Comments on: U.S. has lost "consent of the governed"

By: Pat

Pat — Fri, 14 May 2010 04:01:27 +0000

Madoff and Bail Outs occur as the result of losses by persons who long ago gave up on government as the cure for security.

When there is no longer consent of the governed, there is no incentive not to embezzle and steal.

Among those who come to mind are Congress, too familiar with their own plight, Judges, lawyers, CPA’s, and of course, all of the honest and hardworking people in America who now don’t have jobs due to Wall Street’s desire to capitalize upon cheap labor to enhance profit and loss statements in order to inflate prices, and draw high commissions.

The fact that there is no cure for loss of faith is a dilemma Americans have not had to face before. No one can legislate faith, or police the faithless holed up in out of the way places who prevy upon the vulnerable.

By: FreeWestRadio.com » Blog Archive » U.S. has lost “consent of the governed”

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 17:46:49 +0000

[...] Homeland Stupidity [...]

By: Highlander

Highlander — Sat, 20 Feb 2010 18:46:51 +0000

From where I see things, the only real ‘answer’ here is to return government to the people themselves, and what that entails is to remove ALL power to do anything in the way of legislation.

Rather, legislators should be for no other purpose than to suggest possible acts, and then place those suggestions before the people in a direct plebiscite, with an 80% BOTH show and vote on whatever matter. But in no case of that, would any law be enacted which infringed on any individual right.

The permanent Congress should be disbanded, and at six month intervals the state assemblies would appoint representatives to that function. They in turn would report back at the end of six months with proposed legislation to their respective states.

What that accomplishes is: You can’t bribe someone who has no power to make things happen.

Further, all laws —save the respective Constitutions— would have sunset clauses of 5 years or less, and would require the same 80% show AND vote to sustain them, i.e., at least 80% of the registered voters MUST show at the polls AND vote in the affirmative. If only 79% showed, and 100% of them voted in the affirmative the measure would not pass.

Further, no state would be required to fund —or obey— any federal measure where the population of the state voted against such measures, but neither would they benefit.

The thrust here is just this: If 80% of the registered voters agree to screw themselves, then they deserve what happens.

Conversely, if 80% of the registered voters decide to raise a tax, then it should be ONLY those who voted FOR the measure who pay the tax.