Concordia res Parvae Crescunt
by Jeff Matthews
Many of us are in consensus, even if we fly the different flags of Tea Parties, Tenthers, GOOOH, and so on. And by the looks of things, many Democrats have also just about “had it†after getting a war-mongering, lobbyist-filled, corporatist, secretive, and spying administration after not even the first full year of office. We need to reverse course to avoid an iceberg that will sink us all.
Secession? Not in the near horizon. Revolution? Nope. These are remedies that are always available to mankind. As much as the legal scholars and elites want to craft “rules†to retain the status quo, natural law dictates that the order of mankind transcends fascism, tyranny and corruption. It always has, and it always will. But these remedies will not be exercised in the next coming months.
Instead, we need to look to the 2010 elections. Within months, we will be in the thick of the political process once again. We are all-too-familiar with what we do not like in the system, and as we all know, the rhetoric will be spattered and bandied about as usual. Does anyone need a crystal ball to predict what will be said? “No lobbyists will influence me. I am for the people. I am for small government. I will vote to eliminate the debt.†Really?
Has any politician ever stood up and said, “I am beholden to corporations and lobbyists. I like power and want to expand my control. I need your money to do it, and if you will not give it to me, I’ll support Ben Bernanke and the Fed’s cranking up the printing press and running your kids and grandkids further into debt.†Of course, not. But that’s what they invariably do, despite what they say.
So, we need to be mindful and exercise a sharp, collective wit about us. We need to spot shallow rhetoric as soon as our candidates spew it, and when they do, we need to call them out for it. Who knows? Maybe a new website is in order: 2010rhetoric.com.
I think (and I hope you do, too) that we should DEMAND our candidates to tell us where they stand. They should tell us, in no uncertain terms, the answer to the following questions:
Name, in order, the top 10 federal programs that you believe are beyond federal authority under the Constitution; whether you would vote to dissolve them; the fiscal impact dissolution would have on the federal budget; and how long, in your opinion, should it take to dissolve them.
Should the federal budget be reduced, and if so, by what percentage do you propose? In terms of percentages (e.g. -5%, +10%), what is the highest change in the federal budget you would accept before committing, by your answer here, to vote against said budget?
If these candidates cannot or will not identify specific institutions and commit to answer the budget question, then, we know they are not for us, pure and simple. If they answer, then, we have a way to track promises and progress. If the candidate is elected, did he/she vote to fund the program, and if so, how much? Did the candidate make any effort to dissolve the program? Did the candidate match his/her actions with his/her budgetary constraint views and commitment?
As this movement continues, I realize this article’s specific suggestion will have since been forgotten. Reality dictates the process will not be carried out they way “Jeff†wants it. That’s okay, though, because that is not the purpose of this article.
The purpose of this article is to heighten awareness that we are setting the stage to be played and suckered with spineless rhetoric, once again. We need to be ready for that. We need to call candidates on the floor for it, and we need to let them know those days are over. A new discourse needs to occur.
This time, we need to set the stage right, and we need to demand specific answers to specific questions. “I’m not a lawyer,†“Let me get back to you,†and changing the subject will not cut it this time around.
Let’s make this the overall tone, and let’s make the message loud and clear. We must refuse to vote for “personalities,†parties and rhetoric. If we do not and we go back to old ways of voting, we will accomplish nothing and will have wasted immeasurable amounts of our precious time, energy, and the constructive end to our collective frustration.
Commit and stand firm to your principles and your demands.
Jeff Matthews [send him email] is an attorney living in Houston, Texas. His current projects include the website SovereignStates, and the forthcoming organization, The National Taxpayer Takeover.
Copyright © 2009 by TenthAmendmentCenter.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit to the author and this website is given.
If you enjoyed this post:
Click Here to Get the Free Tenth Amendment Center Newsletter,
The only way to win ANY more elections in this country is to rally the WHITE vote which it looks like you are doing. Yet, why are you hiding from the glaring reality that The Tenth Amendment/Tea Party/State Sovereignty Movement is a 95%+ WHITE MOVEMENT? The Left has no problem pointing this out and the more you hide from it the more you look like dishonrable cowards. Why do you play by their rules of discourse? Why do you give any respect to the Political Correctness they have forced upon you? The Tenthers and the Tea Parties are definitely in danger of becoming neutered Controlled Opposition. I know you don't want to hear this, but I couldn't look myself in the mirror if I didn't have the courage to state the obvious.
Merry Christmas!!!!!
Enjoyed this post a great deal and the questions are good. My first two questions for every candidate usually leads to no more being asked as few have answers that convince me they are serious. My questions?
1. What can you tell me about the 'Oath of Office?'
2. How will you uphold your oath?
If they cannot get beyond these two questions I don't really care what they have to say on any issues or how glowing a personality they have. Thanks for the brain juice stirring post.
This is an excellent resource for finding out how people voted: http://www.votesmart.org/index.htm
Marsha Blackburn Voted FOR:
Omnibus Appropriations, Special Education, Global AIDS Initiative, Job Training, Unemployment Benefits, Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations, Agriculture Appropriations, U.S.-Singapore Trade, U.S.-Chile Trade, Supplemental Spending for Iraq & Afghanistan, Prescription Drug Benefit, Child Nutrition Programs, Surface Transportation, Job Training and Worker Services, Agriculture Appropriations, Foreign Aid, Vocational/Technical Training, Supplemental Appropriations, UN “Reforms.” Patriot Act Reauthorization, CAFTA, Katrina Hurricane-relief Appropriations, Head Start Funding, Line-item Rescission, Oman Trade Agreement, Military Tribunals, Electronic Surveillance, Head Start Funding, COPS Funding, Funding the REAL ID Act (National ID), Foreign Intelligence Surveillance, Thought Crimes “Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, Peru Free Trade Agreement, Economic Stimulus, Farm Bill (Veto Override), Warrantless Searches, Employee Verification Program, Body Imaging Screening.
Marsha Blackburn Voted AGAINST:
Ban on UN Contributions, eliminate Millennium Challenge Account, WTO Withdrawal, UN Dues Decrease, Defunding the NAIS, Iran Military Operations defunding Iraq Troop Withdrawal, congress authorization of Iran Military Operations.
Marsha Blackburn is my Congressman.
See her unconstitutional votes at :
http://tinyurl.com/qhayna
Mickey
As I've ranted elsewhere...
State-sovereignty ignorant voters were evidently electing likewise ignorant lawmakers to the state legislatures since before the ill-conceived 17th Amendment was ratified, IMO. Otherwise, I don't know how to explain why pro-state power state lawmakers in their right minds would have ratified that anti-state sovereignty amendment. After all, the constitutionally powerful state legislatures unthinkingly gave up their voices in the constitutionally humbled federal government when they ratified that amendment.
The problem with the 17th A., IMO, is that voters started filling federal Senate seats with lawmakers who were just as clueless about state sovereignty as the idiots that they had been electing to the state legislatures were. So it's no wonder that the defunct Senate didn't try to stop FDR from usurping state powers and associated taxes in the 1930s and 40s.
And with the exception of states like Oklahoma, Tennessee and others, what do state sovereignty-impaired state lawmakers typically do but sit back and watch the show while Congress rips off the people.
So if I were to add anything to Mr. Matthews' essay, I will stress that we've got to seize the opportunity in 2010 to destroy the phony powers now associated with the Oval Office and Congress by electing pro-state power lawmakers to the state legislatures as well as to the federal Congress. This is because we need state lawmakers who are willing fight to keep the federal government on its constitutional leash.
I completely agree. I've posted a blog post about this very same issue sharing my own viewpoint as well: http://www.whatchannelareyouwatching.com/archives...
Thanks for keeping the conversation going
Anyone want to take bets on a court case being heard in 2010? Maybe an FBI investigation uncloaking Holders tinkering with justice? Throw in a couple treaties that amount to nothing more than treason and you have a real reason for these crooks to sweat unless they do have some ace up their sleeve. Will it be diebold fraud? Another pandemic? DHS going anti tea party? A gun grab? There are numerous ways to avoid a fair election. I put my money on some event ushered in by these leftist tyrants to continue their increasing authority over the people.
I agree with you Bettijo. Why would they do what they do knowing full well they are going to face the entire voter population not the two thirds that turned out in '08. The fact that this "mandate" of change was supported by less than 1/3 of the population and of that 1/3 there are large numbers of defectors waiting to be heard at the ballot box. Add to that the silent 1/3 and the 1/3 who voted republican of whom many are now intent on voting for a candidate whose platform is based on constitutional principals and you have a rout in the making.
It's the sham of voting on a national level - and not just this election cycle....every one.
We are all so anxious for the 2010 elections so we can vote these clowns out of office. But have you noticed the clowns do not seem to fear We The People. Wonder why? Do you suppose they know something we don't?
Seriously, with 61% of the people angry at the elected officials you would think at least some would change their ways in order to get re-elected. We think they are committing political suicide but they apparently don't think so.
I do not think Obama intends to be a one-term president. What trick does he have up his sleeve? Remember Honduras.
Read: http://spectator.org/archives/2009/12/04/soros-ey...
I would like to hear what others think about this. Thanks.
Tenther Radio!
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Subscribe to entries
Subscribe to comments
All content © 2012 by Tenth Amendment Center
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Ron Paul, Houston CCTV. Houston CCTV said: About the 2010 Elections: Principles vs Shallow Rhetoric: Commit and stand firm to your principles and your demands… http://bit.ly/5UpOZ2 [...]
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by RonPaul_2012: About the 2010 Elections: Principles vs Shallow Rhetoric http://bit.ly/4njtuq #tlot #tcot #RonPaul…
[...] on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out” in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you [...]
[...] think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out†in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you [...]
[...] think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out†in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you [...]
[...] think marching on D.C. or calling your Representatives, or threating to “throw the bums out†in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, is going to further the cause of the Constitution and your liberty – you [...]
[...] http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/12/20/about-the-2010-elections-principles-vs-shallow-rhetor... Easy AdSense by Unreal Bookmark It Hide Sites [...]