[detbuch]

Originally Posted by spence

We seem to be hearing a lot of that from the Republican candidates.

Because there is a realization deep in the more "conservative" part of the base that we have a fundamental problem in governance. That we are adrift at sea without a rudder. That depending on oneself has narrower vistas and depending on big government has none save the singular view that unrepresentative bureaucrats decide for us. There is a realization that as individuals we are becoming less relevent and that our votes are becoming more meaningless. Changes in political administration have no effect. We keep moving in the direction of financial and individual oblivion. All the wonderful things that government has given us, and promises to give us more of, just fill us with more uncertainty. The more we get, the more we need. The unelected bureacracy keeps growing to fill those needs, and it pumps out annual reams of new regulations at a clip of 80,000 pages in the Federal Register to add on top of all the old regulations. More money needs to be spent. More regulations are required. What and who are being regulated may not be known by one individual, not one congressman, not one President, not one judge. As new mandates are passed, new regulatory agencies are required to flesh out and produce actual laws to make the mandates function. We now have to pass 2,000 page bills to eventually find out what is in them. The devil in the details will be discovered when the unelected administrators create and recreate them down the road. There is an awakening deep in the base, not only that we are drifting into the mouth of a one-eyed government cyclops which constantly devours all within its reach, but that it is more and more difficult for us to avoid that reach.

There is an awakening to the realization that we are in a position now that is more threatening, by far, to our liberty than were the Founders, because we are electing our own king instead of revolting against him. They had more liberty than we do now, and that liberty rested on their self-reliance. The Constitution they made was specifically crafted to form a government that relied on a free people and designed to ensure that freedom.

There is a growing awareness of what has happened to that Constitution, and how we have drifted away from it, not through the will of the people, who thought all along that it was still our supreme law, but by a wilfull, progressive movement that despised it.

And there is a desire, deep in the base, to return to its design, its principles, and its assurance that we the people are the true sovereigns, not unelected technocrats that pretend to know what we want and need.

I'd be willing to wager that if the GOP wins the election the new POTUS has a very difficult time reconciling their election year rhetoric on Federal Stimulus with their behavior...

-spence

No doubt you would win that wager. The entrenched bureacracy--with its power and tenure, and its easy cover as scapegoat for Congress so that when it does unpopular things our representatives and Presidents can shrug their shoulders and point to them and say they did it, not me--this administrative state will be difficult to dismantle. It will have to be done bit by bit over a long time. It might not be possible. Enough people are still blind to its grip or even of its existence. Our whole Federal system, including the judiciary, have been corrupted from a Constitutional system to an administrative one. The only real difference between parties the past handful of decades has been in degree. The base is demanding a true difference. May not happen. But those who believe that our major problems are a result of abandoning the Constitution, understand that returning back must be attempted. And that it will be very difficult, if it is even possible. If it can't be done, it won't matter if the so-called Republican party is destroyed by trying. We will just keep drifting about by bureaucratic whim, maybe even to some point where we are so broke and disfunctional as a society, that the "administrators" will have to take a less "benevolent" tack in their direction. And, then, maybe a century or two later we can have another revolution. Or maybe we can, before such another revolution is necessary, we can rediscover the blessings of free markets and capitalism, and entrepeneurs, and the fresh air of casting off an overbearing government that must direct our lives--maybe like the Chinese are starting to discover in a little way. But why go through all that if we already had it?