Wrathwilde just got Published

WRATHWILDE · Oct 15, 2007

Just thought I'd let all my friends here on GotMead know that I just got published on OpEd News, a piece about the importance of the Constitution.

CLICK HERE FOR ARTICLE

Please Digg or Reddit if you find it informative,

Cheers Everyone,
Wrathwilde

ucflumberjack · Oct 15, 2007

you were the one that posted about ron paul a while back right?

i thought you might find it funny that i just regestered as a hold on....its hard for me to say this...... ok... here we go...... republican. there i said it, but it hurt. neways i did it in order to vote for ron paul in the primaries(if here even on the ballot here)

ucflumberjack · Oct 15, 2007

i like your article. i need to get a hard copy of the constitution and read through it myself though to get a better perspective on thinkgs in our country these days......

liff · Oct 16, 2007

Congrats on being published. :icon_thumleft: Very nice writing.

WRATHWILDE · Oct 16, 2007

ucflumberjack said:
you were the one that posted about Ron Paul a while back right?

Yep, that was me, I had to reregister as well. The more I read about the Constitution the more I realize just how much effort the Founding fathers put in to trying to protect us from from Government Control. States Rights to keep Federal Government in check, The Federal Government to protect us from States encroaching on our Liberty and Freedoms, and the three Branches to hold each other in check at the top... with the continued destruction of States Rights by the Supreme Court we have lost that balance of power. We need to restore it, does it mean that some States might become more restrictive? Probably. But it will also free up some States to expand your rights and liberties as well.

Cheers,
Wrathwilde

ucflumberjack · Oct 16, 2007

i printed a hard copy of it yesterday and im gonna start reading a little at a time. maybe ill get a book about it from the library, any suggested titles?

WRATHWILDE · Oct 16, 2007

Most of my research was done by looking at different rulings of the Supreme Court, reading the Opinion of the Court, the dissenting opinion, and the Constitution itself.

Here is a series of videos, a class on the Constitution for patriots. They're on Google video, about 8 hours worth, I ran across them a couple of days ago, but haven't had a chance to watch them yet.

Cheers,
Wrathwilde

wildaho · Oct 17, 2007

I just watched a show on PBS tonight about Cheney's agenda since the days of Nixon and his thrust for ultimate Presidential power, especially behind the scenes.

Scary.

Who needs a constitution? It just gets in the way of the true power players...

wayneb · Oct 17, 2007

What both offends me and worries me about all this is that the major power players hijacking our rights and freedoms are all members of -- the Republican Party! You know, those guys who are almost all public supporters of a smaller government, a more accountable government, etc. I'm disgusted by all the covert c#@! going on behind the scenes in this administration.

At least you know where you stand with the Democrats -- they plan to take all your money to redistribute it to the "less fortunate," but at least they're all up front about it!

Angus · Oct 17, 2007

I think one of the biggest problems is the short memories of the American masses. No matter who is in power, that administration tries to bend the constitution to conform with their beliefs. Thus the huge struggle to get a Judge on the Supreme Court when one leaves. Of course the Republicans are trying to take more control of the government, just as the Democrats did when they were in the White House.

Don't forget though that the Republicans had control of both the House of Reprasentatives and the Senate for pretty much the whole of the 90's and zips, and what did they actually accomplish? Nothing!
Don't forget that the Democrats have had power in both houses for the past year, and what have they done? Nada!

The fact is that the Constitution stands as written, or as ammended. The Supreme Court was created to resolve any conflicts between State and Federal laws. Since then, politics has almost given them the power to create laws by interpretation of the Constitution. The group that really holds this power is the Legislative branch of the government (House of Reprasentatives and the Senate). And which party currently has the majority there? The Democrats. So, even if the current Executive administration wants to get more power (as they all do), the ones who have the power to make the laws is the opposing party. Check and Balance.

Angus

ucflumberjack · Oct 17, 2007

somehow i think that the democrats wont want to be in Iraq anymore(maybe im wrong)... if they had the power we wouldnt be.... i think that makes it pretty obvious that the democrats dont have the power.

wayneb · Oct 17, 2007

Angus, you are exactly correct. Any party, person, or group in elected office will try to garner as much "power" as possible. It is inherent in human nature, and it is why all the other attempts at responsive, representative government have failed throughout human history. The failures come when someone or some group is successful at a power grab, and then the rest of the populace is left out in the process. The resilience of our tri-part government structure means getting any significant changes to happen is a long and arduous process -- and it takes a true multi-party majority, not just a political majority, to make fundamental changes happen here. That's why neither the dems nor the reps have made substantive changes in the past several congressional cycles. We should count ourselves lucky that the system doesn't allow any single party to do much more than 'tweak' the direction the country is taking.

In general, the check and balance structure of the federal government has worked well for us. Sometimes the pendulum skews pretty far past the center point, but it still tends to orbit around a nominal equilibrium. My worry is that any covert end-runs, any shadow decision and power structure set up to get around the "inconveniences" put in place by our check and balance system -- NO MATTER HOW NOBLE THE EXPRESSED REASONS WHY -- threaten to usurp authority from the constituents of that check and balance system. If they are successful, that will be the end of our freedoms and our security as a nation.

Angus · Oct 17, 2007

Well put Wayne. Very well put.

ucflumberjack said:
somehow i think that the democrats wont want to be in Iraq anymore(maybe im wrong)... if they had the power we wouldnt be.... i think that makes it pretty obvious that the democrats dont have the power.

We also need to define the "power" that is being discussed here. Power over the military does indeed lie in the hands of the President. What Wrath's article was more focused on is the Constitution and the need to select a candidate who will not attempt to twist its meaning for his or her own political affiliations. The power to change it lies in the hands of Congress, the power to interpret it lies in the hands of the Supreme Court.

Angus

(As for Iraq, the funding of the war is controlled by Congress. Should they wish to bring everything over there to a complete halt, all they have to do is turn off the cash flow. Fortunately, they realize that since we are already over there (right or wrong, save this debate for a different post. I had grave reservasions about going in and I wish we could get out now), we need to exit the country carefully and in stages. Thus, they continue to fund the war. This is a form of power.)

Pewter_of_Deodar · Oct 17, 2007

Nice article with some interesting points...

I do see court rulings and federal laws as one of the greatest threats to our collective freedoms...

The scariest one these days is the loss of my right of free speech or even just my right to have an opinion contrary to what is politically correct by making my discussing those beliefs, whatever they might be, to qualify as "hate speech" or "hate crimes" that are punishable by fines and jail time.

I also see social engineering by wealth redistribution through taxation as a gross violation of the Constitution.

I've watched one party consistently destroy the economy and the other party rebuild it through deficit spending only to have the original party resume control and destroy it again.

I will agree to disagree on the use of our military in areas such as Iraq as I see a failure to do so resulting in things like 9/11 except the next 9/11 will be a mushroom cloud over Seattle or Chicago or some other large US city. So I believe we need to be proactive in our defense.

The same applies to covert actions directed at protecting us from acts of terrorism. I believe the second greatest threat to our freedom and country is our media. We should be shooting members of the media as traitors when they reveal the methods by which we prevented the latest terrorist attack.

But in general, I am not sure discussions about religion or politics belong on Gotmead. There are lots of other websites out there for those sorts of debates. But it's up to Vicki...

Peace,
Pewter

akueck · Oct 17, 2007

Nice article Wrath. The thing that got me thinking most was the fact that the hot-button issues really shouldn't be. The president has no means to legislate arbotion, e.g., so why the !@#$ do we care if the candidate is pro-life/choice? The killer is that there are people, and a lot of them, who can agree with a candidate 99%, but not vote for them on the basis of their views on a fetus. This is totally retarded! This is how we elect a president with a 35% approval rating....twice!

So, how do we get the country to realize that everything we're being spoonfed on TV is crap and a non-issue?

Also I'd like to agree that No Child Left Behind is crap. My wife is a teacher now so she's got the inside scoop, and it's basically that this (law? policy? whatever...) just created more red tape and more people to "watch out for the kids" but made no new funding to actually teach them. So of course tons of schools are not meeting the standards because the money is going to 1) creating standards, 2) evaluating schools, and 3) taking money away when the standards aren't met. Where is the part where the schools get help to reach their goals? O right, they're on their own and to make it worse the funding drops when they fail. Good luck improving on less budget. Shall we try that tactic in Iraq perhaps? That would go over well....

So the solution to the education problem, which might fix the "this country elects people for stupid reasons" problem on the way, is to just pay teachers more. Make it a competitive career option for people who are well-educated and have other prospects. Not many people are going to go through 4 years of school, then decide to opt for the 35k/year teaching job instead of earning twice that as an engineer/scientist/whatever. (Not to say that teachers aren't well-educated, and a 4-yr degree is required, at least in CA. But many who can get a higher-paying job right out of school are probably going to go do that, without much thought to teaching. I'm just saying make it part of the equation and the quality of teachers will go up.)

Pewter_of_Deodar · Oct 17, 2007

AKueck said:
The president has no means to legislate arbotion, e.g., so why the !@#$ do we care if the candidate is pro-life/choice?

The President has huge influence in two ways. The power of veto and the nomination of judges. Both shape the laws in signficant ways. So if someone is gay, they will want a President that vetoes anti-gay legislation and appoints judges that will rule for gay rights.

AKueck said:
So the solution to the education problem, which might fix the "this country elects people for stupid reasons" problem on the way, is to just pay teachers more. Make it a competitive career option for people who are well-educated and have other prospects. Not many people are going to go through 4 years of school, then decide to opt for the 35k/year teaching job instead of earning twice that as an engineer/scientist/whatever.

My Mom retired after 30 years of teaching in public schools in Indianapolis so I've seen most of the ills that hurt the public schools. I know that bureaucracy is an extreme problem as is funding. But I also know that the NEA (the teacher's union) is also one of the greatest impediments to improvement in the public schools. So is lack of participation by parents... lack of discipline... retaining troublemakers in the classroom... integration of special needs children into normal classes... lots of things besides financing...

akueck · Oct 17, 2007

Pewter_of_Deodar said:
The President has huge influence in two ways. The power of veto and the nomination of judges. Both shape the laws in signficant ways. So if someone is gay, they will want a President that vetoes anti-gay legislation and appoints judges that will rule for gay rights.

Well, this is true in a de facto sort of way. But as WW pointed out, there is no constitutional basis for anti-gay legislation in the first place; so if this country were run the way it was laid out to, there'd be no means for the president to legislate this sort of thing. Same goes for the courts. Constitution says we can be gay if we want to, so if they're doing their jobs correctly it won't matter who appointed the judges.

Pewter_of_Deodar said:
My Mom retired after 30 years of teaching in public schools in Indianapolis so I've seen most of the ills that hurt the public schools. I know that bureaucracy is an extreme problem as is funding. But I also know that the NEA (the teacher's union) is also one of the greatest impediments to improvement in the public schools. So is lack of participation by parents... lack of discipline... retaining troublemakers in the classroom... integration of special needs children into normal classes... lots of things besides financing...

Agreed.

My wife has all those problems too. But more money for teachers can also hire more teachers. Smaller classes eases discipline problems, and man we should allow ruler-meets-knuckles. Some kids really do just need a good thwap! to the head. If the parents won't gets their kids in line, why won't we allow teachers to do it?

ucflumberjack · Oct 17, 2007

lol if i knew that my football coach(also pyhsics teacher) or wrestling coach(also history teacher) was allowed to smacl me aroun in class.. well i would payed alot more attentin in class... but the problem with ruling by force is that at some point you cant generate enough force. "ouch my knuckles, dick, im gonna go get my bat/knife/gun/bomb so i dont have to listen to you anymore"

WRATHWILDE · Oct 30, 2007

I just went to the Reagan Dinner this last weekend in Des Moines, a fund raiser for the Iowa GOP. Several Candidates were there to speak, receptions afterward. The Most Unexpected events of the Evening... I'll start with the second most interesting - All the Candidates had Booths and Literature, McCain's Campaign is so underfunded... something like $60,000 in the Hole, that the Signs advertising McCain's presence there were hand made (Very Poorly) - think typical middle school hand painted banners (that's got to hurt). The most unexpected, and pleasant for us Ron Paul Supporters, is that the College Kid who was manning Mitt Romney's Booth let it be known, secretly, that although he is working an internship for Mitt Romney he will be voting for Ron Paul.

ottytrain2: take that Mitt. :laughing7:

:cheers:
Wrathwilde

wayneb · Oct 30, 2007

Just FYI - I've seen two different cars driving around the Denver area with painted signs on their back windows (a la the kind of thing that you usually see from high school students and fans, but these were done more professionally looking) that say "Google Ron Paul." People are getting the word out every way possible!

Wrathwilde just got Published

Lifetime Patron

NewBee

NewBee

NewBee

Lifetime Patron

NewBee

Lifetime Patron

Got Mead? Patron

Lifetime Patron

Lifetime Patron

NewBee

Lifetime Patron

Lifetime Patron

NewBee

Certified Mead Mentor

NewBee

Certified Mead Mentor

NewBee

Lifetime Patron

Lifetime Patron