberties in the name of massive government and over regulation. Berenson is absolutely right, we cannot rely on having good oligarchs… we need to deconstruct the largest bureaucracy in human history and return the power to the people - and that requires that the Bill of Rights once again mean something
In preparation to the BofR meaning something, it must first be taught in schools. Full discussions on why each right is included and why it is very important. Anyone else remember civics class in high school??
I'm on a big kick in my small town to teach a statistics class in high school that will function like a debate class. Pick a topic, research facts for both sides since you won't know which side you'll be asked to argue. I took a law class in high school that worked that way and it was one of the defining classes I've taken in high school, college, or grad school.
I also believe that government should take near the end of high school rather than in grade school/middle school. Introducing the concepts in early school is great, but it's important kids learn and understand the constitution, what it means, and what it represents, as they near voting age. Most kids have completely forgotten civics by the time they're asked to actually use it.
I had it senior year of HS. Teacher was a Socialist but I didn’t realize that then. Textbook skewed liberal, I do remember that. I was a young Conservative but not knowing at that time what that really meant. I was the only student to go head to head with the teacher, the other students just sat there, bored. I just knew the ideas he was espousing made absolutely zero sense to me. Voted for Reagan my 1st Presidential election and never looked back. But I was 1 in a sea of Democrats and what I would today call sheep. I do follow some of my HS class on FB and I have been pleasantly surprised that now, more than a few have come over to Team Reality.
Reagan's election in 1980 was my 26th birthday present. And, even with the ups and downs, it was a good and enduring present at that.
Nice to know we both got good value out of our Special Occasions way back in 1980.
I was 20 and so proud to pull that lever. It's unfortunate its not the same anymore. I'm not even sure my true vote was counted in 2020. I waited 100+ people deep to vote and it seemed to be all Trumpers in line, it was like a party. I've never experienced anything like that before. Usually 5 people max at any time. I was sure he had it in the bag. But voting fraud runs deep in this country. I was so naive. And sad.
one sheeple at a time
Do it! You will be giving these students an everlasting gift. I had a genius prof in middle school—Yale phd. He was also the head of the middle school (now head of the school) Parents made him keep teaching as they knew what he could give to kids. We studied current topics, fictional wars etc…some days we pulled a marble out of a hat: Red marbles had to argue one side and purple the other. He would occasionally interject a pithy comment but otherwise he spoke little. That exercise (and teacher) is fundamental to how I still think today.
High School has changed drastically since the 70’s and before. Generally speaking, the students have zero idea of what the Bill of Rights say and how they came to be. For anyone out there who cares, take an online free civics course. A refresher for us all, and perhaps for some a first time, could be one way to save us from looming tyranny. We the People have inalienable rights given to us by our Creator.
Absolutely agree! In high school, a course required for graduation (can't remember the name but had the word Governments in it) taught the details of how American govt works and then overviews of other world govt systems for comparison (parliamentary , monarchical, socialist, communist, oligarchy, etc.).
I graduated in 1976 which was THE COOLEST - we had special Bicentennial events, our tassels were red, white, and blue and the whole class of over 700 was so patriotic and joyful as one. We were about 1/3 black and nobody cared what color you were.
Since I didn't have kids, until recent years I had no idea what a bullet I dodged in K-12 and at my university.
P.S. I had civics class in 8th grade and the Govt class was for HS juniors or seniors only.
You have it exactly right. Government isn't the solution, government is the problem. That's why government is always pushing big government and nanny government. Government doubled in size just a few years after Sept 2001, and as Afghanistan proves, bigger is not better, in fact I'd venture to say that the size of government in WWII led to better results, and happier people (eventually) on both sides of the conflict.
Government is self justifying and self perpetuating.
It has to be cut back unless you want the American Dream cut back. It has ALREADY cut back on the American Dream, and the CUTTING BACK has been blamed on LACK OF SUFFICIENT GOVERNMENT.
obama made health care worse, we can argue over whether it was deliberate, but it is unambiguously worse (and much more expensive)
Was any government involved in laser eye surgery FOR YEARS? Yet it continued to improve and get cheaper!
There is a argument that if government was involved (for instance) of getting bananas to the US, that they would be multiple dollars each. There are a lot of logistics involved, and bananas have a very limited shelf life. They are labor intensive, and only grow in certain areas of the world.
And since the government is involved in printing of currency, and the FED, they've totally screwed it up (or political reasons) We have yet to see the worst of inflation, it will be here for some time.
"To err is human, but to REALLY screw something up, it takes a government"
That's the value of the free market and competition!
Competition makes things better, from people in athletics, to free markets for pricing, and too efficiency in general.
We should be using government on a very limited basis, because it is so inefficient. For national defense, and a few other things.
That was beautifully said... especially the part about government being self-justifying and self-perpetuating. There is a reason that "crisis reporting" is so critical to our government - they absolutely require hysteria to justify their existence. If people simply looked at performance of government vs free market, everyone would see the truth. So they must, instead, look at outlier's (that are usually fake), amplify them, and pretend that represents reality in order to justify greater regulation and control.
And to your final point, there is a reason the US, at founding, created a federal government for three things - defending our borders, defending our currency, and regulating international trade. That was it. My post focuses primarily on the introduction of federal taxes - something most people forget didn't get ratified until 1916 and didn't become anywhere near the market or social burden they are today until the 1940's and 1950's to pay down the debt of WWII - and how their rapid expansion in the 1970's and 1980's officially swallowed the free market whole.
Article V Convention of States is I think, our last hope of a peaceful resolution to the madness that is our runaway federal government but they need our support and they need it now!
Conventionofstates.com
19 states and counting. Support this work if you can.
https://conventionofstates.com/
Thanks for posting this link Charles. Term limits, yes!
Alex, you realize this battle you're waging isn't just for your right to free speech, it's for all of America. I don't think that I'm overstating that. You have the ammunition and the smarts to pluck the little bird and you have the support of those of us that love our country, no matter what the media or the Marxist try to propagandize on the issue. We stand with you; I want to wish you the best of luck but really right is on your side so a little luck can't hurt but you got this. Kick their ass.
Alex is fighting for American values and Western values, which spring from Judeo-Christian morality and Greek, Roman, and Enlightenment thought. Respect for the individual, freedom of speech, freedom of press, limited government, etc. Alex, the Founding Fathers would be proud!
You are so correct. The sad fact is our children, our future, are lied to in schools, have ideologies forced upon them that are divisive, and haven't been given the tools they need, the very things you've written here, to prosper and make true and productive change in this once great nation. The anecdote of the frog that is slowly boiled to death comes to mind. I'll be 70 this year and I feel so compelled to give some truth to kids. For no other reason than to prepare them and strengthen them against the trails to come. Perhaps that is our generation's obligation.
Pro Elon people are treating him as some sort of freedom of speech God. Anti Muskers thought Twitter was a bastion of democracy before he bought it - you know when it was controlled by dodgy hedge funds and investors. The reality is, it's a business and is being used to make money and harvest your data. You may be able to say more what you want with Elon in charge but harvesters gonna harvest.
Maybe. But it's undeniably pretty crappy as a business if you look at any metric applied to normal companies. It has a ludicrous number of users, which would imply that they would have been making tons of money in their 16 years of existence. But that simply has not been the case.
making money isn't always the business plan
One billionaire like Musk can’t protect our constitutional rights but he can definitely help in the fight when you consider dozen’s of billionaires are using their money and subsequent powers to decimate our constitutional rights. We need more billionaires like Musk willing to stand up for us. Taking on the communists is a high dollar endeavor and if Musks intent is as he has stated we should all be grateful for him and his actions. It’s quite ironic a foreign born person is stepping up like no other to help save America, unlike the greedy American billionaires
Right not perfect, but a huge foot in the door! There are many battles ahead, but mama bear is AWAKE and she is charging hard across the land!
Mama Bears and Papa Bears are awake! Even some Baby Bears (middle school and above) are starting to question the lies they are being told.
Godspeed Alex!
Have you seen the articles on Obama and Clinton pushing the Digital Services Act Package through the United Nations?, which would create several EU regulations on the Internet, including a law to forbid alleged disinformation. Ironic, the two biggest purveyors of misinformation pushing for so called democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic.
If this goes through none of us will be protected from the speech police. Twitter followers have been losing their minds because we might be able to debate, criticize the regime, ask questions and god forbid use our own minds to see what is true and is not. What is more ironic, their very actions have caused millions of us to lose whatever trust we had in the very organizations that are supposed to protect us.
"Yes, California, ultra-liberal California."
TBF, "liberal" meant something other than a foot soldier for the corporate army many years ago.
I'm liberal and let me tell you, the nutbags in San Francisco who call themselves liberals are not liberals anymore. They are brain-dead, mentally ill misfit toys.
They are authoritarians and totalitarians, some fascist, some socialist, some communists, but all anti liberty totalitarians.
Yes, exactly, they are all playing the Bernie Sanders hustle. So they can line their pockets and buy their mansions. Nancy Pelosi perfected the craft.
Yep. That's why I call them "Leftists." Free speech is fundamental to liberalism. When you abandon it, you're no longer "liberal." I refuse to concede to their attempts to redefine English!
First, those White Men who wrote the Constitution--the ones whose statutes are being removed, vandalized, and otherwise desecrated--were geniuses. The Constitution stands the test of time.
Second, I seem to recall that the federal medical bureaucrats, back in early 2020, attempted to impose "pandemic" restrictions and some states slapped back. Others not only played along but in same cases were more ridiculous. But that's on them--and those voters need to slap 'em down. That is also why the Chief Medical Midget needs to be ridiculed, exposed, and ignored.
Third, never in my lifetime have I seen such a clear demarcation between states--red/blue; liberal/conservation; screwball/sensible. The problem exists for those of us whose politics are incompatible with our ZIP codes. Relocating is not always an option, but at least it's Out There.
Finally, good luck, Alex. Kick ass & take names!
Wishing you much luck! And since I am in CA and Nextdoor is also in CA, I am wishing I had taken Nextdoor to court for censoring my 100% accurate statistics about the low risk of Covid to children. Either way, when you win, I will be happy to forward the news to Nextdoor informing it that it broke the law when it violated my right of free speech on its platform.
May the force be with you!
The US Constitution used to be a document of enumerated powers, now it is a document of enumerated liberties with only the Bill of Rights left as a backstop. Every 3rd grader once knew this. The Commerce Clause decisions emasculated it. Wickard v Filburn in particular.
Competition between the states was key and hopefully it will be again.
Competition in the world is now key which is why the Biden Admin and similar elites around the world want a worldwide tax and worldwide rules. No competition means no escape from their boot.
One hopes that Alex is waking up to this, based on this post, perhaps he is.
“Sometimes a case meets a moment”
Thank you for this! For not giving up
The way I see it, we have a garden of power to protect our constitutional rights. It is our national politicians.
Today though that garden is filled with garbage and weeds preventing the flowering of protection that the American people need. We have Kevin MaCarthy quoted as demanding that social media ban Republicans he sees as somehow supporting the "insurrection". Until we rid ourselves of these DC swampy bits of garbage and weeds we will continue to have this problem.
It seems to me that we are going to need a convention of the states. There are 24 states that are solid Republican with 7 a toss-up. 34 states are required. So with a couple of moderate Dem states, or even hard liberal states that have items they want to see addressed, we can get this done. And term limits needs to be front and center. I also think we need a commission that reports to a panel of governors elected by the governors that is like a grand jury that investigates conflicts of interest of federal politicians and senior federal government employees.
If our national politicians are not protecting our constitutional rights, then we should throw the bums out.
Good luck! And also watch where you step in San Francisco.....