Maggie's Farm

We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Much Sorry with Delays
Birth, Death and All That Stuff in Between
How to Honor Labor Day, Every Day
My Yom Kippur Miracle (Repost from 2010)
Good intro to fly casting
Peach update, with pie
NYC update
Easy for you to say: To the elites on mass immigration
For NYC on 9/11, Sailors' Snug Harbor
Pickled Peaches
Water Shoes
Labor Costs in U.S.
Your "identity"
Good news about The Great Courses
Uses of Hot Pepper Jelly/Sauce, Chutneys, and Jams
A Saturday Drive to Litchfield County, CT
How to Pick a Kayak
Civilized: Fruit forks and knives
Loads of kayaking on Cape Cod
Psychology Experiments' Questionable Results

Categories


All categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Add to Google

Subscribe with Bloglines

Monday, November 5. 2007

Another QQQ

I think people ought to be free at state and local levels to make decisions that even Fred Thompson disagrees with. That’s what freedom is all about. And I think the diversity we have among the states, the system of federalism we have where power is divided between the state and the federal government serves us very, very well.

Fred Thompson, as quoted in Federalist Fred, at Volokh. I am down with that view, Fred.

Posted by Bird Dog in Quotidian Quotable Quote (QQQ) at 14:44 | Comments (5) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

Good luck with that Fred.

The population is in no way ready to resume local responsibility for much nor are the states equipped with the minds it would take to implement states rights..we've all been tugging on the Federal teats too long.

Fred's proposal reminds me of what Tony Blair said in his speech to Congress on advice a constituent gave to Labor Party Leader Keir Hardy in the early part of the 20th century.
Hardy corresponded with the Pankhurst's, a group demanding female sufferage.
Shortly before the election, June 1913 one of the Pankhurst sisters wrote Hardy saying she had been studying Britain carefully and there was a worrying rise in sexual immorality linked to heavy drinking. So she suggested he run on the platform of ,votes for women, chastity for men, and prohibition for all.
He replied saying, "Thank you for your advice, the electoral benefits of which are not immediately discernable"

It's been too long for states to wean themselves off the Federal teat and the population wouldn't stand for less guvment in their lives.....Reagan gave it a shot but even he finally capitulated ...know how I know ..we still have a Dept of Education.

Nope, "Slick" Willie showed how to get socialism refreshed and get away with it ... the Dems are poised to make us a socialist, not a federalist nation. To stop it it will take Civil War II.
#1 Habu on 2007-11-05 15:34 (Reply)
Fred left out esential element of powers division; the people.

But that is just me take from what BD threw down.

He comes across better than any candidate, after his showing on NBC. Russert, contrary to popular commentary, in no way drilled him like he did Hillbillary, but that because he left Tiny no obvious veins.

He did leave an open wound with his sincere but shallow abortion position; he won't hold girls responsible criminal for murder.
#2 Leag on 2007-11-05 16:43 (Reply)
I love Fred's point of view. I don't want my state to be like yours, I don't want my peoples' beliefs shoved down your throat, I don't want homogeneity - I want Federalism. If I don't like my state's take on things important to me, I can move. Follow the Constitution and get the federal government, as well as it's politicians, out of my way.
#3 Lantana on 2007-11-05 20:14 (Reply)
If you ever want federalism back you'd better go buy a gun...now before the Dems outlaw anything but a .22 single shot.

Buddy said something the other day that has ecjoed in my mind ever since. Paraphrasing , it was something like "I sure do hope we don't have to fight our way back to the Constitution" ... how absolutely clear is that summation of a deep concern, and an acknowledgment that we have strayed so far from the Constitution.
#3.1 Habu on 2007-11-05 20:22 (Reply)
Folks should read up on the decade of the 1850s. Not a pretty thing, the slip slide into rebellion. Not so long ago, either. Great grandpappy's time. As it says in the Book of Matthew and a few other places in the Bible, it takes four generations to forget something big--then you're back memory-free and can do it all over again.
#3.1.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-05 21:38 (Reply)

Add Comment
(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)

By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email
addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications.

Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u],
[url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

BBCode format allowed
 
 
A Chris Southern Consulting website.