Could a country like ours start again.

[Quietgentleman]

Recently I been doing some reading on our founding fathers and have come away with more respect for them than I already had. I have been sitting here wondering if we now had it to do over create our own nation would we create anything half as brilliant as they did. I sit here worried that we as a nation might have lost sight of what freedom really is. Or do we still have our Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Madison's................. still out there and would we have the sense to listen to them?


Quietgentleman

[torenghout]

There is another, Ron Paul

[jim]

We'd fail miserably.

jim

[RangerRick]

As with the first exercise - not without a lot of blood being spilt, unfortunately and I fear not many would be willing to make that sacrifice.

Ranger Rick

[wax]

Quietgentleman - I sit here worried that we as a nation might have lost sight of what freedom really is. Or do we still have our Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Madison's................. still out there and would we have the sense to listen to them?

Wax- It can be an interesting time passer to contemplate our current position for recovery as a nation and for reformation.

We have some very good things going for us... we also have some very bad things going.

First the good things:
Modern Americans rarely realize that the founding fathers were not supported by the general population when they took the actions they did.

In fact it is estimated that at the time of the Declaration's signing well over half of the American population was against the tenents represented there.

The ideas presented by the founding fathers were brewed within the fraternal environment of early America. They formed organizations like the "Sons of Liberty" and the "Order of the Red Men" in which they were able to organize and form the opinions which eventually led to action.
George Washington, John Hancock, Thomas Jefferson, Paul Revere, Samual Adams, and Patrick Henry, used men like Thomas Paine and Ben Franklin to spread the message they created by secret discourse.
Interestingly Ben Franklin was carefully kept from having a connection with "the Sons" but he was the one who presented Paine to the others so there is little doubt that he was closely involved.

We still have fraternal groups in the US but they are very different from these early forms and they are really not required any longer because we now have a much more powerful tool for discussion and information transfer --- Internet forums just like this one!

And we have many... many more men like Hancock and Washington today than were even dreamed of then!
Men like the Davis brothers of Southern Minnesota, owners of dairy facilities and faux granite countertop production.

So what makes them so similar?

One of the truly remarkable things about men like John Hancock is that he had no obvious reason for doing what did!
He was a very rich man, the largest land owner in Boston, and he would actually stand to make more money from increased taxation.
It was one of his ships that was used for the "Boston Tea Party"... a fact that shows our founding fathers were very careful in actions.

But the best news of all is that these men assumed violent struggle within the political structure they created.

Some went so far as to declare that every generation (every twenty years) would likely see use of violence in protest against government tyranny!
It was an experiment designed to bend under pressure precisely because it was assumed that others would not stand for government abuse any more than the founding fathers would.
"A Republic if you can keep it..."

But they had sight of something that few people do today:
I am a family man, I live in St Peter, which resides in the State of Minnesota, which is a member of the Federal Republic of the United States of America.
My commitments spread from the origin to the end, from the local to the federal, from the start to infinity.

They designed the system in that way precisely because that is how they saw themselves.
They envisioned thirteen seperate nations joining together for mutual profit under a very weak Republic.
Americans have forgotten that concept in the last hundred years or so.

We are fifty seperate countries joined together for mutual profit, and such profit (in fact all government) is a mechanism of defense alone.
Defense in government can be both physical and financial but once it is allowed to pass beyond simple defense it becomes tyranny and must eventually fall.

This is a simple idea, but a powerful one.

If the USA falls my responsibility is to Minnesota, if that falls then it is to St Peter, then my family.
But the founding fathers assumed something more important than collapse of defense, they assumed that every American would address governance from the center: What is important to my family, my local community, my State, and then my Federal government.

That is very good news indeed because it allows stability even if the overall system becomes unstable.

I shall stand even if government fails because government starts with me!

[wax]

Now for the bad news:

As I have said Americans have lost sight of the original system.
Just like in 1774 most Americans couldn't form an opinion about government if you asked them; it is a sad fact but universal in a way.

If we could bring Franklin forward in time he would be thrilled by how far we have advanced.
Thirteen seperate nations have become 50, all joined by the Federal system forseen by him.
But I suspect that within minutes of his arrival he would become livid and begin planning for Civil War!
One glance at Washington would cause him to make a call to arms and declare that the system as is shall not stand!

We have allowed his greatest fear.
We have dismissed warnings from men like Washington out of hand; direct warnings, exacting warnings!

Washington would draw and fire without even waiting for discourse over agencies like the CIA, FBI and NSA!
He warned against them personally.
But Franklin would be most angered by powers that the average Americans today overlook.
Federal regulation of such things as commerce (FDA) and personal liberty (Drug War, BTAF, federal laws on such things as abortion) are against every principle of the design created by our founding fathers.

Does that mean that Washington would support the use of drugs by the population?
Well... definately yes and absolutely no!
Washington created one of the largest breweries in America, he was not a prude when it came to... mind alteration.
Yet his idea was based on commerce... Virginian commerce.
And that is the point of course, such issues are for the States and the States alone!
The Federal government was specifically prohibited from sticking it's nose into such issues.

In our founding father's views:
Pot smoking may or may not be prohibited in any given State, as well as any other "Blue Law" like prostitution, public cigarette smoking, alcohol age limits, abortion, and the like.
Some States would likely be extremely strict while others very loose.
We can guess which States would decide what but it is really not material right now because tyranny has been allowed for so long that most Americans don't think about it.

If our founding fathers had been around, we would have very likely seen war in the mid 1970s over a very simple issue.

The Federal government decided that everyone must drive 55. But they knew that they were absolutely prohibited from demanding it.
So they "suggested" and most States readily complied.
But when States like Idaho and South Dakota refused the Federal government decided it would with-hold federal highway funding.
Paine would have snapped his wrists printing that news!
It was a defining moment, and sadly, I failed to grab my rifle and take action!
I was only in my pre-teens so I can at least blaim others for innaction.

We as a nation failed in that moment.
Since then the same blackmail has been used by our Federal government for just about any issue they have created.
Don't want to raise your alcohol age limit to twenty-one like we have dictated?
No more funding... you decide what is important.
Don't want to take ephidrine off your store shelves?
No more funding... you decide what is important.
Don't want to turn over your National Guard units to be used illegally within the US to suppress citizens?
Don't want a Nation ID system?
Don't want a Federal criminal database?
Don't want a national drivers license?

We can go on and on because it really doesn't matter what is being requested; the Federal Government knows that it can not legally enforce it... and it knows that any individual State that questions anything will fold under financial blackmail.

And it really isn't the Federal governments fault, I blaim Texas! You see once tiny South Dakota was allowed to stand alone on the 55mph issue, we were all doomed to greater sins.
Every State knew exactly what was happening.
But our leaders simply turned away.
And the sins of our fathers will return upon us.

[wax]

But if there was one moment in which the collapse of our society as we know it: one moment that assured I will eventually be forced to hold a line: it came in May of 2002.
Our founding fathers would have fired anything they could find without waiting for support of any kind!

It is a sad fact that nations are often destroyed by the most undesirable and unlikely of men.
Sometime in May of 2002 (some claim May 8th but we don't really know) Jose Padilla stepped off a plane in Chicago and was taken into custody.

He was a dirtbag of the highest order, a career criminal, a gang member, and he might have been plotting against the United States of America.
Unfortunately for us he was an American... whether he deserved to be or not... because his mother snuck into this country to give birth to his worthless life.
The law as stands provided him with the same rights as you or I have, whether we like that fact or not.

I say we assume early May because he was not charged with anything.
An American may be held by authorities for up to 72 hours.
The courts are actually very clear that authorities must present any American prisoner within 24 hours of being detained in order to insure Habeus Corpus, but assuming that an arrest is made on Friday it may be Monday before the arrest is reviewed by a judge.

Habeus Corpus literally means "present the body" and it is one of the most powerful rights Americans possess.
It means that you or I can not simply be snatched from the streets by someone in power and disappear from public view.

All arrests must be reported to the courts and we can assume that someone came before a judge around May 8th and declared that this particular American did not have a right to Habeus Corpus.
I can assure you that the judge in question knew differently, but upon such a claim it is normjal to grant a 30 day extension in order for the prosecutor to prepare an argument.

On June 9th 2002, president Bush himself declared Padilla an enemy combatant and transfered him to military custody.
We can assume this was done because the 30 extension had expired and our executive branch knew beyond a doubt that if Padilla came before a judge he would be released with prejudice.
A violation of something like Habeus Corpus can never be allowed if the United States is to continue to exist!
Denying the Judicial Branch review of Jose Padilla was a violation of the seperation of powers written into the United States Constitution!

And it got worse! Much worse!

On a number of occasions our Judicial Branch demanded that Padilla be released.
The Executive Branch refused!
Let me repeat that people because it is a moment that all Amercans have a duty to understand.
On a number of occasions our Judicial Branch demanded that Padilla be released.
The Executive Branch refused!

Eventually the State Department came up with some charges and filed them.
But it doesn't really matter; Jose Padilla can not be convicted of any crime committed prior to May of 2002 by a US court no matter what that crime is!
Denial of his Constitutional rights negates the very authority of any presenting prosecuting agent.
We could prove beyond a fraction of a doubt that he committed treason, that he murdered thousands, that he raped babies and... well... anything.
Nothing can be done to him.

But even if he walked out into the streets tonight the problem still exists.
I hope someone simply takes him on a one way boat ride into international waters and places a bullet in his head. A crime to be sure but he is not worth our pity in any way.

Yet again, even if that happens the problem exists!

The seperation of powers exist to insure that no branch may ever deny the other.
That moment which may never occur has occured.

And most Americans have no idea that the documents they claim protect them do not currently have any power what-so-ever!

How could it be fixed?
Hmm... well let me say this:

There are two facts concerning my nation:
1: Americans may not be attacked by foriegn forces on American soil without nations crumbling, leaderships being destroyed, and the entire world taking notice!
The duties of our leaders has been fulfilled in that measure since 9-11 even if one wants to argue that the wrong nations crumbled or that the wrong leaderships were destroyed.

2: A violation of the seperation of powers can not occur without very public and very very powerful punishment!
It is a defined act of treason and must be publicly redressed.
Don't get me wrong in any way, the punishment would never (in fact could never be allowed to) reach the office of president.
But men like Ashcroft and many others must stand before the flame of justice and be burned in a very real way!

There can be no correction without all three branches of government publicly explaining the error and taking public action to negate it with extreme prejudice.
Did I mention the word "public" yet... I hope so.

[wax]

So to continue the bad news:

What if something like the above mention of seperation of powers becomes a public issue and the system starts to collapse?

Are we safe in falling back to a more local government in order to reform and adjust... can we fix such a problem in the commen sense way that our founding fathers designed?

No....

Given that States have ceded too much power to the Federal government and have largely ceased being self sustaining systems there is a much greater problem.

Washington would simply sit down and cry after reading even the most basic "Executive Order" because he would realize just as I have that all has been lost!

Few Americans realize that washington could have easily made himself king! In fact he was enticed to on many occasions.
He refused and chastised our young nation for the very idea.

Somehow... someway... our Federal government has been allowed to consider itself as more important than the State.
I suspect it was really a slow process and can not be defined by something like the Civil War.
Yes that struggle defined the idea that various States may not withdraw from the Union as a form of redress but Lincoln insured State soveriegnty, he did not negate it.
The issue was NOT SLAVERY!
It was secession.
Slavery was declared illegal as a form of punishment for secession, nothing more and certainly nothing less.

Anyway... somehow we allowed our Federal government to issue orders designed to protect it at the expense of the indivual States which form it.

I don't have time right now but simply google "executive order" and start reading.
You will quickly see the problem.
I have faith in the readers of this forum that the issues will be rapidly understood.

No leadership may be allowed to gain power above the State in declaring an emergency that the leadership in question is allowed to define!
Executive orders can not be allowed to pass the State Executive level.

Had our Federal Executive branch requested each State Government to supply it with Executive Orders in order to insure Federal protection we woulsd still be "sitting pretty".
But they did not.

[gracie88]

Nope. We are too well-fed, we are used to being taken care of, we have tv.
(back to lurking)

[DaNgEr_KiTtY]

i think we would wind up socialist or communist.

[jim]

Wax

What does Texas have to do with this?

Lincoln was a traitor to this country and his oath of office. He was evil in it's worse form, and he along with his cronies ruined this country.
jim

[WileyCoyote]

Short answer - no.

You have to have enough people committed to the idea, willing to lose not only their lives but their families, their homes, their wealth (and we are far richer than those Dead White Guys), their reputations, their standing in the communities, their everything up to and including their lives. You also have to know simply that, should such a group actually stand together and try to start such a thing, they would be branded as terrorists and taken out in a battle far more fiery and bloody than anything seen - and far shorter than the Revolutionary War, where armament was fairly equal and the only things that gave those Dead White Guys advantage were guerrilla tactics and knowing and being on their home terrain. Think that Tories were a problem back then? Look at the people in your own town, your own community, on your own street. How many of them would stand up for you or with you?

The weaning away of States' rights came about through taxation and the accompanying earmarks. If you decide in your home State as a body now to, say, refuse to accept the National ID program, all people from your home state will be refused to be allowed to fly - even in contiguous states. So all of you shrug your collective shoulders and say, "so what, we'll drive, and be damned to the Feds!" Then the feds start cutting you out of all of those nice things like free school lunches and Homeland Security grants to supplement your police and fire departments. The longer you stand tall, the more the feds will, in your home State, yank the fiscal rug out from underneath you. Eventually you, or at least a significant number of you, will surrender. States have become far too dependent on the Federal subsidizations for everything from construction through redevelopment to medical care for their children and elderly. It will be "those terrorist revolutionaries who closed down the hospitals and schools and starved the children" - you.

[the_grizz]

JMHO
Democrat = Communism
Republican = Socialism
Constituition = Freedom
Keep your powder dry!

[bigjack]

Short answer - no.

You have to have enough people committed to the idea, willing to lose not only their lives but their families, their homes, their wealth (and we are far richer than those Dead White Guys), their reputations, their standing in the communities, their everything up to and including their lives. You also have to know simply that, should such a group actually stand together and try to start such a thing, they would be branded as terrorists and taken out in a battle far more fiery and bloody than anything seen - and far shorter than the Revolutionary War, where armament was fairly equal and the only things that gave those Dead White Guys advantage were guerrilla tactics and knowing and being on their home terrain. Think that Tories were a problem back then? Look at the people in your own town, your own community, on your own street. How many of them would stand up for you or with you? * *

The weaning away of States' rights came about through taxation and the accompanying earmarks. If you decide in your home State as a body now to, say, refuse to accept the National ID program, all people from your home state will be refused to be allowed to fly - even in contiguous states. So all of you shrug your collective shoulders and say, "so what, we'll drive, and be damned to the Feds!" Then the feds start cutting you out of all of those nice things like free school lunches and Homeland Security grants to supplement your police and fire departments. The longer you stand tall, the more the feds will, in your home State, yank the fiscal rug out from underneath you. Eventually you, or at least a significant number of you, will surrender. States have become far too dependent on the Federal subsidizations for everything from construction *through redevelopment to medical care for their children and elderly. It will be "those terrorist revolutionaries who closed down the hospitals and schools and starved the children" - you.


If just one state would start the ball rolling, it could lead to a domino effect. Some states send more $ to washington than they get back so it would have to be a state with relatively few "government dependents"

The state could declare it citizens exempt from illegal federal taxes and use those funds to fill the gap of the missing federal $. Then recall the National Guard and place them back under control of the Governor.

I don't believe the Feds have the balls in this day and age to put a state under military occupation. If one state could do it others would follow. The feds would be forced to negotiate a vast decrease in their power and authority to remain relevant at all.

It would be hard but I believe it could be done. Will it happen in our lifetime? I seriously doubt it.-Jack

[bookwormom]

a lot could be done, but it won't. The brakeman sits at the controls.

[JAK]

If you look at the history of Britain, and I haven't really, but I think if you did you would find that it has gone though many ups and downs. I expect the same will be said about America in 2776 and 3776. The world has gone through many Dark Ages. Some say the Dark Ages were not all bad, dark like a womb. I'm sure someday people will forget about us also. So?

I try not to attach myself too much to pieces of paper, or even ideas. All paper will turn to dust. Ideas good and bad come and go as the tides. I try to honour the memory of my parents and their ancestors. I try to respect the land I live in, and all the people and creatures that have passed through it, and will pass through it. Finally, I try and consider where all this is going, and how it will eventually end far far into the future, and what it might all mean at the end of the day.


A Red, Red Rose

O MY Luve 's like a red, red rose
That 's newly sprung in June:
O my Luve 's like the melodie
That's sweetly play'd in tune!

As fair art thou, my bonnie lass,
So deep in luve am I:
And I will luve thee still, my dear,
Till a' the seas gang dry:

Till a' the seas gang dry, my dear,
And the rocks melt wi' the sun;
I will luve thee still, my dear,
While the sands o' life shall run.

And fare thee weel, my only Luve,
And fare thee weel a while!
And I will come again, my Luve,
Tho' it were ten thousand mile.

- Robert Burns. 1759–1796


Honour thy Father and thy Mother.
Fear the Land. Consider the End.

[STRIKER]

Recently I been doing some reading on our founding fathers and have come away with more respect for them than I already had. I have been sitting here wondering if we now had it to do over create our own nation would we create anything half as brilliant as they did. I sit here worried that we as a nation might have lost sight of what freedom really is. Or do we still have our Jefferson, Adams, Franklin, Madison's................. still out there and would we have the sense to listen to them?


Quietgentleman


I think the real question is should we even try?

Lets look at some facts:

This nation is a mess right now. Just look around.

Democracy is an idiocy. Placing the power to choose leaders in the hands of a mostly uneducated mass of fickle voters is insanity.

Religion is the root cause of more hatred and murder than even money is yet we allow it to be freely expressed. Stupid.

Allowing every Tom, Dick and Harry to own and use firearms openly can only be described as INVITING chaos and trouble. Dumb.

The list goes on and on.

This Nation is CRAZY.

However, for the life of me I can't come up w/ a single idea that would be any better so God help me, I must be crazy too.

So no matter; as long as I am alive there will be no need to start over because while I draw breath it will never have ended. ;)