pafret Loc: Northeast

The e******n process in America has become a disguise for corruption that attracts the corrupt. When men and women go to Washington, they pretty soon learn that they are paid by the federal government and, therefore, they are in the hire of the federal government. No allegiance to their constituents is necessary and, as a matter of fact, there is very soon is even little pretension — at least until e******n time.

One need merely look at the fossils who have held office for the last generation; people like Rep. John Conyers, Sen. Thad Cochran, Sen. John McCain, Sen. Mitch McConnell, Sen. Patrick Leahy, Sen. Orrin Hatch, Sen. Richard Shelby, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Sen. Chuck Grassley — all of whom have "served" 30 years or more — to see why a term limit bill like the one introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz and co-sponsored by Republican Senators Marco Rubio, Mike Lee and David Purdue is necessary.

Limiting the terms of representatives and senators and eliminating their federal pensions would be a first step to restore our liberty.

If Americans could restore their power over so-called elected representatives, this could cut out the smoke and mirrors of politics. I think the hour is late and maybe even too late, but let's try to reverse all the perks that our "elected representatives" have bestowed upon themselves.

If we are to undertake this monumental task we must first look back to see when and how republicanism died.

The year 1913 was a terrible one for human liberty. The 16th and 17th Amendments were ratified that year, and the Federal Reserve central bank was established. The Federal Reserve created a fiat money system of theft for the benefit of the banksters and the moneyed elites. It is designed to impoverish the people. The 16th Amendment established a progressive income tax that the U.S. Supreme Court failed to strike down. The 17th Amendment changed the way Senators were selected, taking the appointing power from state legislatures and placing it in the hands of v**ers. That removed the final nail holding the checks and balances the states had in place over federal power.

Most of the nails had already been removed in 1861 when Abraham Lincoln shredded the Constitution, stripped Americans of their strongest check against federal tyranny and invaded the secessionist states. The result is that in 1913 the U.S. government was taken over once and probably for all time by moneyed power.

Many of the Founders — particularly the anti-Federalists — feared a powerful central government. The Constitution they established to create a restraint on federal power decreed that each state's legislature would choose its two senators as one of the checks against a strong central government.

Depending upon their point of view, Founders either hailed or lamented the fact that, by simply refusing to appoint Senators, the States could see the central government "destroyed" (William Richardson Davie) and "put an end to" (Samuel Johnston). Or, as Alexander Hamilton (who actually wanted a U.S. system similar to British mercantilism) opined: "It is certainly true, that the State Legislatures, by forbearing the appointment of Senators, may destroy the National Government."

The 17th Amendment was proposed ostensibly to correct a procedural problem that cropped up when divided State legislatures were unable to agree on a Senator to send to Washington, D.C. This would leave States unrepresented.

According to a research paper by Wendy Schiller from Brown University and Charles Stewart III from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in about 2 percent of cases the State legislatures were deadlocked and unable to resolve their differences and select a Senator. However, it did occur — even occurring in the very first Congress, when the State of New York went without Senate representation for three months.

The direct e******n of Senators by the people ended that problem, but created a whole new problem in which Senators are now bought and paid for by the banksters and lobbyists. It is this system that explains why the Republican elite have gone against Republican v**ers on subjects like amnesty for i*****l a***ns, Obamacare, etc., which are pushed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and big corporations,

Term limits and repealing the 17th Amendment would take the money out of senate e******ns on the federal level. Senators would be beholden to their state legislatures rather than the corporatist class which lines their pockets and finances their re-e******n campaigns.

Their ability to v**e for themselves pay raises, their tenure and pension perks, their liberal, special low-cost health perks not available to citizens, their immunity from the laws they pass on the people, their retirement plans paid for by the government (read: the people) and their lack of term limits must all be removed. Their salaries should be paid by their respective States.

The notion that long-serving politicians and political bureaucrats would become obstructionist to the will of the people, corrupt and wealthy off government is not new. John Taylor of Caroline, in his book, "An Inquiry into the Principles and Policy of the Government of the United States," published in 1814, warned about that very thing.

Before publishing this first of his four books on politics and agriculture, Taylor, a lawyer, served as cavalry colonel and a m*****a major in the Revolutionary War, served in the Virginia House of Delegates and two stints in the U.S. Senate, so he had keen insight into the corrosive nature of politics:

Great power, or a long possession of power, changes a man's moral nature, whether it is derived from inheritance or e******n. Patriots, as well as princes, become tyrants from being steeped in the same menstruum, and yet nations are still to learn, that its intoxicating qualities are the same upon both. They consider its effect as natural in one case, and monstrous in the other; as if both princes and patriots were not men. Revolution falls, because its usual remedy is only to draw the menstruum from e******n instead of inheritance, into which to plunge the moral qualities of human nature. Even a hope of office corrupts eloquence. It ceases to be the animated auxiliary of t***h, and becomes the mercenary ally of interest. Honesty is exchanged for art. An artificial character is formed by a possibility of continuing considerable power. It assumes different principles with different persons. It gilds its baits with patronage, contract and charter, at the publick expense. And the varnish it assumes is to conceal the foulness of the stuff it hides. Whereas a portion of power, insufficient to arm treachery, and limited to an unalterable period, being chastened of the excitements to fraud and force, leaves the mind open to virtue, and the certainty of returning to a private station, settles its bias. From the foundation of Rome to the accession of Augustus, Was above seven centuries; and from thence to the termination of its empire, less than five. The first was a term of growth, the second of decline. The first of progressive prosperity; the second of oscillations depending upon the change of character. The first was a term of rotation, the second of permanent or hereditary power. The corruption or error of electing the same man a second time to the consular office, was a symptom and became an instrument of the destruction of the republic, except for which, we can only compute the probability of its duration, by an inference from the long term of its existence under the auspices of the annual rotation o[ executive magistrates, and a division of power. The same period demonstrates the error of the objection, that rotation causes a loss of talents to the public. It would have been most likely to produce this loss in military affairs. For seven centuries Rome applied the principle of rotation to her generals, and conquered; for five, she trusted to experience, and was subdued. The rotary generals and statesmen of the little Athenian republic, destined it to live for ever in the annals of fame, and most of its contemporary governments are for ever dead. As to civil affairs, the claim of experience would probably be answered by the old adage, but the burst of talents in both cases which blazes forth whenever the monopoly of experience is destroyed by rotation, is accounted for by the fall of the monopoly. The trade being laid open, the wares increase, and are made better by competition. Talents, civil and military, ale created by the prospect of employment, and smothered by the monopoly of experience.

The Cruz term limit bill is likely just a head f**e designed to distract the American people and give the appearance that the elected class is listening to the people's complaints about the corrupt system. The likelihood that congress-weasels would support legislation that puts them out of the center of power politics is slim and none, and slim is on his way out the door. Certainly, for any such bill to be considered it would have to "grandfather" in the incumbent class.

But it's a measure that is long overdue, and a compromise that would be worth taking.

Yours for the t***h,
Bob Livingston
Bob Livingston
Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter™

Rose42

Good article! Do you have a link for it?

Liberty Tree

[quote=pafret]The e******n process in America has become a disguise for corruption that attracts the corrupt. When men and women go to Washington, they pretty soon learn that they are paid by the federal government and, therefore, they are in the hire of the federal government. No allegiance to their constituents is necessary and, as a matter of fact, there is very soon is even little pretension — at least until e******n time.

One need merely look at the fossils who have held office for the last generation; people like Rep. John Conyers, Sen. Thad Cochran, Sen. John McCain, Sen. Mitch McConnell, Sen. Patrick Leahy, Sen. Orrin Hatch, Sen. Richard Shelby, Rep. James Sensenbrenner, Sen. Chuck Schumer, and Sen. Chuck Grassley — all of whom have "served" 30 years or more — to see why a term limit bill like the one introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz and co-sponsored by Republican Senators Marco Rubio, Mike Lee and David Purdue is necessary.

Limiting the terms of representatives and senators and eliminating their federal pensions would be a first step to restore our liberty.

If Americans could restore their power over so-called elected representatives, this could cut out the smoke and mirrors of politics. I think the hour is late and maybe even too late, but let's try to reverse all the perks that our "elected representatives" have bestowed upon themselves.

If we are to undertake this monumental task we must first look back to see when and how republicanism died.

The year 1913 was a terrible one for human liberty. The 16th and 17th Amendments were ratified that year, and the Federal Reserve central bank was established. The Federal Reserve created a fiat money system of theft for the benefit of the banksters and the moneyed elites. It is designed to impoverish the people. The 16th Amendment established a progressive income tax that the U.S. Supreme Court failed to strike down. The 17th Amendment changed the way Senators were selected, taking the appointing power from state legislatures and placing it in the hands of v**ers. That removed the final nail holding the checks and balances the states had in place over federal power.

Most of the nails had already been removed in 1861 when Abraham Lincoln shredded the Constitution, stripped Americans of their strongest check against federal tyranny and invaded the secessionist states. The result is that in 1913 the U.S. government was taken over once and probably for all time by moneyed power.

Many of the Founders — particularly the anti-Federalists — feared a powerful central government. The Constitution they established to create a restraint on federal power decreed that each state's legislature would choose its two senators as one of the checks against a strong central government.

Depending upon their point of view, Founders either hailed or lamented the fact that, by simply refusing to appoint Senators, the States could see the central government "destroyed" (William Richardson Davie) and "put an end to" (Samuel Johnston). Or, as Alexander Hamilton (who actually wanted a U.S. system similar to British mercantilism) opined: "It is certainly true, that the State Legislatures, by forbearing the appointment of Senators, may destroy the National Government."

The 17th Amendment was proposed ostensibly to correct a procedural problem that cropped up when divided State legislatures were unable to agree on a Senator to send to Washington, D.C. This would leave States unrepresented.

According to a research paper by Wendy Schiller from Brown University and Charles Stewart III from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, in about 2 percent of cases the State legislatures were deadlocked and unable to resolve their differences and select a Senator. However, it did occur — even occurring in the very first Congress, when the State of New York went without Senate representation for three months.

The direct e******n of Senators by the people ended that problem, but created a whole new problem in which Senators are now bought and paid for by the banksters and lobbyists. It is this system that explains why the Republican elite have gone against Republican v**ers on subjects like amnesty for i*****l a***ns, Obamacare, etc., which are pushed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and big corporations,

Term limits and repealing the 17th Amendment would take the money out of senate e******ns on the federal level. Senators would be beholden to their state legislatures rather than the corporatist class which lines their pockets and finances their re-e******n campaigns.

Their ability to v**e for themselves pay raises, their tenure and pension perks, their liberal, special low-cost health perks not available to citizens, their immunity from the laws they pass on the people, their retirement plans paid for by the government (read: the people) and their lack of term limits must all be removed. Their salaries should be paid by their respective States.

The notion that long-serving politicians and political bureaucrats would become obstructionist to the will of the people, corrupt and wealthy off government is not new. John Taylor of Caroline, in his book, "An Inquiry into the Principles and Policy of the Government of the United States," published in 1814, warned about that very thing.

Before publishing this first of his four books on politics and agriculture, Taylor, a lawyer, served as cavalry colonel and a m*****a major in the Revolutionary War, served in the Virginia House of Delegates and two stints in the U.S. Senate, so he had keen insight into the corrosive nature of politics:

Great power, or a long possession of power, changes a man's moral nature, whether it is derived from inheritance or e******n. Patriots, as well as princes, become tyrants from being steeped in the same menstruum, and yet nations are still to learn, that its intoxicating qualities are the same upon both. They consider its effect as natural in one case, and monstrous in the other; as if both princes and patriots were not men. Revolution falls, because its usual remedy is only to draw the menstruum from e******n instead of inheritance, into which to plunge the moral qualities of human nature. Even a hope of office corrupts eloquence. It ceases to be the animated auxiliary of t***h, and becomes the mercenary ally of interest. Honesty is exchanged for art. An artificial character is formed by a possibility of continuing considerable power. It assumes different principles with different persons. It gilds its baits with patronage, contract and charter, at the publick expense. And the varnish it assumes is to conceal the foulness of the stuff it hides. Whereas a portion of power, insufficient to arm treachery, and limited to an unalterable period, being chastened of the excitements to fraud and force, leaves the mind open to virtue, and the certainty of returning to a private station, settles its bias. From the foundation of Rome to the accession of Augustus, Was above seven centuries; and from thence to the termination of its empire, less than five. The first was a term of growth, the second of decline. The first of progressive prosperity; the second of oscillations depending upon the change of character. The first was a term of rotation, the second of permanent or hereditary power. The corruption or error of electing the same man a second time to the consular office, was a symptom and became an instrument of the destruction of the republic, except for which, we can only compute the probability of its duration, by an inference from the long term of its existence under the auspices of the annual rotation o[ executive magistrates, and a division of power. The same period demonstrates the error of the objection, that rotation causes a loss of talents to the public. It would have been most likely to produce this loss in military affairs. For seven centuries Rome applied the principle of rotation to her generals, and conquered; for five, she trusted to experience, and was subdued. The rotary generals and statesmen of the little Athenian republic, destined it to live for ever in the annals of fame, and most of its contemporary governments are for ever dead. As to civil affairs, the claim of experience would probably be answered by the old adage, but the burst of talents in both cases which blazes forth whenever the monopoly of experience is destroyed by rotation, is accounted for by the fall of the monopoly. The trade being laid open, the wares increase, and are made better by competition. Talents, civil and military, ale created by the prospect of employment, and smothered by the monopoly of experience.

The Cruz term limit bill is likely just a head f**e designed to distract the American people and give the appearance that the elected class is listening to the people's complaints about the corrupt system. The likelihood that congress-weasels would support legislation that puts them out of the center of power politics is slim and none, and slim is on his way out the door. Certainly, for any such bill to be considered it would have to "grandfather" in the incumbent class.

But it's a measure that is long overdue, and a compromise that would be worth taking.

Yours for the t***h,
Bob Livingston
Bob Livingston
Editor, The Bob Livingston Letter™[/quote]

If the 17th amendment were repealed the money brokers would just t***sfer their money from the senators to the state legislatures.

The Critical Critic Loc: Turtle Island

A common, but misconstrued retort. State legislators, though varied by state, have term limits. Negating the effectiveness of this theory. None can be bought for a lifetime.

Example:

A system with senators who serve one two-year term and two four-year terms every ten years is considered a 2-4-4 term system. In the 12 states where the length of the term is two years, all state senate seats are up for re-e******n every two years.

pafret Loc: Northeast

email@news.boblivingstonletter.com

Or look up Bob Livingstone. Newsletter is free.

Rose42

Just found it. Thanks

3357hot

找不着。