Repeal the 17th Amendment!

[rightwinger]

We weren't a second rate power, Bubba....We were pretty much masters of the Western Hemisphere.

And America was already well on its way to being the most wealthy and strongest nation on Earth because of the mechanization of the Industrial Revolution, not because of anything that racist, tyrant thug Woodrow Wilson did.

Meaning we were bigger than Canada and a bunch of Banana Republics

It was Wilson who put us on track to be a global player

<<<<gong!>>>> That would be Dwight Eisenhower, actually.

You would impress more if you had said FDR

 

[Oddball]

In the period since 1913, we have moved from a second rate power to the richest and strongest nation on earth. The people are more secure and have a superior standard of living. That is a result of a higher percentage of GDP.

Like it or not, we now have a stronger central government and are better off for it

We weren't a second rate power, Bubba....We were pretty much masters of the Western Hemisphere.

And America was already well on its way to being the most wealthy and strongest nation on Earth because of the mechanization of the Industrial Revolution, not because of anything that racist, tyrant thug Woodrow Wilson did.

Meaning we were bigger than Canada and a bunch of Banana Republics

It was Wilson who put us on track to be a global player

It was Wilson who put us on track to be the world's military butt-insky....Seems nobody on the left can mind their own damned business.

 

[Vidi]

We also had a federal gubmint that only consumed a few percent of GDP, no ridiculous foreign interventionist wars, no direct taxes on incomes, a currency of substance, virtually no federal debt and a national economy that was the greatest success story in all of human history.....Compared to the total mess we have today in the District of Criminals, that devolution.

In the period since 1913, we have moved from a second rate power to the richest and strongest nation on earth. The people are more secure and have a superior standard of living. That is a result of a higher percentage of GDP.

Like it or not, we now have a stronger central government and are better off for it

We weren't a second rate power, Bubba....We were pretty much masters of the Western Hemisphere.

And America was already well on its way to being the most wealthy and strongest nation on Earth because of the mechanization of the Industrial Revolution, not because of anything that racist, tyrant thug Woodrow Wilson did.

HAHAHAHAHA!

amazingly bad grasp of reality you have there.

We became the worlds manufacturing leader because we werent bombed to hell and back in the world wars. Our factories always stood while our conmpetitions factories were destroyed in two world wars. While we were building products, they were rebuilding cities and nations. Its fairly easy to become wealthy when you dont have to rebuild everything over and over.

Even then, it was only through the genius of Eisenhower that we truly became an economic superpower. In a perfect example of Government leading the way, he invested in infrastructure, creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and providing private industry the means to ship its product across the country quickly and efficiently.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Aid_Highway_Act_of_1956

 

[Oddball]

I was speaking of before 1913, you putz.

Try and keep up.

 

[Vidi]

I was speaking of before 1913, you putz.

Try and keep up.

Before 1913, we were recovering from the Civil War. We werent a superpower, we were barely a power.

We fought Spain, a declining power, to wrestle away a few places like Puerto Rico and the Phillipines from them. We intervened a few times in Latin America but that was mostly AFTER 1913. ( Mexico, 1914, Haiti 1915 )

So, what BEFORE 1913 are you refering too?

OOOOOOOHHHHHH!!!! You must be refering to the Progressive Era! Which began in 1890's and extrended all the way until the early 1920's!

Is that what you mean? That we were a World Power under the Progressives?

But wait...I thought you were against Progressives? Isnt that right?

So how is it, you can reconcile the fact that the period youre refering to the US becoming a world power is known as the Progressive Era? Hmmm?

 

[Oddball]

The Industrial Revolution also happened prior to 1913.

Giving the warmongering tyrant Wilson the credit for the industriousness and inventiveness of the American people is the height of socialist progressive hubris.

 

[rightwinger]

We weren't a second rate power, Bubba....We were pretty much masters of the Western Hemisphere.

And America was already well on its way to being the most wealthy and strongest nation on Earth because of the mechanization of the Industrial Revolution, not because of anything that racist, tyrant thug Woodrow Wilson did.

Meaning we were bigger than Canada and a bunch of Banana Republics

It was Wilson who put us on track to be a global player

It was Wilson who put us on track to be the world's military butt-insky....Seems nobody on the left can mind their own damned business.

Yup.....after we return to our pre-1913 form of government (gold standard anyone?)we can go back to being isolationist.

 

[Oddball]

So much for the myth of the peaceful piety of socialist progressives.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It was Wilson who put us on track to be the world's military butt-insky....Seems nobody on the left can mind their own damned business.

Because of Wilson and WWI, we became the industrial colossus of the world. Because of FDR and WWII, we also became the military colossus of the world. And Bush, a conservative in comparison to the Progressive and New Deal presidents, managed to almost break the military and the economy to boot.

You offer nothing constructive in opposition to those three.

 

[Oddball]

Because of Wilson and is arrogant meddling in WWI, WWII was inevitable....It also set the stage for the disastrous interventions in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.....

But hey, it's always a welcome sight to watch the left give us a full display of their love for meddlesome foreign wars.....It makes all your bitching bout GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!! ring extra hollow.

 

[Vidi]

So much for the myth of the peaceful piety of socialist progressives.

And so much for the myth of your understanding of history.

The Progressive Era coincided with the Industrial Revolution. The strength of our nation was built at that point on the backs of the working class being propeled into a new emerging Middle Class.

Once again, proving that American growth is created NOT from the top down but from the bottom up.

Peace and piety are bullshit labels those who pretend to have understanding throw about like glitter bombs, hoping they stick but failing to make any real point other than their own patheticness.

 

[Vidi]

Because of Wilson and is arrogant meddling in WWI, WWII was inevitable....It also set the stage for the disastrous interventions in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.....

But hey, it's always a welcome sight to watch the left give us a full display of their love for meddlesome foreign wars.....It makes all your bitching bout GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!! ring extra hollow.

now youre blaming Wilson for World War II?

Wow youll rewrite the ntirety of World History to make a point wont you?

The most direct cause of World War II was the Treaty of Versailles, which threw Germany into a depression starting in the 1920's. A hungry and desperate people turned to Hitler to bring Germany back from the economic devestation that Treaty caused.

Had America been the world power you pretend it to be at the time, Wilson, as the littlest power in the "Big Three" may have been able to make some changes to alleve some of the burden placed on Germany by that Treaty. However, Wilson could not be seen as weak on Germany or he would surely be voted out in the next election and with both the British and the French ( the other two of the Big Three ) hell bent on revenge against Germany ( who hadnt started the war in the first place ) Wilson could do nothing as he was outnumbered.

Then there was the League of Nations which was completely opposed by guess who? Yep, the Republicans. They wanted a return to the isolationist policies of the past, sure that in the future, we could not again be drawn into any more of "Europes wars"

 

[Listening]

Like it or not, we now have a stronger central government and are better off for it

Another baseless conclusion that the left constantly bleats in an effort to somehow hypnotise people into thinking they should be grateful that Obama is trying to suck our liberties away at an incredible pace.

 

[Oddball]

Because of Wilson and is arrogant meddling in WWI, WWII was inevitable....It also set the stage for the disastrous interventions in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.....

But hey, it's always a welcome sight to watch the left give us a full display of their love for meddlesome foreign wars.....It makes all your bitching bout GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!! ring extra hollow.

now youre blaming Wolson for World War II?

Wow youll rewrite the ntirety of World History to make a point wont you?

The most direct cause of World War II was the Treaty of Versailles, which threw Germany into a depression starting in the 1920's. A hungry and desperate people turned to Hitler to bring Germany back from the economic devestation that Treaty caused.

Had America been the world power you pretend it to be at the time, Wilson, as the littlest power in the "Big Three" may have been able to make some changes to alleve some of the burden placed on Germany by that Treaty. However, Wilson could not be seen as weak on Germany or he would surely be voted out in the next election and with both the British and the French ( the other two of the Big Three ) hell bent on revenge against Germany ( who hadnt started the war in the first place ) Wilson could do nothing as he was outnumbered.

Then there was the League of Nations which was completely opposed by guess who? Yep, the Republicans. They wanted a return to the isolationist policies of the past, sure that in the future, we could not again be drawn into any more of "Europes wars"

Anyone who knows history understands that the Treaty of Versailles, which Wilson was a party to, set the stage for WWII...So, yes, Wilson was responsible for the second war, however indirectly.

No American intervention, and the Europeans would've had to work it all out for themselves after the stalemated war.

 

[Listening]

Because of Wilson and is arrogant meddling in WWI, WWII was inevitable....It also set the stage for the disastrous interventions in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.....

But hey, it's always a welcome sight to watch the left give us a full display of their love for meddlesome foreign wars.....It makes all your bitching bout GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!! ring extra hollow.

now youre blaming Wolson for World War II?

Wow youll rewrite the ntirety of World History to make a point wont you?

The most direct cause of World War II was the Treaty of Versailles, which threw Germany into a depression starting in the 1920's. A hungry and desperate people turned to Hitler to bring Germany back from the economic devestation that Treaty caused.

Had America been the world power you pretend it to be at the time, Wilson, as the littlest power in the "Big Three" may have been able to make some changes to alleve some of the burden placed on Germany by that Treaty. However, Wilson could not be seen as weak on Germany or he would surely be voted out in the next election and with both the British and the French ( the other two of the Big Three ) hell bent on revenge against Germany ( who hadnt started the war in the first place ) Wilson could do nothing as he was outnumbered.

Then there was the League of Nations which was completely opposed by guess who? Yep, the Republicans. They wanted a return to the isolationist policies of the past, sure that in the future, we could not again be drawn into any more of "Europes wars"

Anyone who knows history understands that the Treaty of Versailles, which Wilson was a party to, set the stage for WWII...So, yes, Wilson was responsible for the second war, however indirectly.

No American intervention, and the Europeans would've had to work it all out for themselves after the stalemated war.

What is more fascinating is Pat Buchanan's assertion that our entry into the war (WW II) caused the Iron Curtain. He believes that had we not rattled our sabres Hitler would have focused on Russia alone and the two of them would have chewed each other up to the point that Russia would have had no punch once the war was over. Germany would have still lost. And England and the U.S. would have had minimal involvement.

All speculation...but not without some thought.

In the end we will never know because we did not go these specfic routes.

Now, what has this got to do with the 17th amendment ? I am not sure.

What I am more tuned into is that if the senators had their strings pulled by state government, there would not be all this garbage that goes on where the fed just pushed unfunded mandates down the chain with a flip attitude of "deal with it".

 

[Vidi]

now youre blaming Wolson for World War II?

Wow youll rewrite the ntirety of World History to make a point wont you?

The most direct cause of World War II was the Treaty of Versailles, which threw Germany into a depression starting in the 1920's. A hungry and desperate people turned to Hitler to bring Germany back from the economic devestation that Treaty caused.

Had America been the world power you pretend it to be at the time, Wilson, as the littlest power in the "Big Three" may have been able to make some changes to alleve some of the burden placed on Germany by that Treaty. However, Wilson could not be seen as weak on Germany or he would surely be voted out in the next election and with both the British and the French ( the other two of the Big Three ) hell bent on revenge against Germany ( who hadnt started the war in the first place ) Wilson could do nothing as he was outnumbered.

Then there was the League of Nations which was completely opposed by guess who? Yep, the Republicans. They wanted a return to the isolationist policies of the past, sure that in the future, we could not again be drawn into any more of "Europes wars"

Anyone who knows history understands that the Treaty of Versailles, which Wilson was a party to, set the stage for WWII...So, yes, Wilson was responsible for the second war, however indirectly.

No American intervention, and the Europeans would've had to work it all out for themselves after the stalemated war.

What is more fascinating is Pat Buchanan's assertion that our entry into the war (WW II) caused the Iron Curtain. He believes that had we not rattled our sabres Hitler would have focused on Russia alone and the two of them would have chewed each other up to the point that Russia would have had no punch once the war was over. Germany would have still lost. And England and the U.S. would have had minimal involvement.

All speculation...but not without some thought.

In the end we will never know because we did not go these specfic routes.

The two front war certainly made the war impossible for Hitler to win. He should have dealt with Britain first then went after Russia.

The simple fact is though, that the Russians pulled off the most amazing recovery in all of history, moving their destroyed factories out of the reach of German bombers and regearing up, especially in terms of tanks. They moved their entire industrial base in less than six months. Simply amazing. After the Battle of Kursk, the Germans had no chance, even if the Us had pulled out of the war, to defeat Russia.

Mr Buchannan is wrong. Had the US not been in the war, Russia would have had far more control of Eastern Europe and may have even continued on beyond Germany in a war of conquest all their own. After all, there was no longer a standing French Army and the Brits, God love them, were hurting far too much to take on Russia at that point. But then Russia did still have Japan to content with, so theres that little problem for them.

 

[Oddball]

No Treaty of Versailles = No Hitler = No WWII.

 

[Listening]

Tony BlankleyColumnist, author
Posted: January 27, 2010 12:03 PM BIO Become a Fan Get Email Alerts Bloggers' Index
Repeal the 17th Amendment

As I was preparing to write a column on the ludicrous maligning of the Tea Party movement by liberals, Democrats and the mainstream media (which I hope to write next week, instead), I started thinking about one of the key objectives of the Tea Party people -- the strict enforcement of the 10th Amendment ("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").

As an early 1960s vintage member of the then-new conservative movement, I remember us focusing on the 10th amendment during the 1964 Goldwater campaign. It has been a staple of conservative thought, and the continued dormancy of 10th amendment enforcement has been one of the failures of our now half-century-old movement.

But just as the Tea Party movement in so many ways seems to represent the 2.0 version of our movement, so I again thought about the 10th amendment anew. After about 10 seconds' thought, it struck me that the best way to revive the 10th Amendment is to repeal the 17th Amendment -- which changes the first paragraph of Article I, Section 3 of the Constitution to provide that each state's senators are to be "elected by the people thereof" rather than being "chosen by the Legislature thereof." (As I Googled the topic, I found out that Ron Paul and others have been talking about this for years. It may be the only subject that could be proposed and ratified at a constitutional convention with three-fourths of the state legislatures.)

At first blush, this might seem counterintuitive, as the 17th Amendment was brought about by a populist movement supercharged by muckraking articles in the newspapers of William Randolph Hearst. Those articles exposed corporate bribery of state legislators to control senatorial votes. As the direct election of senators by the people was a reaction to the corrupt lobbying of state legislatures that so aggrieved late-19th-century Americans, it might seem odd to recommend its repeal now -- when again, corrupt lobbying and the aggrandizing of excessive government power over the people is part of the fuel that is driving the tea parties. It certainly seems particularly odd for me to suggest this just a week after the election of Scott Brown to the Senate by an aggrieved public that has just overwhelmed with their individual votes the Boston Democratic machine.

<snip>

The most efficient method of regaining the original constitutional balance is to return to the original constitutional structure. If senators were again selected by state legislatures, the longevity of Senate careers would be tethered to their vigilant defense of their state's interest -- rather than to the interest of Washington forces of influence.

The Senate then would take on its original function -- the place where the states are represented in the federal government.

http://townhall.com/columnists/tonyblankley/2010/01/27/repeal_the_17th_amendment/page/full/

 

[Vidi]

No Treaty of Versailles = No Hitler = No WWII.

I agree however:

Because of Wilson and is arrogant meddling in WWI, WWII was inevitable....It also set the stage for the disastrous interventions in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan.....

But hey, it's always a welcome sight to watch the left give us a full display of their love for meddlesome foreign wars.....It makes all your bitching bout GEORGE BOOOOOOOSH!! ring extra hollow.

Anyone who knows history understands that the Treaty of Versailles, which Wilson was a party to, set the stage for WWII...So, yes, Wilson was responsible for the second war, however indirectly.

No American intervention, and the Europeans would've had to work it all out for themselves after the stalemated war.

You tried to lay the Treaty of Versialles at Wilsons feet.

Inaccurate at best.



Oh and I love the fact that you COMPLETELY IGNORED the fact that the era in which you claim America rose to power in the world has been labeled the Progessive Era.

Nice dodge on that bullet, eh? Now you can continue on with your inaccurate veiw of history unencumbered by the truth.

 

[Oddball]

Wilson was a party to the treaty...This is a historical fact that cannot be denied.

It's also undeniable that were there no American intervention in WWI, the war would've stalemated and the parties would have had to sue for a much more equitable peace agreement.

Ergo, Wilson's intervention was, at least indirectly, responsible for the rise of Hitler and WWII.