"to see rising in America an empire of liberty,
and the prospect of two or three hundred
millions of freemen,
without one noble
or one king among them"
How weird is that? We are at the 300th million right now...
The intentions were pure, and simple.
The whole nature of American Government was set up with the separation of powers so that we would be a nation under the rule of law, not of men.
We hear this over and over, and yet, we still don't get it -- and matter of fact, are taking things in reverse; we are becoming everything we left England for; we are becoming a land based on everything we loathe -- a government shaping every aspect of our lives from what is deemed too much salt to bailing out failed businesses, banks and failed European nations, like Greece -- with our military spanning the globe to protect every other nation, but our own.
Think about it. We don't have our military lined up upon our border; we don't have our military protecting the streets of New York; our military is so embedded with other people's defenselessness, we barely have enough left over to care for ourselves.
This was not what our forefathers intended; peace through strength was the mission, the way of the nation's security -- and it was as simple as that.
We were supposed to be somewhat isolationists, our military was to be used to defend our shores and more or less keep to ourselves -- and not get involved with the rise and fall of the rest of the world. Now we could argue night and day the justification of our involvement in the both the world wars, and places like Vietnam, and of course today, occupying places like Iraq and Afghanistan -- but that is not where G wants to go -- we can save it for another time and place. And just to make myself perfectly clear, my utmost respect and gratitude for our Armed Forces ranks super high on my list, everyday.
But let's delve deeper in this idea of keeping to ourselves. Here at home, and as intended by the founders, our system of checks and balances of both federal and state powers elevated the individual; as the Tenth Amendment states, "the powers not delegated to the U.S. Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." We were a nation of the people, by the people, WE the people. And likewise,
"If the federal government became dominant, it would mean the end of local self-government and the security of the individual. On the other hand, if the states become dominant, the federal government would become so weak that the structure of the nation would begin to fractionalize and disintegrate into smaller units."It was all about the balance of power.
As laid out in The 5000 Year Leap, a major shift in our checks and balances in government occurred in 1913, after years of rolling along just fine, the 17th Amendment swooshed in at the first sign of progressivism, allowing the popular vote to take away the power of the state -- Senators, having been previously appointed by their own state legislatures -- only now being elected by the general public, just as in the House of Representatives.
But by implementing this one change, the federal government usurped control and power as originally intended -- as the actions of Senators were no longer on behalf of the individual state, advocating the needs of the state, with the ability to "veto any legislation by the House of Representatives which they considered a threat to the rights of the individual states." (Note to self, if I were president for the day, first thing I'd fix).
The Senate simply became just another branch of government conveniently swayed and corrupted by popular opinion, lobbyists, special interests and all the perks that come with higher power; and the sovereignty of the individual state was gone. Making it much easier for making law run amuck and for states to lose their say -- and indeed it has.
This is not what our founders intended.
If we consider what is happening in Arizona for a moment, we might just see how essential the balance of power and the effects of any imbalance might be. If only the federal government heeded the wishes of the state; if only the representation in the Senate came from a position forcing the issues particular to the state; if only the task of securing our borders, as delegated to the federal government, was handled thirty years ago -- like for instance, immediately following Reagan's amnesty of 3 million illegals.
This is not what our founders intended.
And now, we're all over the place; today, we have 54 BILLION American dollars bailing out Greece with no say whatsoever; it's done with a phone call, from our President to the EU, with the message, "let's get it done."
While poll after poll will tell you, Americans haven't given the stamp of approval on our own bail outs -- whether it be TARP funds or "STIMULUS" -- but here we are now, bailing out other countries without so much as a congressional vote, just like that -- the federal reserve waltzes in, writes a bad check without looking back.
While on top of that, if the issue raised by our very own Glenn Beck is true -- referring to AIG insuring the Credit Default Swaps, being currently secured by billionaires, banks and Hedge Fund Managers, betting in wild abandon that Greece will ultimately fail -- America will surely come tumbling after. For why would we put ourselves in such a vulnerable position, with our own serious liabilities and mass corruption to correct as well? Why?
This is not what our founders intended.
Here's a question, why would we ever mirandize and jail any illegal immigrant? With one-third of our jails occupied by illegals, wouldn't it be cheaper, and wiser, to send them immediately on a one-way ticket home?
Here's another question, if places like Greece -- renowned for unfunded liabilities in entitlement programs, socialized medicine, and union retirement benefits bankrupting an entire nation goes unchecked for years, until such time they simply can't turn on the lights, causing uprisings and violent protests -- are we really all that far behind? Or do we just don't want to look?
And how about what we are calling the latest Grecian formula for revival in this new legislation to fix themselves the world over -- referring to it as the Austerity Policy. Are you kidding me? After years of living the antithesis of such -- living it up on Ouzo, throwing plates up against the wall with retirement at 53, and celebrating the live long day, you now wish to bestow upon your citizens brand new policy based upon strict financial regulation, taking on more personal responsibility and capping benefits, characterized by austerity? Have you not seen My Big Fat Greek Wedding?
This is Greece on bailout, in the words of Aunt Voula, "What do you mean he don't eat meat?" pause. "Oh that's okay, I make lamb."
I just don't see how this is all gonna work out okay.
If I were making the deal, I would have at the very least proclaimed free gyros to Americans for life (with proof of I.D.of course), but that's just me.
Here's another question, what happens when Portugal, or Italy, or Ireland go down?
And just who is left to bail out America when the European Union is broke?
This would be a good time to get back to original intent.
Less is more, as austerity was the way -- if we simply stuck to the Puritan mindset, as archaic as that may sound, isolation -- without taking away the community and fellowship with one another as a whole, nor the joy of true free enterprise -- and living the simple life would have saved us; much of our mess simply would not exist. And Greece proves that theory on the streets of Athens as we speak, though it's all greek to me...opa!
If America is in fact "the world's best hope," as Thomas Jefferson once said, what really happens now when even our own foothold upon the very foundation of this nation keeps slipping away?
"It has been frequently remarked that it seems to have been reserved to the people of this country, by their conduct and example, to decide the important question, whether societies of men are really capable or not of establishing good government from reflection and choice, or whether they are forever destined to depend for their political constitutions on accident and force."The great equalizing of society is taking shape on a global scale -- as horrific as it may sound, perhaps the intentions of this government is for America to fail, in order to come to the table of the global economy on the same poor, miserable footing as the rest of the world -- for that would be only fair, right?
According to the latest government era of "never let a crisis go to waste" along side the ever so popular ideology of the redistribution of wealth (note of sarcasm, please), you would think the individual, and the rise of the common man, had nothing to do with America's Divine Providence all these years.
To return full circle with a word from John Adams, he concluded that:
"if the people abandoned
the freedom gained
by the adoption of the Constitution,
it would be treason
against the hopes of the world."
Perhaps it is time to re-affirm and re-establish "good government from reflection and choice;" in other words, that being what our founders intended and the rest of the world depends.
Yes. Exceptional-ism joyously intended.
Make it a Good Day, G
Post a Comment