Individual Liberty — Individual Responsibility 

I think that last one (civics exams for voters) was tried once and found to be “racist.” Now there's a federal “law” that certain districts have to have any changes to their election procedures approved by the federal judiciary.

If such a law (requiring civics exams to cast successful votes) were to be put into place, it would eliminate most college graduates and over 50% of currently elected officials from the voter rolls. That doesn't seem like such a bad idea to me. It would also eliminate close to a majority of public school graduates.

The way things have gone in the last few decades only those of us that make it a point to study and learn about our founding and our history, and those people who are naturalized citizens would be left with the right to vote. I imagine if we implemented all of your suggestions here, we'd have less than 2% of the populace eligible to vote, and then only if they actually carried their weapons publicly.

It's a pleasant fantasy, but it won't be happening anytime soon. Sadly, I think the reality is closer to “reality TV” or your typical sitcom. Sex, drugs and hip-hop have replaced morals, integrity, intelligence, and taste in our culture. We ended up with the government most of us deserve, even if it's the one that will eventually make slaves of us all. If I recall correctly, that is the left's plan after all – they're just twisting the language so we'll all think we're free.

When people claim to have a "right" to health care (as an example), that shows a lack of either integrity or morality as far as I'm concerned. Either that, or a lack of intelligent consideration of the issues. Health care is a service provided by one individual (the doctor) to another (the patient). The doctor may exhibit some degree of altruism and offer his services at a lower rate for more needy patients than for others, but that's his right and his choice. When the government gets involved, coercing the doctor to provide his services under threat, the doctor is no longer a free man, but has become a slave to the people.

Yet in today's health care debate, people don't even consider the immorality of this type of arrangement, instead asserting that they have a "right" to the coerced services of another. Republicans and Democrats alike have fallen into this immoral way of thinking, accepting the premise that health care is a right and simply negotiating now for how tight the chains should be. When the system no longer can sustain itself, they'll start withholding that care that is allegedly a "right" making value judgments about the quality of their constituent's lives and rationing care to cut costs. Since the people will be coerced to pay for "government provided" health care under penalty of prison time, they will have lost their liberties in exchange for this so-called right.

The thing about that is it shows a lack of intelligence to believe that a thing that government provides cannot also be withheld by government.

That's merely one example. Many people are indeed intelligent, whether they're on the political left or right, but an equal number are not. Intelligence isn't really the issue though, even though I did list it. Rather it's ignorance. The ISI has a rather simple civics test on their web site. It's a mere 33 questions long and yet most people (71%) that take this simple test fail (scoring 59.9% of worse). Our elected officials do even worse on this test than the average citizen. The questions on this test are simple, such as "what are the three branches of government?" or "Under Our Constitution, some powers belong to the federal government. What is one power of the federal government?" (One of the multiple choice answers for that one was "Establish standards for doctors and lawyers", which is of course NOT one of the federal government's powers, but is being asserted as such by both Democrats and Republicans, and the media.)

Integrity? How many of the people you know thought that Dan Rather was truly one of the more "honest" television anchormen (he was lauded for it by other newsmen)out there despite having deliberately aired "news" based upon falsified documents and claiming that the information in them was still accurate? More than half of the people I know personally did. Why is it that when our President lied to the American people on national television ("I did not have sex with that woman - Monica Lewinsky"), and perjured himself under oath (eventually being disbarred because of it) those same people defended him as a fundamentally good president, complaining that conservatives were all up in arms about "nothing." Even today, I have liberal friends that tell me that William Jefferson Clinton "only" lied about sex - as if that's perfectly acceptable? When did it become "moral" to commit adultery? Why is it that one of the more popular recent television programs was "Sex in the City", now picked up in syndication on a "women's programming network"? Why is it that "Desperate Housewives" is still being aired if we are such a "moral" people? Why is it that beer (and candy, particularly "TWIX") advertising encourages young people to lie? Why is a new "comedy" being release where the protagonist is the only man in the world capable of lying (the trailers make this look like it's funny, but it's not) - and people think that this is a "good idea" for a film? Why is it that if you go to a major department store or even to some restaurants now you can hear the canned music extolling the "virtues" of rape and murder with obscenities boldly spoken every fifth or sixth word? And this sort of filth wins music "awards?"

So, "what is the real problem?" I'd say it's a culture of corruption, and not just in Congress. Congress is after all, just a microcosm of what goes on outside those marble halls. We have become a nation of hedonists, bent on preserving our "rights" (actually saying we're "entitled" to this or that) at the expense of the rights of others, ignorant of our heritage and ready to throw away all that our forbears gave us. It's a rot that has been progressing for over a century.

I suppose I could blame the "media", but to a certain extent they're right - they're only producing what sells. I suppose I could blame the educational system for failing us - but a lack of parental involvement is just as much to blame.

People are smart?

A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.
- Agent Kay - Men In Black

If we're ever to avoid a slide into socialism, the people need to wake up and learn the truth. The fact of the matter is, people are inherently sinful by nature, politicians no less so. If we don't actively combat our own natures, everything we touch eventually decays, including our systems of government. The founders knew this. At the time of the drafting of the United States Constitution no democracy had survived for more than a couple of hundred years without falling to corruption and eventually being conquered either from without or from within. We're right at about that time frame, and our government and our society have already been fundamentally altered far away from what the framers gave us.

If we don't look to the fundamentals as a people we will lose the gift that was given to us. David's proposals won't see the light of day in our modern society, but they do suggest that perhaps the solution is an electorate that is educated about their heritage, that knows the difference between rights and entitlements, and that is willing to do what it takes to see to it that their government is under their control, rather than that of the masses.

“In a democracy (’rule by mob’), those who refuse to learn from history are in the majority and dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance.”-third world county’s corollary to Santayana’s Axiom

Actually, quite a lot. The original post was about the fact that our government is actively engaged in taking away our rights and liberties. That the elected officials and the bureaucrats that compose it are responsible for that is only a half truth. The rest of the truth is that you, and I, and every other person that ever cast a ballot in this country is also responsible for it.

You are of course entitled to your opinion. I would point out though, that you are obviously aware that something terribly wrong has occurred in our government.

"The future for my children and my grandchildren does not look very good.

"This federal government has gone absolutely insane with power, and I mean both Republicans and Democrats."

Are we then to sit idly by and watch our republic collapse about us, our children and our grandchildren? Do we continue to watch as our neighbors vote for and praise those politicians that would continue to erode our liberties? Refuse to engage those that believe in the entitlement mentality, in appeasement, and who twist the meaning of words to befuddle us into thinking that this is the way things should be?

If we do that, then we are as guilty as the politicians that are stealing our liberties and our rights and driving this nation ever deeper into the pockets of our enemies. Hogwash? I think not. You and I may have to agree to disagree on this one, but I believe that educating people about our heritage and our liberties, and voting responsibly is the best way to preserve them. If we fail in that, we fail in our duty as citizens to our country, and to our children and grandchildren.

The only NATIONAL election that any of us actually has a say in is the choice of electors for President and Vice President. That's more a popularity contest than anything else, but it does have a tendency to reflect the majority of public policy opinion.

Elections for Senate and the House aren't national elections, they're state elections. We really have no control at all over the Congressmen from other states. But, having control of our own Congressmen is only a part of a much larger plan to take back our federal government. This is one of the reason's I'm an advocate of repealing the seventeenth amendment to the Constitution (although I'm enough of a realist to know that it's not going to happen in my lifetime).

Getting control of our Congressmen is (or should be) relatively straightforward. The thing to do is educate the people about what the proper role of Congress is, to educate the people when Congress passes the blame for their actions on to the Executive (The president, for example, can only propose legislation and policy. It's up to Congress to enact it.) or to the "market". We cannot for example, hold President Obama to blame for the massive deficit - the blame for that belongs squarely on Congress' shoulders. The only share of the blame that belongs to the President is for proposing the budget, and for signing the bill when it came across his desk. The specifics must be laid squarely at the feet of Congress.

So, I would include your plan as a part of a larger plan, not as the whole plan. Here's my plan for taking back our country...

1. Each of us must take responsibility for our own lives and actions. This is paramount. The liberals have a catch phrase for this - "Think globally, act locally." There is power in the accumulated and coordinated actions of the individual.
2. Each of us must work to educate ourselves about the Constitution of the United States, about the general working of federal law, and what the appropriate powers of the federal government should be.
3. Each of us must work to educate ourselves about the Constitution of our own state, as well as the general working of state law and what the appropriate powers of the state government we live under are, as well as what the appropriate relationship between our state government and the federal government (and the governments of other states and nations) is.
4. We must all make ourselves aware of the character of the men and women who aspire to office at all levels that we have a say in, from the local dogcatcher, to state representatives, to federal representatives, to the President. Then we must vote according to our understanding of that character and the responsibilities and duties of the office in question. And we must do this at every level of government.
5. We must, each of us, having done all of the preceding things, educate one another about the things we have found. We must persuade one another as to why these things matter, and be willing to be educated ourselves.
6. Finally, and only after we have done the other things, we must hold those we elect accountable at all levels of public office. This is where your proposal finally fits in. Without strength of numbers and strength of conviction, your plan isn't workable. Without a clear understanding in the voting population as to why it's right or wrong for federal powers to be expanded or curtailed in favor or at the expense of state powers, no amount of haranguing our state legislatures will have any effect.

As I understand it, the federal government's primary purpose is the defense of the United States. It's secondary purpose is to ensure peace between the United States. It is the primary purpose of the States to govern the people and to exercise jurisdiction within their own borders only - not to negotiate with foreign powers. This was the purpose of the tenth amendment - to ensure that this arrangement stayed in place.

So yes, it is important to me that our state legislatures take back their rights and responsibilities. It won't happen though, until the voting public becomes aware of the scope of the problem and the scope of their powers. Elections matter, and they are the only way we have to take back our government. The many elections that have put socialists that don't believe in individual liberty and individual responsibility indicate to me that the average citizen is not that intelligent or informed, and so I believe education is the first step.

The road to liberty will be a long one. We've spent 222 years on the road to tyranny, as apathy has set in and we allowed the idea of a "perfect union" to become entrenched. The Constitution was established in part "to form a more perfect union." But, it was never the founders intent that we be all one jurisdiction.

Each "congress" has a term of two years. Every two years we have the opportunity to replace every sitting Representative. Every six years we can replace one or possibly two (depending on where you live) of our sitting Senators. This will almost never be successful during the general election, so we have to strike during the primaries.

These elections are far more important than the Presidential election though. While the president may set the agenda through popularity and by virtue of leading his party, only Congress is responsible for writing federal laws and passing budgets, taxes and the like. We put too much emphasis on the President, primarily because it is the only national election that all of the people participate in, but the President's powers are considerably limited compared to the powers of Congress.

As long as our Congressmen are human, they will be subject to corruption and venal influences. The status quo will probably be maintained even if we manage to oust the sitting Representatives and Senators anyway, thanks to the entrenched careerist federal bureaucracy and the system in place for congressional staffers, many of whom end up writing the actual language for our bills anyway.

We have a much better chance of reforming our state governments than the federal government. That's why we need to start locally. Our states will not assert their tenth amendment rights unless the people in our state offices understand those rights and the reasons for asserting them.

The only alternative to working from the grass roots level to clean up local and state government is armed revolution. The chances of that being successful are fairly slim. Especially when you consider that close to a third of the populace actually likes the direction things are going and another third is too apathetic to really care.