Do you *really* think the federal government is saveable?

[porcupine]

I mean, really? Is there any scenario you can imagine where the federal government would do anything besides grow until it collapses?

[pcosmar]

I mean, really? Is there any scenario you can imagine where the federal government would do anything besides grow until it collapses?

I had spent the last couple years trying to remain optimistic.
Ron Paul had given me some hope.

That hope is dead.

I don't presently believe so. It would take a miracle, and I don't really expect one. :(

[sparebulb]

I believe that there will be violence and that we may loose badly. Our neighbors do not value freedom like we do.

[MsDoodahs]

US FedGov: Too big NOT to fail.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[ihsv]

Reality being what it is, and there being no discernible liberty-inspired change of course in DC, I have to admit I'm very pessimistic. At this point, no one can guarantee there will even be elections in this country in 2010, let alone 2012. Government will continue to make things worse, and as things get worse, government will assume more power and authority. If the worst happens and our social structure collapses under the financial debt we have amassed, both as individuals and as a nation, government will resort to increasingly more draconian measures to preserve itself. It will not shrink voluntarily; neither will it disappear without a fight.

That's the long answer to your question. The short answer is: No

[porcupine]

So...if there's no hope for change on the federal level, what's your action plan? Are you just sitting tight?

Also, why all the enthusiasm for people like Rand Paul if there's no hope?

[pcosmar]

So...if there's no hope for change on the federal level, what's your action plan? Are you just sitting tight?

Also, why all the enthusiasm for people like Rand Paul if there's no hope?

I am cutting wood to keep my house warm. Will be planting seed as soon as the frost is past (about the first of June) and watching things go down hill.
I don't live in the state where Rand will be running, but wish the best.

I am wishing to be wrong, but preparing for the worst.

[Original_Intent]

I still have a tiny shred of hope.

That hope is that if crap gets bad enough (Great Depression style) that people will take five minutes away from their big screen TVs and get educated.

But sadly, most likely they will just act like 5 year olds that got their favorite toy taken away. Or at least too many will.

The one positive thing is that most of the people that have guns are also the people that give a tinker's damn about their rights and their liberty.

[Theocrat]

I mean, really? Is there any scenario you can imagine where the federal government would do anything besides grow until it collapses?

When the federal government starts following the Constitution strictly, this will happen. The only party whose candidates will guarantee that is the Constitution Party.

[porcupine]

When the federal government starts following the Constitution strictly, this will happen. The only party whose candidates will guarantee that is the Constitution Party.

And when, exactly, are you expecting the Constitution to be 1/2 as viable as the completely un-viable Libertarian Party?

[Theocrat]

And when, exactly, are you expecting the Constitution to be 1/2 as viable as the completely un-viable Libertarian Party?

It's already happening. You just don't see it yet. ;)

[ghengis86]

short answer; not really, but I always maintain a tiny shred of hope while i stockpile food and ammo.

long answer: unlike The One (Peace Be Upon Him), my hope is directly proportional to the amount of liberty minded individuals and their efforts to educate the sheep. a seemingly impossible task if there ever was one. but every now and then i get a comment for a co-worker like 'can you believe they want us to register every handgun?' or 'you have to let a failing business die'. sure, they're for civil liberties and against deficits now that a democrat is in office, but its a wonderful time to challenge their championing of the previous president's ideology. maybe, just maybe, they'll come around.

on the other hand, ending up as a loose confederation of states with a massively shrunken motherland (think soviet union fail) is probably the best (most plausible) thing to hope for; otherwise the federal government will continue to amass power by all means necessary until the empire complete collapses (think rome).

[Crowish]

I still have a tiny shred of hope.

That hope is that if crap gets bad enough (Great Depression style) that people will take five minutes away from their big screen TVs and get educated.

But sadly, most likely they will just act like 5 year olds that got their favorite toy taken away. Or at least too many will.

The one positive thing is that most of the people that have guns are also the people that give a tinker's damn about their rights and their liberty.

haha

[satchelmcqueen]

no, its not saveable.

[Truth Warrior]

Nope! :) It's a law of nature. Exponential growth in not sustainable. :cool: It's not a matter of if, just when and how. ;)

[Defining Obscene]

No, I don't believe it is salvageable. All my anarchist bias aside, the swift movements toward globalism will ensure that this government won't be saved, right now its just getting plumped up like a fat hog only to be consumed by the biggest brother of them all.

[AuH20]

The federal government is not salvagable by any stretch of the imagination. Its corruptive roots are too entrenched, with its primary function being the consolidation of more and more power. I wish there was another conclusion I could arrive at, but sadly this is where we are.

[acptulsa]

The government or the Constitution? Theoretically, there's no difference. Where there is a difference in reality, I hope fedgov isn't salvageable. But I still hope the Constitution is.

[heavenlyboy34]

I mean, really? Is there any scenario you can imagine where the federal government would do anything besides grow until it collapses?

No. :p It isn't too big to fail. ;)

[misterx]

No, but that doesn't mean you quit trying. This thing will collapse eventually, and we can't let freedom be forgotten in the meantime. The flame has to be kept alive if we are ever to pick up the pieces and return restore the constitution. Otherwise, people will clamor for even more Federal power in the next government.

[Truth Warrior]

No, but that doesn't mean you quit trying. This thing will collapse eventually, and we can't let freedom be forgotten in the meantime. The flame has to be kept alive if we are ever to pick up the pieces and return restore the constitution. Otherwise, people will clamor for even more Federal power in the next government. How many times does the word "freedom" appear in the US Constitution? How many times does the word "power" appear?

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[nayjevin]

It will likely fail, me with it - fighting for good, or bitching about the bad, not sure yet which.

Ya, governments don't work -- but people seek truth - and that's all this movement was ever about.

[Truth Warrior]

I admire your consistency. Even though I am not a fan of the strategy. :) What's the scores on the word counts? :)

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[Truth Warrior]

About 37-1. Have any key word suggestions? :) Is that the "power" to "freedom" score. If so, you caught my main drift. ;) Did you happen to include the counts in the amendments too? :D

Soooo, what's the US Constitution about?

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[acptulsa]

Anyone have a count on how often the word 'power' appears in the Constitution because the Constitution is trying very hard to limit it? Does the word 'kill' ever appear in laws against murder?

[Truth Warrior]

Anyone have a count on how often the word 'power' appears in the Constitution because the Constitution is trying very hard to limit it? Does the word 'kill' ever appear in laws against murder? Does the word 'murder' ever appear in laws against murder? Where does the word "limit" appear in the CONstitution? How many times? It reads like an org chart template to me. :D

[acptulsa]

Does the word 'murder' ever appear in laws against murder? Where does the word "limit" appear in the CONstitution? How many times? It reads like an org chart template to me. :D

"...shall not be infringed" is enough of a limitation <IMHO> :rolleyes:

[Truth Warrior]

"...shall not be infringed" is enough of a limitation <IMHO> :rolleyes: Did they mean it?

[acptulsa]

Did they mean it?

They seem to have. But they didn't live long enough <IMHO> ;):cool:

[Truth Warrior]

They seem to have. But they didn't live long enough <IMHO> ;):cool:
Revolution of 1800
Politics and Public Service

Some observers have regarded Jefferson (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h664.html)'s election in 1800 (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h448.html) as revolutionary. This may be true in a restrained sense of the word, since the change from Federalist (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h377.html) leadership to Republican (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h446.html) was entirely legal and bloodless. Nevertheless, the changes were profound. The Federalists lost control of both the presidency and the Congress.

By 1800, the American people were ready for a change. Under Washington (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h658.html) and Adams (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h460.html), the Federalists had established a strong government. They sometimes failed, however, to honor the principle that the American government must be responsive to the will of the people. They had followed policies that alienated large groups. For example, in 1798 they enacted a tax on houses, land and slaves, affecting every property owner in the country. Jefferson had steadily gathered behind him a great mass of small farmers, shopkeepers and other workers; they asserted themselves in the election of 1800. Jefferson enjoyed extraordinary favor because of his appeal to American idealism. In his inaugural address, the first such speech in the new capital of Washington, D.C. (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h1932.html), he promised "a wise and frugal government" to preserve order among the inhabitants, but would "leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry, and improvement." Jefferson's mere presence in The White House (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h461.html) encouraged democratic behavior. White House guests were encouraged to shake hands with the president, rather than bowing as had been the Federalist practice. Guests at state dinners were seated at round tables, which emphasized a sense of equality. He taught his subordinates to regard themselves merely as trustees of the people. He encouraged agriculture and westward expansion. Believing America to be a haven for the oppressed, he urged a liberal naturalization law.

Federalists feared the worst. Some worried that Jefferson, the great admirer of the French, would set up a guillotine on Capitol Hill.

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h470.html (http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h470.html)

[tropicangela]

http://cdn1.bumperstickersapp.com/bs/big.2461161.jpg