Hmm, he sounds like exactly what I don’t like in the Republican party. Frankly, I think social issues should be personal/state matters – not Federal, and I in fact prefer conservatives who are liberal on social issues – regardless of whether I agree with them or not – simply because social issues are the main thing that seems to drive the anti-Republican crowd, and I want to see as few of them motivated to vote as possible. And economically/constitutionally (read constitutionally as states vs Federal) he’s exactly the opposite of what I’m for, as well. We need to be shrinking the Federal government, not growing it in more conservative leaning directions. So here’s hoping his recent rise in the polls is just to take away from Romney’s (shiftless, positionless, but I’d vote for him over Obama or Santorum) numbers enough to give Gingrich (has a past, but actually has smart positions, and responsible for most of what the Republican party’s been proud of in the past couple of decades) a boost.
Tag Archive: Federalism
John Perry Barlow, founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, thinks that the Internet has broken our political system, and that we need to find something other than a centralized, top-heavy model to work with.
Wow, just wow. The man is suddenly realizing just how broken everything is becoming. Maybe in his search he’ll discover that our whole system was never meant to be a top heavy system in the first place, something even some of the slashdotters (usually a pretty left of center crowd) actually realize as well. In other words, “*cough* Federalism *cough* *cough*”. This is exactly the sort of thing that I find mind boggling. So many technologically proficient people who’s intelligence I otherwise respect so consistently espouse Democrat Politics and typically Liberal Fascist policies, positions, and politics – to the point of demonizing Republicans and conservatives – and yet everything they’ve learned about engineering teaches them in every other aspect of life that bottom up solutions kick the butt of top down solutions every single time. They just don’t get it.
Minnesota Attorney General Lori Swanson is only a Federalist when she can use those arguments to go after Republicans. When the same arguments could be applied against Democrats for Health Care, not so much.
And yes, it is racist – it treats people of one genetic descent different then people of another.
The Oklahoma Congressional Delegation is wondering why the Federal government got involved in what should have been a purely state legislation matter.
The sad thing is that this question is barely ever asked by legislators anymore, even though the Federal government is supposed to have almost no power compared to the states. Now we have government interfering with health care (even declaring it a Federal right that they’ll have to provide) and interfering in all sorts of business and the economy, so that when someone up top fails, so do we all.
Republicans don’t need to find the next personality to lead the party. That’ll happen naturally, and they’ll regain power if they’ll recommit themselves to Federalism, and stick to it even when the going gets tough.
Randy Barnett wants a constitutional convention of the states to implement a Bill of Federalism, to restore the proper balance between states and the Federal government. I’m all for it, just as I am for so many similar proposals (or even proposals that do things he’s discussing piecewise, such as the Fairtax). The real problem, of course, is that the big government Democrats are in power in so many places, and where they aren’t, big government Republicans often are.
New Hampshire decided that HCR06, a resolution affirming State’s rights based on Jeffersonian principles was inexpedient to legislate.
Too bad, it would have been really nice to see it go through.
Update: It was killed by the Dems (of course) in a party line vote. As one forum commentor at a site put it, if they’re so unhappy with the constitution, why don’t they just rewrite themselves a new socialist one? The answer, of course is that they can get what they want while pulling the wool over most voter’s eyes simply by constant and slow corrosion of our existing constitution.
New Hampshire’s got quite the bill being reviewed, one that would give me quite a bit of hope about the future of our nation if it actually passed. “A Resolution Affirming States’ Rights On Jeffersonian Principles” is an astounding piece of legislation (h/t Hal Turner, The Betrayal, Pat Dollard) that refutes any Federal laws outside of the areas the constitution allows for. In other words, the legislation insists that the Federal Government behave like the constitution was designed, with no limitations on anything not allowed by the constitution. This would especially hammer gun, drug, and speech laws.
I would be rather amazed if this did go through, but if it did, I wouldn’t be surprised if quite a few other states passed similar resolutions, and we actually had some return of power back to the states. Next up would be repealing the 16th ammendment in favor of a tax that didn’t require tracking citizens’ every financial move.
You can follow the status of this legislation here.