A Logical Approach to Racism in America
by "Mrs. Eric"
3 December 2016
This is how I view the challenges with racism.. not that anyone is asking, be still and buckle in....
Nobody is born racist - it's taught. It's taught by instilling fear of others who are easily identified as being different than ourselves. The news spews this garbage and is eager to headline stories and show videos of the extremes of each group and we buy it hook, line and sinker. If the news reported tomorrow that purple women want to kill all babies, you can bet you'd look at purple women differently.
We need to get past the stereotypes and stop listening to the fearmongering. Instead of the focus being on divisions of gender, color, religion, etc., what we really need to look at is why. Why do so many lose faith in the American dream? Of the possibility of prosperity? Too many of our own citizens are poor - destitute, really. And these groups, like BLM, are born from this. They start out with the hope of leveling the playing field but all too often end up causing more division because the alt-left or alt-right of the movement take over; and the group that was supposed to help only divides them even more.
Wasn't that Obama's platform? Hope and change? Maybe that's why so many voted for him - maybe it wasn't because of his race?? Obama did things like give free cell phones and I imagine that seemed great but all that does is make hurting people more comfortable in their crappy circumstances - it doesn't change the circumstances.
So many of the people without hope turn to a lifestyle that leads to gangs and violence. What we need to do is focus on how to bring real change - real hope. Higher paying jobs seem like a good starting point, but not $15/hr fast food jobs that are unrealistic when a burger costs $1. Maybe jobs that help rebuild America's infrastructure... and we need to remove all the obstacles that prevent them from working. For example, we shouldn't require a high school diploma to get hired for a job where the skills are working with your hands. School isn't for everyone - the lack of a diploma doesn't mean people don't have marketable skills. Give them hope, give them real palpable change, stop watching news stories about the extremes from these groups - and the race issues will die.
WHAT ABOUT HISTORY?
(written "Election Eve" 2016)
With the election looming large on the immediate horizon, people should be very concerned. Especially those that have studied history. If you do not remember your sutdies in American History class from high school, I recommend that you pick up some books and start reading about the American political culture circa 1765-1791. I cannot help but see the parallels between what was happening prior to the American Revolution and what is happening in America today.
See if this sounds familiar....
- The populace was tiring of being ruled by people who were so "disconnected" from them that they could not understand their basic needs and desires.
- The ruling elite was living well and prospering off of the work of the average citizen who was working his hardest just to provide the bare necessities for his/her family.
- Taxes and regulations were becoming more oppressing almost by the day.
- The average American did not feel that they had a voice in the government that ruled them.
- Newspapers knew that political opinion and "spin" sold copy.
We all know how that played out. The rag-tag band of hearty and tenacious individuals that felt oppressed by their tryrannical government gave them a warning which went unheeded. Frustration and anger grew until the citizens would take no more. I spend an abundance of my available spare time studying Colonial America and the politics of that era. I cannot help but wonder what is going to be the catalyst for present day America to realize the current government's oppression -- and what (if anything) will people be willing to do about it? We have suffered through almost eight years of graft, corruption, and tyranny. How much more are people willing to take?
Some thoughts on the Seventeenth Amendment -- by Mike
For the last 100 years, since the passage of the 17th Amendment,... which took away individual States representation at the Federal level by taking away each State's legislatures vote for Senators, and giving that vote directly to the people of each state, the Federal government has been guilty of taxing us to death, and eroding away individual rights and the rights of the individual States.
Another way to put it would be that the state legislature in Lansing used to vote to send our two Senators to DC, representing the State of Michigan.
If you look at the Bill of Rights, those first 10 amendments cover individual and States rights; the 10th amendment stating:
"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."
Many people do not realize the the Constitution was designed specifically to restrict the Federal government in its powers. Had the 17th Amendment NOT been passed, the country would likely be in a lot better shape - but because the States no longer have representation at the Federal level, there is really no one to keep the Federal government in check.
In saying that, many people COMPLETELY forget that this is the United STATES of America. Not just ''America.'' As rudimentary as this might sound, it is like that thing so gigantic that no one really notices it, or they've gotten so used to it that it's never thought of at all. It is all of these States that make up America, not a Federal government in Washington D.C. ... It seems that most people just have kind of accepted that the States have been ''absorbed'' into, and under, a Federal governmental entity.
Looking at the Federal government now, we are $14.3 trillion dollars in debt, and there is no one to keep a tight reign on the people in Washington, and their spending of our tax dollars, our kids, and our grandkids' tax dollars - we are in debt for generations to come.
The Constitution needs to be read and understood in order for more people to really know what is going on. If you don't know your rights, then how will you know when they're being taken away? I am not a lawyer, but I had numerous law classes in college and love constitutional law. Things like executive orders, so-called ''czars,'' and entities like the EPA implementing its will is nothing more than circumventing the Constitution. This is NOT how government business should be conducted. I am NOT against a Federal system of government, I, along with tens of millions of others, just want the Federal government to act as it was originally designed to act, NOT act as the monolithic entity that it has become.
Federal Overreach: In defense of nullification – by Eric
I don’t know about you, but I am tiring of the federal overlords trying to dictate every element of our lives whether it is same-sex marriage, Affordable Care Act subsidies, or numerous other things. The Feds want to tell us what we can buy, how our food has to be processed, how our children are to be taught -- and just expect us to go along willingly.
The federal government was originally designed as an agreement between the original colonies, which were sovereign States, to handle specific items as were enumerated in Article I, Section VIII of the Constitution. Though the specific items that Congress was to handle were specifically mentioned, and members of the Constitutional Convention still thought that the federal government may still try to overreach its authority, they passed the Tenth Amendment as part of the Bill of Rights (First ten amendments to the Constitution).
The Tenth Amendment was short and to the point, it says:
“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”
Or simply stated: If the power is not specifically granted to the federal government, they do not have the power. The individual State holds the power. If you read the enumerated powers, there are very few. It is for this reason that two important Founders (James Madison and Thomas Jefferson) authored two resolutions that became to be known as the “Principles of ‘98”. The “Principles of ‘98” consisted of the Kentucky Resolve (Jefferson) and the Virginia Resolve (Madison) which were both written in 1798, years after the US Constitution was ratified and in effect.
The “Principles of ‘98” basically said that the states had the right to refuse to acknowledge or enforce any federal law that the individual states deemed unconstitutional. This is known as “nullification” or “interposition”. Though the resolves were mostly written in response to the Alien and Seditions Acts, the influence lasted more than a century. Jefferson especially did not trust the Supreme Court (or any of the federal branches) having the final say on things. He thought that this power should rest with the States to whom the overall federal government was to be held accountable. After all, no federal government could exist with the participation of the individual States, right? He said:
“To consider the Judges of the Superior Court as the ultimate Arbiters of Constitutional questions would be a dangerous doctrine which would place us under passion for party, for power, and for the privileges of their corps – and their power is more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functions are, to the Elective control. The Constitution has elected no single Tribunal. I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves.”
So taking this all into account, I don’t understand how people can just accept the line that the decision is made just because the Supreme Court or (insert government agency here) says so. The States have the right to accept whether they want it or not. If the individual States decide it should be the law of the land, they should amend the Constitution so it is known that it is the will of the States.
After all, who is closer to the actual will of the people, the federal government, or the state governments?