Article in Moonbattery site:

Why Democrats Want to Abolish E*******l College

If today’s radicalized Democrats seize sufficient power, it won’t be a matter of enduring a few years of poor government while we wait for the pendulum to swing back. They plan to inflict irreversible damage. One example is demographic t***sformation resulting from the open border. Another is their assault on the E*******l College:

Desperate to bring the Tyranny of the Majority to our representative democracy, on the first day Democrats assumed control of the House of Representatives, Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN) submitted a bill to k**l the e*******l college.

Tyranny of the majority was a major concern of the Founding Fathers, who set up a democratic republic, not a democracy. They did not want a system that would allow 51% to ens***e the other 49%, or cities to lord it over less densely populated areas.

Without the e*******l college, p**********l candidates would naturally concentrate on where people are concentrated: urban areas. The rest of the country would be left unrepresented.

Amending the Constitution won’t work. There is too much resistance to such a ham-fisted power play by densely populated, l*****t-dominated states like California and New York. So they have devised an end run around the Constitution called National Popular V**e, which is intended to impose direct popular v**e by interstate compact.

Already alarmed back in 2015, E*******l College expert Tara Ross explained why this venerable institution is so crucial:

http://youtu.be/LXnjGD7j2B0

The purpose of progressivism is to centralize power in the fist of an ideologically homogenous elite. The Constitution is their primary obstacle. Their war on it did not start with the E*******l College, nor will it end there.

Progressives struck a blow against the ingenious system set up by the Founders when they passed the 17th Amendment. Consequently, Senators are now elected by popular v**e instead of state legislatures. This undermines a primary purpose of the Senate, which is to represent states as government entities, thereby balancing the centralized power of the federal government. Today’s progressives want to inflict worse damage by doing away with the Senate altogether.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights stand as so written..
Amendments (very difficult to do for a reason)may be added but they do not change the foundation of the Constitution-or Bill of Rights..

Likewise we are A republic not a federal republic democrat anything..
The left believes if they claim it as such long enough that by attrition it will be adopted...It will not..

The "republic" is mentioned is in Article IV, Section 4. "The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union a republican form of government." It does not say democracy at all.

Lest we forget Benjamin Franklin reply when asked what sort if government we were ~~a republic, if you can keep it...

No matter how many ways you want to slice that bread it still end up the same, it's a Living Document, don't be so stubborn...You're wrong

A living document, also known as an evergreen document or dynamic document, is a document that is continually edited and updated.

Is the Constitution a living document?

The U.S. Constitution is called a living document because it was created with the purpose of being able to grow and change (just like a living thing) with the changing needs of the country. Through the addition of amendments, the constitution is able to adapt in ways that are needed for the nation to succeed.

Living Constitution is a term used to describe the Constitution's ability to change to meet the needs of each generation without major changes. This is a concept used in interpreting the Constitution of U.S. It is based on the notion that Constitution of the United States has relevant meaning beyond the original text and is an evolving and dynamic document that changes over time. Therefore the views of contemporaneous society should be taken into account when interpreting key constitutional phrases. The constitutional framers specifically wrote the Constitution in broad and flexible terms to create such a dynamic, "living" document.

Our Constitution is our set of rules and laws which governs us, our amendments are additions to our constitution. For example, when we added in the amendment to allow women and people of color to v**e, it is an amendment and thereby part of our Living Constitution. A beautiful thing really... as it is also called Evergreen~ always alive, nice huh

And trumpy. Now I am no fan of trumpy's because I do not like his tax cuts for the wealthy and mega-corporations with the LIE that it is going to help the middle class and working poor. Much of the improvement in the economy,. especially lower unemployment, actually began under his Oliness' reign.

I do not agree that a border wall, or wh**ever you want to call it, is the best solution to stop the invasion of the US by i******s, terrorists, drug and sex smugglers, criminals and gang members. A wall would also cut off access to parts of farmers' and ranchers' land and the river in many places.

IMO, stationing as many troops as necessary along the border and giving them the authority to use wh**ever means (force) necessary to stop the invasion would be a better solution. Think of the economic boom to all the US towns and cities along the border with the military and their families...housing, autos, clothes, local taxes, etc.

Also, stop the BILLIONS ( http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2017/02/10/514172676/mexicans-in-the-u-s-are-sending-home-more-money-than-ever ) being sent back to Mexico. As for paying for the troops...they were going to get paid regardless.

But the h**e dim-o-craps and their moonbatty apparatchiks have for trumpy and the continual witch hunt to find something on him is ridiculous especially when the biggest criminals reside in their ranks, yet they overlook them.

Exactly why I enjoy reading your well thought out posts... An uncanny ability to speak your position without derogatory name calling etc ...

I like your idea of arming our borders with military and the boom effect for the towns an added plus... Of course many here will tell you Trump can’t use our military to build strength against the i******s~~ I’m not even speaking of the wall yet~~

From funding impact of Military budgets to have to convince Pentagon lawyers that the situation there constitutes a threat to national security, a true national emergency, and not a law enforcement etc...

We must remember the Posse Comitatus Act, which prohibits the use of federal troops for law enforcement under most circumstances... Where threat of attack is suspected military can ve used temporarily.. Left to a judgement call of Eminent attack, by the time they ruled on it that attack may well be under way...

Soooo, close the borders down entirely, let no one in for as long as it takes to get our nation secure!!! Can we do that much???