LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Report Post  
Karl Denninger
 
Posts: n/a
Default


In article ,
Harry Krause wrote:


Karl Denninger wrote:
Convince both legislative bodies and an appropriate number of states to
ratify your view of this matter, and you can have it.


I think we are moving in that direction. There's no reason not to do so.


I don't.

There are plenty of reasons not to do so. The reasons can be found in
places like The Federalist, to start.

There was a real concern that allowing direct presidential elections would
be disasterous. There was also a real concern that allowing direct
SENATORIAL elections would likewise be disasterous.

We now have nearly 100 years of a record on the latter, in the form of the
outrageous expansion of federalism since the 17th Amendment was passed.

This has been an unmitigated disaster for State and Individual rights.

The movement needed is towards repealing the 17th Amendment, not passing a
new one to get rid of the EC.

This was attempted immediately after the 2000 elections, and went absolutely
nowhere.

For good reason too - it would make less-populous states completely
irrelavent in the election of the President. The framers designed the
Electoral College PRECISELY to overrepresent small population states
PRECISELY so they were not made irrelavent.

Hawaii, as an example from the current election cycle.

Until you can muster the PROPER way to change this you will live by what is
already in the Constitution, or you may take up residence somewhere more
to your liking.

I suggest North Korea.


Typical right-wing wingnut. Really. It's prefectly reasonable to argue
for the end of the EC, and to work for the change.


Exactly why do you think this is reasonable, given the record in the nation
since the 17th Amendment, and the clear violations of the Constitution that
have been passed and embraced by the federal government since.

List bascially ALL federal social programs, and you find that they're
unsupportable in the Constitution. Essentially NONE of them would have
passed without the 17th Amendment, as that was proof against states having
programs rammed down their throats.

--
--
Karl Denninger ) Internet Consultant & Kids Rights Activist
http://www.denninger.net My home on the net - links to everything I do!
http://scubaforum.org Your UNCENSORED place to talk about DIVING!
http://www.spamcuda.net SPAM FREE mailboxes - FREE FOR A LIMITED TIME!
http://genesis3.blogspot.com Musings Of A Sentient Mind

 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OT for those who want to vote (long) Jonathan Ganz ASA 0 October 28th 04 02:20 AM
*** 2004 ELECTION RESULTS *** lc3 General 0 August 6th 04 09:39 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:53 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017