Socialist Democrats want to take a Constitutional Republic and turn it into a Banana Republic. Hopefully the citizens will get enough of a distaste to vote against it.
-Andy Torbett
Tag Archives: Constitutional Republic
Double Down Double Standard (Non-Poetic Version)
It seems my recent poem has caused many to have an attack of the giggles. Perhaps they think its unmanly to write a poem…or…something. If so, then by all means stay away from such girlish pursuits as The Iliad , Beowulf, or even that silly little National Anthem of ours. We wouldn’t want to clutter your “open” mind. Just keep that wind tunnel of yours wide open and clear of any obstruction between both your ears and behind those vacant eyes.
Once again let me remind people, that my reason for the angst is not the picking of berries blue and red or the foraging of fiddleheads. Uh-oh, did I just rhyme again? Get over it! It’s the lack of respect for private property and ambivalence to the double standard conservatives portray.
Did you know that long before our foraging and hunting traditions here in Maine, our Founding Fathers put a high premium on private property? Yes, so much so they were willing to die for it. They challenged the most powerful Nation in the world at that time, Great Britain, for Life, Liberty, and Private Property.
Oh, I can hear giggles the more. “Idiot! Not only does he write poems but he screwed up the most famous line in American History!”(giggle snort) I am well aware the line reads Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, but do you know that line was originally drafted Life, Liberty, and Private Property.
I’m sure there are different reasons why it was changed. I can imagine they realized that one is not necessarily born endowed with private property, hence, the pursuit. Still, this shows that our Founders placed private property on a very high pedestal, a thing to be protected.
Much of the anger by conservatives here in Maine against landowners who asked for this foraging bill is really seeded in the fact that most of these major landowners are of a liberal persuasion. They have bought up large tracks of land and have begun to block hunting , foraging, and recreation on their land. Yes, it makes me angry, too.
But the fact of the matter remains, they still own the land. Still, the anger remains and the desire to use or block the legislature from defending their rights because they appose our will and our want seems, ahem, poetic justice. The question remains, what of the Constitution?
According to the Constitution, private property rights trump all including the Bill of Rights. For example, when I was campaigning during the Q3 referendum if a homeowner took exception to what I was saying they could order me off their property. I had to go and exercise my 1st Amendment rights elsewhere. If a homeowner objects to my sidearm on their property and demands I remove myself, I need to remove myself and exercise my 2nd Amendment rights elsewhere. The rights of the private landowner overrule our rights to hunting, foraging, and recreating. So take your various pursuits of happiness and pursue them elsewhere.
Sadly, it seems we are willing to preach the Constitution when it works in our favor but trample it when it doesn’t. The issue is more than foraging and hunting traditions, berries and fiddleheads. The question should be asked: Is the Constitution the foundation of the Republic for all citizens or just a weapon to wield against our opponents to win elections?
Whenever I write against this double standard among so-called conservatives, the immediate retaliation is, “No! We are going to teach them a lesson!” or “Now, they can know what it feels like!” I have been a conservative all my life but this double standard on so many issues, not just this, is not conservatism. It’s something I don’t recognize. The politics of retaliation and me first, the future be dammed. It seems we are not interested in winning elections to make the Republic stronger but simply to gain the power to inflict our double standard on our opponents, payback. And faster the pendulum swings…
Geographical Prejudice Part One
The recent debate (I’m being kind. Tantrums is the more accurate term.) concerning the electoral college has brought into sharp clarity the desire or belief by some that only certain areas, and those that reside there, should decide the political fortunes of the rest of the Nation. It would seem if you follow this line of thinking (Again, I’m being kind), that a mere residency in certain enlightened geographical locations endows said resident with more political fortitude than those from less desirable locals, and therefore, those residents who reside in the “cool place” their votes should have more import,clout than those who reside in the “not-so-cool place”. Embracing this form of reasoning (I’m not even being kind here, I’m just throwing out nice terms in vain attempt to gloss over reality.) results in a form of governance called Pure Democracy, historically defined as Mob Rule.
To say that this columnist takes a dim view of geographical prejudice could probably be characterized as the understatement of the century…in some corners of humanity….somewhere… Still, our friends (I’m not going to help you through these “kind terms” anymore.) need to be reminded that despite all the work of politicians, media elites, educators, and actors, who live in those “cool places”, despite their efforts to convince us that we are a democracy, this election proved this time proven point. Self-absorbed, elitist, and “way cool” people are so blinded by their own arrogance that they rarely know anything of what their talking about.
Yes, elitist have been shocked to find out that despite their barrage of indoctrination attempts, the United States is still not a democracy and is still a Constitutional Republic. Our Founders chose a Constitutional Republic rather a Pure Democracy to protect us from “cool people” who live in “cool places” and think their opinion by virtue of their place of domicile should have more value than those in other geographical locations. They had seen throughout history that within a Pure Democracy instigators had merely to target high population areas where people tend to herd rather than think (IE. “How is Joe Cool voting? OK. That’s the way I’m voting.”), work up the mob to overthrow whatever perceived or real injustice, only for the people to find they had been used for a hidden agenda, and the cycle would start again. Civilizations under Pure Democracy are kept in a constant state of revolution until a dictator takes power that can rule the mob through brute strength. Remember, all dictators are voted in, yes, like Castro, Hitler, and others all shouting “Democracy”.
The Founders chose a Constitutional Republic to prevent this. By instituting the Electoral College and selecting two Senators from each State, no matter the population, the framers insured that the more rural States, whose residents tended to be less effected by populace swell, had an equal voice in the governing and electoral process. Furthermore, the Senator’s were elected by State’s legislature, leaning towards a Republic style of government, and the Representatives were elected by popular vote, a use of Pure Democracy.
Our Founding Fathers installed a Constitutional Republic with pieces of democracy to insure the fairest way that all areas of our Nation could have a equal voice. Which begs the question, why haven’t the States figured that little piece of common sense out? In the next installment, we’ll look at how Maine’s political system is entrenched with geographical prejudice and the steps we as citizens can take to make our voices heard and change this travesty which has oppressed this State for too long.
The Maine Conservative Voice 