--- On Wed, 9/17/08, Per Östberg <[log in to unmask]> wrote:


> I've heard this argument (or arguments like > it) in american politics
> before. Is this for real? I mean is this
> something you say just to
> promote the Republican party (over the
> democrats), or do you really
> think that democracy is somewhat
> unimportant? That beeing a republic
> (or any other aspect of your constitution)
> is *more* important than
> beeing a democracy?
> 
**************************************

Being a "Republic" has nothing to do with Democrats and Republicans at all.  It is the very foundation of this country not to have a "Tyranny of the masses" or Tyranny of the Majoity".

Our founding fathers created not one but many individual states of freedom.  If someone truly disagreed with the matters of the state, one could "vote" by moving.  People did this before all the power got centralized in D.C.

Being a "Republic" is a very important concept.  I would even say the founding fathers were concerned about the general voting public, enough so that Senators were to be voted by local elected officials, and NOT the general public.  That way, a truly "Republican" state, would not have a Senator that is "Democrat".  

That of course got changed in 1913, by the 17th amendment.  Also know as the Senator employment act.  Thus ensuring incumbents could make a lifetime carrier out of robbing he public treasury.

And soon it became a family business, thus creating America's royalty.

-Craig

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *