Many of today's students and young adults seem to either have never been taught American history or American Government, or have totally forgotten it. And I won't spend time here pointing out the woeful performance of all when it comes to answering simple questions about today's elected, and/or appointed office holders and members of the Supreme Court.
What is totally puzzling is the apparent lack of understanding about the purpose of the Electoral College, the way it works, and the rights it guards.
Who wants to do away with the Electoral College?
Predominantly, it is Democrats, Socialists, Marxists, and those they have successfully indoctrinated.
Why?
Because if only the highly populated states need to be courted for votes, those who live in rural areas will no longer count...will no longer be of value to office seekers and their interests will be ignored in favor of satisfying "the mob."
What is their objection to the Electoral College? It essentially takes away any value from the size of a numerical victory. Once you win your state, the Electoral College awards you that state's Electoral College votes. Whether a candidate wins a state by one (1) vote or ten million (10,000,000) votes is immaterial...he or she merely gets that State's Electoral College votes. The extra 9,999,999 don't matter.
Why is this of value to the Republic and its citizens as a whole? It requires a successful candidate to campaign and attempt to prove his or her value to EVERY STATE's voters; It protects the value of ALL States, not just States that have the largest populations. For a candidate to be elected, his or her value to Wyoming, Idaho, and Rhode Island is just as important as the value to New York, California, Texas, and Florida (among others).
If the Electoral College did NOT exist, those citizens of the United States who lived in the less populated states would not only NEVER see or hear from a Presidential Candidate, their ideas and needs would NEVER be considered by any elected official.
That is what motivated the framers of our Constitution. The less populated colonies demanded protection from being "steamrollered" by the more populated "States" if they were going to be a respected part of the United States of America.
Our President should HAVE TO prove to ALL the voters that he has their interests at heart, not just the people in the most populous States. Right now, middle America counts too. The political party that is most populous on the coasts doesn't want that to be so.
The Electoral College puts a damper on "mob rule." Shear numbers don't, and shouldn't, over-ride the agreement that make the United States of America possible in the first place. If the Electoral College hadn't been created, neither would our Republic. And if the Electoral College were to be eliminated by a Constitutional Amendment, this current Republic would also cease to exist as a bastion of individual rights.
Showing posts with label Constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Constitution. Show all posts
Thursday, March 5, 2020
Saturday, December 17, 2016
A Government may be legal...and still be illegitimate
The United States has just gone through an intense election and the European Union is seeing its member nations involved in an almost universal crisis of confidence in membership in that union.
Most of us have been angry, disturbed or perhaps just uncomfortable with actions that have been judged by our respective national justice systems to be legal even as we "knew" that they were wrong. Sometimes this has been because of badly worded laws, sometimes because of very good defenses coupled with inadequate or inept prosecutions (or the reverse), and sometimes because it seemed as everyone was so very worried about the individual tree as the forest was left to burn or wither.
In America Free Speech, originally defined to mean that there could, with rare exceptions, not be prevention of the right to say something, has become defined as meaning that whatever and however something is said, there shall be no consequences for it. That is just a perversion of the original intent. No longer is it necessary to be certain that your speech is a truthful statement lest you be brought into court for libeling someone...say whatever you want. This may be legal...but any sane person would suggest that such action should be judged as illegitimate.
The legal system in America has become a tool to enable people to avoid consequences for doing and saying illegitimate things. Just one example is the treatment of those entering and remaining in our country illegally. Our Constitution is a contract between its government and its citizens; it basically establishes that the government will protect its citizens and the country's borders and the citizens will obey the laws that govern the land. How on earth does any person or group who has NOT obeyed the laws of the United States get the right to claim that the government provide them the protections promised to its citizens? Those here illegally come to the table as non-parties to the contract and, moreover, they come with unclean hands, having already broken the laws that a citizen, as part of the contract, agrees to obey and abide by.
In France, the people voted NOT to join the European Union...but somehow (who know by what technical legal maneuvers) they are a member. The fact that France's politicians have done something that they argue was legal, does not make it legitimate. All over the world, the increased ability to communicate without prior constraint by governments is revealing to the people that their governments are run for the self-defined elites of each country, that the citizens are being made to support the lives of elites who care not one wit for the citizenry.
Strange that the elites seem unable to understand why the people are upset, angry and growing closer and closer to violence each day. How quickly the elites around the world forget the lessons of the Russian and French revolutions, among many others. When the government(s) show contempt for the law or use it for their own privileged purposes, why should they not understand that the citizens will see that they need to act in their own interests regardless of the laws, in the same way that the politicians have done to mistreat the citizens, to regain control of their own lives.
Those in power can only avoid "consequences" for so long before they must account. And the longer they delay that accounting, the more extreme the consequences.
Most of us have been angry, disturbed or perhaps just uncomfortable with actions that have been judged by our respective national justice systems to be legal even as we "knew" that they were wrong. Sometimes this has been because of badly worded laws, sometimes because of very good defenses coupled with inadequate or inept prosecutions (or the reverse), and sometimes because it seemed as everyone was so very worried about the individual tree as the forest was left to burn or wither.
In America Free Speech, originally defined to mean that there could, with rare exceptions, not be prevention of the right to say something, has become defined as meaning that whatever and however something is said, there shall be no consequences for it. That is just a perversion of the original intent. No longer is it necessary to be certain that your speech is a truthful statement lest you be brought into court for libeling someone...say whatever you want. This may be legal...but any sane person would suggest that such action should be judged as illegitimate.
The legal system in America has become a tool to enable people to avoid consequences for doing and saying illegitimate things. Just one example is the treatment of those entering and remaining in our country illegally. Our Constitution is a contract between its government and its citizens; it basically establishes that the government will protect its citizens and the country's borders and the citizens will obey the laws that govern the land. How on earth does any person or group who has NOT obeyed the laws of the United States get the right to claim that the government provide them the protections promised to its citizens? Those here illegally come to the table as non-parties to the contract and, moreover, they come with unclean hands, having already broken the laws that a citizen, as part of the contract, agrees to obey and abide by.
In France, the people voted NOT to join the European Union...but somehow (who know by what technical legal maneuvers) they are a member. The fact that France's politicians have done something that they argue was legal, does not make it legitimate. All over the world, the increased ability to communicate without prior constraint by governments is revealing to the people that their governments are run for the self-defined elites of each country, that the citizens are being made to support the lives of elites who care not one wit for the citizenry.
Strange that the elites seem unable to understand why the people are upset, angry and growing closer and closer to violence each day. How quickly the elites around the world forget the lessons of the Russian and French revolutions, among many others. When the government(s) show contempt for the law or use it for their own privileged purposes, why should they not understand that the citizens will see that they need to act in their own interests regardless of the laws, in the same way that the politicians have done to mistreat the citizens, to regain control of their own lives.
Those in power can only avoid "consequences" for so long before they must account. And the longer they delay that accounting, the more extreme the consequences.
Monday, February 15, 2016
Is Government becoming our "God" substitute?
Even a cursory scan of History reveals a significant involvement presence of "God" in governing. And the records show that it wasn't a particularly "hard" sell; a vast majority of human beings all over the planet have an instinct to look to a "higher power", while any and all of those who wished to govern found it both effective and useful to claim direction from an unassailable higher being that could be challenged at the human level. Even today, we see religion playing a huge role around the world in establishing a "right to rule."
Countries and Rulers who attempted to eliminate any reliance on authority from a higher power have been seen to have a limited shelf life. The exist as long as military force supports the head of State, but collapses when that support disappears, usually accompanied by a lot of ill will.
A common view is that this is because of two elements: 1) as mentioned above, it is nice for a ruler to be able to play "good cop" to God as the "bad cop" when ruling...it allows the human to take credit and kudos for the good things, and blame the bad things on an unassailable and unreachable entity with unlimited power and authority; and 2) many people truly believe in an "Almighty God" and do not need significant convincing to accept the concept.
The Founding Fathers clearly saw that any successful governing entity required the granting of authority of a Higher Power, stipulating that the right to govern was given man by God, and was inalienable. They depended on the concept that by placing governing power in the hands of many, there would be less chance of any one individual claiming, acquiring and exercising his or her personal views by representing them as God's will. All of those who were influential recognized the challenge. Some were expecting success...probably the majority. Others, like Jefferson, thought that the attempt had promise but a limited life span; as he said, "ultimately government becomes the enemy of individual freedom." And they all recognized that the time could very well come when the government they founded would cease to be responsive to God and the People, thus requiring still another revolution.
When there is a general acceptance that governance is ultimately responsible to "God" there is a tendency to grumble when personal lives don't go very well...but most of the time (with exceptions, like the French Revolution) that is where it stops. For more to occur, the "stand-ins" for God have to be supremely stupid...and that does occur. When there is no concept of authority from God, it is much easier for those who object to governmental decisions to brand them as unacceptable and to claim just as much right to rule as does the person in charge. Thus...governmental chaos can occur, followed by a period of optimism to be followed once again by chaos...and so forth.
America has evolved into a state of confusion in this regard. We still have "In God we Trust" on our money. A majority, as slim as it might be today, still sees us as a Judaeo-Christian country that looks to the moral elements of the ten commandments as imperatives. At the same time, our Supreme Court has seen the Constitution's ban on "establishing" an official religion, a ban designed to allow each person the right to worship God in his or her own way, as a direction to remove God from public places.
Similarly, the public and the courts have eroded the once automatic alignment of law and morals as delineated in the Ten Commandments, making legal all manner of activities that were once seen as unacceptable. Increased right to litigation has led to a remarkable lowering of standards considered previously as required civil behavior, the elimination of which once would have effectively brought about the shunning of the miscreant by all in a community. Now they appear to be on the verge of being the majority. Our leaders seem to delight in talking about God but ignoring God when governing.
Government, and human beings, make poor governors; both best succeed when they see themselves as tools, rather than the ultimate authority. At the very least, an elected leader needs to always remember that he serves all of the people...NOT as a God or an authority, but as a representative and servant. Politicians in our Republic have been quick to announce that they are elected because of their judgement and knowledge and ability to deal with many factors; they point to their background and relevant experiences as why they will decide for the people what the best decisions should be. I find this presumptuous and repugnant; I fail to understand why so many citizens just accept this balderdash as authoritative.
But no longer do our leaders look to the people for guidance as to what the people want. And they eliminate any concept of praying for guidance from any higher power either. They have determined to be an authority of and for themselves. The attempt to create a government for the people, by the people and of the people (with a presumption that all were accountable to "God") has become a government for the government and the office holders, by the government and the office holders, and of the government and its office holders.
It is hard to see how this will ever turn out well for what once was the United States of America.
Countries and Rulers who attempted to eliminate any reliance on authority from a higher power have been seen to have a limited shelf life. The exist as long as military force supports the head of State, but collapses when that support disappears, usually accompanied by a lot of ill will.
A common view is that this is because of two elements: 1) as mentioned above, it is nice for a ruler to be able to play "good cop" to God as the "bad cop" when ruling...it allows the human to take credit and kudos for the good things, and blame the bad things on an unassailable and unreachable entity with unlimited power and authority; and 2) many people truly believe in an "Almighty God" and do not need significant convincing to accept the concept.
The Founding Fathers clearly saw that any successful governing entity required the granting of authority of a Higher Power, stipulating that the right to govern was given man by God, and was inalienable. They depended on the concept that by placing governing power in the hands of many, there would be less chance of any one individual claiming, acquiring and exercising his or her personal views by representing them as God's will. All of those who were influential recognized the challenge. Some were expecting success...probably the majority. Others, like Jefferson, thought that the attempt had promise but a limited life span; as he said, "ultimately government becomes the enemy of individual freedom." And they all recognized that the time could very well come when the government they founded would cease to be responsive to God and the People, thus requiring still another revolution.
When there is a general acceptance that governance is ultimately responsible to "God" there is a tendency to grumble when personal lives don't go very well...but most of the time (with exceptions, like the French Revolution) that is where it stops. For more to occur, the "stand-ins" for God have to be supremely stupid...and that does occur. When there is no concept of authority from God, it is much easier for those who object to governmental decisions to brand them as unacceptable and to claim just as much right to rule as does the person in charge. Thus...governmental chaos can occur, followed by a period of optimism to be followed once again by chaos...and so forth.
America has evolved into a state of confusion in this regard. We still have "In God we Trust" on our money. A majority, as slim as it might be today, still sees us as a Judaeo-Christian country that looks to the moral elements of the ten commandments as imperatives. At the same time, our Supreme Court has seen the Constitution's ban on "establishing" an official religion, a ban designed to allow each person the right to worship God in his or her own way, as a direction to remove God from public places.
Similarly, the public and the courts have eroded the once automatic alignment of law and morals as delineated in the Ten Commandments, making legal all manner of activities that were once seen as unacceptable. Increased right to litigation has led to a remarkable lowering of standards considered previously as required civil behavior, the elimination of which once would have effectively brought about the shunning of the miscreant by all in a community. Now they appear to be on the verge of being the majority. Our leaders seem to delight in talking about God but ignoring God when governing.
Government, and human beings, make poor governors; both best succeed when they see themselves as tools, rather than the ultimate authority. At the very least, an elected leader needs to always remember that he serves all of the people...NOT as a God or an authority, but as a representative and servant. Politicians in our Republic have been quick to announce that they are elected because of their judgement and knowledge and ability to deal with many factors; they point to their background and relevant experiences as why they will decide for the people what the best decisions should be. I find this presumptuous and repugnant; I fail to understand why so many citizens just accept this balderdash as authoritative.
But no longer do our leaders look to the people for guidance as to what the people want. And they eliminate any concept of praying for guidance from any higher power either. They have determined to be an authority of and for themselves. The attempt to create a government for the people, by the people and of the people (with a presumption that all were accountable to "God") has become a government for the government and the office holders, by the government and the office holders, and of the government and its office holders.
It is hard to see how this will ever turn out well for what once was the United States of America.
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Has America stopped respecting and being governed by the Constitution?
My generation revered the Constitution. Beginning in grade school...and right through High School...all kinds of History classes were linked and compared to the Constitution, comparing and contrasting it's content against other governments in other times. The Founding Fathers were also shown great respect for the thought and considerations they embodied in the Constitution, and than the Bill of Rights...and even the declarations and wording of the Declaration of Independence.
Not so anymore.
My grandchildren to to highly ranked schools, several now in Middle school, one in High School, one in College. They had almost zero teaching centering on the Constitution. Any time spent on the Founding Fathers seemed designed to find fault and to "bring them down" to a level that was disrespectful of their person's and, by extension, their work product. Their teaching seems designed, through criticism as well as neglect, to create disrespect for the "idea" of America.
Today technology seems to rule. Technology is a wonderful tool, although I often think that the young people of today have become too dependent on it; they don't know multiplication tables in their head, they often can't do simple math and need a calculator, a slide rule is an unworkable puzzle to them, and except for the math "nerds" Algebra and the solving of simultaneous equations might as well be Greek (and don't get me started on languages and vocabulary). They can't write legibly...even printing is questionable, and they can't "problem solve" without "Google" or "Bing" and they are lost if the internet goes down for even a moment. They "text" to each other even if in the same room, and walk down streets and malls blind to the actual world around them. Most don't know their elected officials on any level, have no idea of how any government actually works, can't create a budget, read anything that takes more than 3 minutes, and can't be bothered to be civil to anyone. Discuss the assumptions that the founding fathers had when they started to consider and create and write, and you get puzzled, confounded faces.
The concepts of "opportunity", "consequences", Pursuit", "earning", "civility", "responsibility", and "respect for others"...among others...is foreign to them. They are familiar with the concepts of "being owed", "privileges", "my rights", "someone else's fault", and other narcissistic traits. Their schooling (not sure if that term is appropriate any longer...perhaps indoctrination would be more truthful) and their experiences as they went through their school years have indicated that this is the way to look at life.
"Someone" has done these folks a disservice. And that "someone" is us...all of us. Oh, I could write for hours on the Progressive infiltration and present control of the entirety of our educational (Yeah...right!) systems, from Kindergarten (note the Germanic origin of the word...our school system is based on the Prussian Model that was intended as much for indoctrination and regimentation as it was for any real education. Basic reading, writing and math was fine, but independent problem solving and thinking was not desired) through Doctorate Level Degrees and the application of Alinsky's Rules to turn out intellectually inadequate "graduates." I could point out how many of the High School Graduates today cannot write a cogent sentence, cannot spell, cannot do simple math without a machine, and are unable to concentrate for more than 3 minutes on anything before wanted and...in some cases...needing to consult "Facebook" or the like.
But what is most disappointing is that it is our collective fault. The not-so-slow disintegration of our society has not been done in secret. It has happened out in the open and ... although couched in ways and terms that seemed legal, civil, and considerate at the time ... we all knew that we were allowing a diminution of our ideals and allowing avoidance of the concepts of "right" and "wrong." Oh, we had excuses. We had "reasons". The end results was that we gave up the concept of standards and the expectation of "striving" in favor of the lowest common denominator; of not wanting anyone to "feel bad" about not being first. And we gave up on the standards assumed in the Constitution to be a constant...that of "earning" one's way, of suffering consequences of bad decisions, of recognizing that there is such a thing as failure...and that one can actually learn from it and use failure as a sign-post to success. This is the kind of thing that a study of the Greek Empire and the Roman Empire would have revealed to our children and grandchildren. Such an understanding is essential to being a good citizen, whether having a College Education or not...but it no longer is taught in our Grade, Middle, and High Schools. Oh, an occasional perceptive teacher who is dedicated to his or her students' well-being and success in life may include some portion in the course of a semester or year...but not many do, some because they themselves are not aware of its importance.
Is it too late to save the "idea" of America? I want to believe that it is not, but...when close to 50% of us are living on the Government's tab rather than on what we have achieved and earned on our own, and that Government tab is creating what is approaching Nineteen Trillion ($19,000,000,000)Dollars in debt, it is hard to see any way to repay it without telling a lot of people, many of which will be determined voters if you take away their "free" stuff, "NO!" Madison and Jefferson warned about the dangers once any democratic form of government served a populace who discovered they could vote themselves money that they didn't earn. I fear that we are now there...
Not so anymore.
My grandchildren to to highly ranked schools, several now in Middle school, one in High School, one in College. They had almost zero teaching centering on the Constitution. Any time spent on the Founding Fathers seemed designed to find fault and to "bring them down" to a level that was disrespectful of their person's and, by extension, their work product. Their teaching seems designed, through criticism as well as neglect, to create disrespect for the "idea" of America.
Today technology seems to rule. Technology is a wonderful tool, although I often think that the young people of today have become too dependent on it; they don't know multiplication tables in their head, they often can't do simple math and need a calculator, a slide rule is an unworkable puzzle to them, and except for the math "nerds" Algebra and the solving of simultaneous equations might as well be Greek (and don't get me started on languages and vocabulary). They can't write legibly...even printing is questionable, and they can't "problem solve" without "Google" or "Bing" and they are lost if the internet goes down for even a moment. They "text" to each other even if in the same room, and walk down streets and malls blind to the actual world around them. Most don't know their elected officials on any level, have no idea of how any government actually works, can't create a budget, read anything that takes more than 3 minutes, and can't be bothered to be civil to anyone. Discuss the assumptions that the founding fathers had when they started to consider and create and write, and you get puzzled, confounded faces.
The concepts of "opportunity", "consequences", Pursuit", "earning", "civility", "responsibility", and "respect for others"...among others...is foreign to them. They are familiar with the concepts of "being owed", "privileges", "my rights", "someone else's fault", and other narcissistic traits. Their schooling (not sure if that term is appropriate any longer...perhaps indoctrination would be more truthful) and their experiences as they went through their school years have indicated that this is the way to look at life.
"Someone" has done these folks a disservice. And that "someone" is us...all of us. Oh, I could write for hours on the Progressive infiltration and present control of the entirety of our educational (Yeah...right!) systems, from Kindergarten (note the Germanic origin of the word...our school system is based on the Prussian Model that was intended as much for indoctrination and regimentation as it was for any real education. Basic reading, writing and math was fine, but independent problem solving and thinking was not desired) through Doctorate Level Degrees and the application of Alinsky's Rules to turn out intellectually inadequate "graduates." I could point out how many of the High School Graduates today cannot write a cogent sentence, cannot spell, cannot do simple math without a machine, and are unable to concentrate for more than 3 minutes on anything before wanted and...in some cases...needing to consult "Facebook" or the like.
But what is most disappointing is that it is our collective fault. The not-so-slow disintegration of our society has not been done in secret. It has happened out in the open and ... although couched in ways and terms that seemed legal, civil, and considerate at the time ... we all knew that we were allowing a diminution of our ideals and allowing avoidance of the concepts of "right" and "wrong." Oh, we had excuses. We had "reasons". The end results was that we gave up the concept of standards and the expectation of "striving" in favor of the lowest common denominator; of not wanting anyone to "feel bad" about not being first. And we gave up on the standards assumed in the Constitution to be a constant...that of "earning" one's way, of suffering consequences of bad decisions, of recognizing that there is such a thing as failure...and that one can actually learn from it and use failure as a sign-post to success. This is the kind of thing that a study of the Greek Empire and the Roman Empire would have revealed to our children and grandchildren. Such an understanding is essential to being a good citizen, whether having a College Education or not...but it no longer is taught in our Grade, Middle, and High Schools. Oh, an occasional perceptive teacher who is dedicated to his or her students' well-being and success in life may include some portion in the course of a semester or year...but not many do, some because they themselves are not aware of its importance.
Is it too late to save the "idea" of America? I want to believe that it is not, but...when close to 50% of us are living on the Government's tab rather than on what we have achieved and earned on our own, and that Government tab is creating what is approaching Nineteen Trillion ($19,000,000,000)Dollars in debt, it is hard to see any way to repay it without telling a lot of people, many of which will be determined voters if you take away their "free" stuff, "NO!" Madison and Jefferson warned about the dangers once any democratic form of government served a populace who discovered they could vote themselves money that they didn't earn. I fear that we are now there...
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Why protecting our borders IS important
Why is it important? Bear with me, and consider the following:
People are wrong when they say that the current problem amounts to Hispanic bashing. The anger is not at Mexicans or any other Hispanic group because they are Hispanic, it is because they are Illegal.
My father was an immigrant. My mother's parents were immigrants. They waited for years to be granted the opportunity to come here. They had to prove that a job awaited them. They had to have a sponsor who guaranteed that they would have a place to live and who also guaranteed that they would support them for one year if they lost the job that was promised.
In other words, they found out the rules, obeyed and lived by the rules, and were rewarded by the legal right to come to America. They felt honored by the opportunity, and they proved their own honor.
How does that have any connection with illegal entry to the United States? Does Mexico care what the nationality is, of ethnic background, of those who attempt to enter Mexico illegally? If you do not know, the answer is, "No, they do not care and treat all the same...harshly.
Our government has forgotten or decided to abdicate its main responsibility...protecting its citizens. If illegals were coming over the border wearing uniforms and carrying guns, would you expect the government to send in troops or do whatever was necessary to protect our borders? I suspect that you would say yes, but if not then you certainly do not value the existence of the United States. So, what is the difference. We are still being invaded. And, while shooting invaders who do not carry guns may not be appropriate, stopping them is still very appropriate, and rewarding them for invading is absolute insanity.
Not stopping them is virtually inviting the overthrow of the government. This administration, and the one before that, is doing exactly that and, in my mind, is the very epitome of seditious behavior.
But...there is another major reason why we should protect and close our borders. We are telling the children of this country, as well as the American public generally, that our laws don't mean anything. Really. They are discretionary and can be ignored if they are inconvenient. No, you say? Prove it. Ask anyone you come across whether a law has to be obeyed if you do not like it. I will bet that the answer that you get the most time is “it depends.” Our government passes laws that they don't read, hold protecting our borders hostage to getting illegals in this country on a citizen track so they can vote the “right” way, allow one race to picket a voting place while preventing others from even questioning the citizenship of voters and allowing felons to vote. And we wonder why our youth has no moral standards? How can they...we don't have them ourselves.
My father was an immigrant. My mother's parents were immigrants. They waited for years to be granted the opportunity to come here. They had to prove that a job awaited them. They had to have a sponsor who guaranteed that they would have a place to live and who also guaranteed that they would support them for one year if they lost the job that was promised.
In other words, they found out the rules, obeyed and lived by the rules, and were rewarded by the legal right to come to America. They felt honored by the opportunity, and they proved their own honor.
How does that have any connection with illegal entry to the United States? Does Mexico care what the nationality is, of ethnic background, of those who attempt to enter Mexico illegally? If you do not know, the answer is, "No, they do not care and treat all the same...harshly.
Our government has forgotten or decided to abdicate its main responsibility...protecting its citizens. If illegals were coming over the border wearing uniforms and carrying guns, would you expect the government to send in troops or do whatever was necessary to protect our borders? I suspect that you would say yes, but if not then you certainly do not value the existence of the United States. So, what is the difference. We are still being invaded. And, while shooting invaders who do not carry guns may not be appropriate, stopping them is still very appropriate, and rewarding them for invading is absolute insanity.
Not stopping them is virtually inviting the overthrow of the government. This administration, and the one before that, is doing exactly that and, in my mind, is the very epitome of seditious behavior.
But...there is another major reason why we should protect and close our borders. We are telling the children of this country, as well as the American public generally, that our laws don't mean anything. Really. They are discretionary and can be ignored if they are inconvenient. No, you say? Prove it. Ask anyone you come across whether a law has to be obeyed if you do not like it. I will bet that the answer that you get the most time is “it depends.” Our government passes laws that they don't read, hold protecting our borders hostage to getting illegals in this country on a citizen track so they can vote the “right” way, allow one race to picket a voting place while preventing others from even questioning the citizenship of voters and allowing felons to vote. And we wonder why our youth has no moral standards? How can they...we don't have them ourselves.
In the 60's, when protests meant something, civil disobedience meant that you were going to be arrested and that you were going to be in jail. You had decided that going to jail for breaking a law that you believed should be changed was a price...a consequence...that you were willing to meet in order to make a point. There was no expectation of being let out or not serving the punishment...you had broken the law, and you expected to pay the price. After all, if the law meant nothing, why change it? We respected the law and wanted laws to be changed so that they were Just in addition to being the law...we believed in law.
Today? No one expects to be arrested after breaking laws in protest. Even the courts act disrespectful to the law...they do not enforce them. The Government clearly does not respect the law or the Constitution...if does not honor the commitments the law or the Constitution puts on it. You disagree? How about the obligation to protect our borders? How is that going? When instead of protecting the borders, the government puts up signs warning citizens that travel in an area of the United States of America is prohibited because of illegal activities that come in over the non-protected border, that raises a question of how my government is acting in accordance with the constitution...at least in my mind.
Why doesn't someone write about that? Why don't we as citizens impeach our "representatives" (that is a joke) for non- and malfeasance? Why don't we explain that when Reagan gave amnesty, the deal was that the government was going to close and control the border and it hasn't been done...the government lied. And we are not going to accept promises again...Close and Protect the border, prosecute employers who hire those in the country illegally, stop spending public money to aid those who did not respect us enough to get legal authorization to come to this country or to stay here. Respect the Law...and stop selling us lies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)