Connect with us

Everything

We are not anti-Federalists, we are conservative, constitutionalist Federalists

Published

on

Many people have heard of the term federalism and believe it is synonymous with conservative or the right. With the rising of the new Federalist Party, it is important to know what is Federalism. If we look at North America, you see that Canada, United States, and Mexico are all based on a federalist form of government. Most of the countries around the world which have a federalist form of government would not be considered conservative.

In the United States, our Founding Fathers were divided on this issue. Should the United States have a strong federal government and Constitution or simply have each State be a nation-state and stick with the Articles of Confederation. The debate over Federalism was most prominently seen in the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers.

The Federalist ultimately won the debate, and the compromise was the Bill of Rights. I think all modern day Federalist are happy this vigorous debate happened, and we are ever grateful to the Anti-Federalist for the Bill of Rights.

In today’s America, it might seem that the Anti-Federalist were correct. That the Federal government is too powerful and today we don’t need a Federalist Party but an Anti-Federalist Party.

I wholeheartedly agree that the federal government is way too powerful, but I would also argue that state governments are way too powerful. If our Founding Fathers were alive today, they would look at our government and wouldn’t recognize our government as something born out of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I believe the Progressive movement in the early 20th Century from both Republicans and Democrats and the adoption of the 16th & 17th Amendments began to move this country into a centralized government which the Federalist would have opposed.

Therefore, if the Anti-Federalist seemed to have been more right should the Federalist Party rebrand itself as The Anti-Federalist Party?

In one sense, yes and no. The Federalist Party believes in having a federalist form of government by going back to the intended role on which the federal government was formed and not what we see today. So in one sense for the Federalist Party to accomplish its goal it must first become the Anti-Federalist Party until we bring down the size of the federal government and restore powers back to the States and the People.

Today, we see conservatives looking at the political landscape and seeing two political parties which are emulating the progressive policies of the early 20th Century. Many, including myself, want something new, or better yet, something old.

We want to go back to the founding principles which formed this country. We do want a federal government but one that is limited to the enumerated powers in Article 1 Section 8. Instead of Republicans fighting over a replacement for the Affordable Care Act (ACA – ObamaCare), why isn’t the discussion about repealing the ACA and reducing the federal government to its defined Constitutional role. The federal government has no business in nationalizing or regulating health care. We the People have not enumerated those powers in the Constitution to the federal government.

We also don’t want state governments regulated our everyday lives.
The Anti-Federalist were not only worried about State sovereignty being usurped but individual rights. If they looked at what states are doing today, they would be appalled.

What we are lacking isn’t federalism in the country what we are lacking is genuine conservatism applied to federalism. We lack leaders throughout government that believe that government is a tool, not the solution. It’s a tool for the general welfare of society. To protect our natural rights, which are universal and inalienable. Leaders that recognize that we are a People with a government and not a Government with people.

We want a federal and state governments limited to the powers we enumerate to them. Not Rights the government graciously grants us. We demand Conservative Federalism but can we expect to receive it?

The answer will always be no. You can’t wait to receive it. You must take it. You must make the decision today. Will I take back my Rights? Will I finally realize that the binary choice of Democrats and Republicans is a false narrative?

If you agree with me and want our country and government back then today is the day we resurrect the conservative movement. Together we can bring real conservative federalism back to America. I believe we can do this if we come together and destroy the binary choice of Democrat or Republican. If we unite under the flag of Federalist Party and begin our campaign of Anti-Federalism we can and we will bring true conservative federalism back to America.

Mr. Roditis a candidate for California State Controller. He is an entrepreneur and owns several companies. He graduated from UCSD with a B.A. in Political Science/International Relations. He's a former City Commissioner with the City of Anaheim, CA. He's a Conservative Constitutional Federalist. Follow him on Twitter @KonRoditis

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Guns and Crime

Minority Report Act of 2018: A law guaranteed to end gun violence

Published

on

As Democrats resort to using children as political leverage to advance their effort to void the Second Amendment following a Florida High School shooting, Republicans are blaming the FBI for the tragedy as political cover to save their election chances in November.

In the White House, Trump blames the FBI for being too preoccupied with Russia to notice the warning signs of Nikolas Cruz’s “mental instability.”

In an order demanding a review of the FBI, Attorney General Jeff Sessions concluded that “It is now clear that the warning signs were there and tips to the FBI were missed. We see the tragic consequences of those failures.”

While it can be argued that the FBI should have done a better job—they admitted as much already—it’s absurd to conclude that this tragedy would have never happened “if only…” However, if we accept the conclusion of the Attorney General, then there is only one possible action we can take—reintroduce and revise H.R.5611 under a new name, the Minority Report Act of 2018.

H.R.5611 was originally presented following the Orlando shooting in 2016 and was intended “to prevent terrorists from launching attacks and obtaining passports, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.” (emphasis mine).

That’s the original version of the bill, but as I mentioned earlier, it will be revised. The Minority Report Act of 2018 takes the original legislation and makes it better with the creation of the PreCrime Department.

While it’s true that “warning signs” and “tips” can be an indicator of a possible future crime, PreCrime is able to see what’s going to happen before it occurs, even down to the time and place. Imagine how wonderful it would be to pass a law that actually ends gun violence, unlike the thousands of failed laws already on the books.

If the Minority Report Act of 2018 becomes law, the government will need to find three gifted Precogs who can previsualize crimes by receiving visions of the future, but that shouldn’t be too hard for a government who expects the FBI to possess that gift. Still, once we have the Precogs in place, we’ll finally have a law that works.

Of course, the Minority Report Act of 2018 is satire used to prove the point that more laws won’t succeed in ending gun violence. However, more anti-Second Amendment laws will destroy our Republic, and that’s a crime that doesn’t require a Precog to predict.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

EXCLUSIVE: Interview with Yehuda Remer, Author and Second Amendment Advocate

Published

on

Yesterday, I spoke with Second Amendment advocate and author, as well as my good friend, Yehuda Remer. We discussed his conservatism, how he developed a love of guns and how he turned that into a career, and how he got into writing.

Below is a transcript of our exchange:
JF: Let’s begin. Tell us about your background. Growing up in blue LA, how did you become conservative?

YR: So I grew up in an apolitical home where politics were not mentioned. As an Orthodox Jew, I always figured I was a Democrat because hell, aren’t all Jews? In 2007 while Obama was campaigning for his first term as President, I was driving to work one morning and listening to the local FM DJs. They were talking about some highly inappropriate things and as I sat there listening, I swear I felt the brain cells exploding one by one in my head. I truly felt myself getting stupider by the Second. I decided to turn on AM radio and over the next year, I found myself nodding in agreement with the many common sense things they had to say. Before long I realized not only was I not a Democrat, but I wasn’t even a Republican. I was a full on Conservative, almost Tea Party like. Following that epiphany, I started blowing up Ben Shapiro’s phone because we grew up together and he was my go-to guy. He explained all my questions not in preaching way but in a way that allowed me to make up my own mind based on what he said. I guess you can call me a Ben Shapiro “disciple.”

JF: That’s awesome. What made the Second Amendment and guns your passion?

YR: During my road into politics, I started learning about the Constitution. Because I grew up in an apolitical home, I didn’t care about the country and took it for granted. But after learning about the Constitution, the one that stuck out was the Second Amendment. It made sense to me. Up until that point, I thought the only people allowed to have guns were law enforcement, military, and bad guys. I never realized that a citizen of the United States could own and carry a firearm. My mind was blown. A buddy of mine called me and invited me to the gun range. Let’s just say, the rest is history.

JF: How did you learn everything you need to know?

YR: Most of it I was born with. I’m just a natural. The rest, well, that was with hard work. Like I mentioned before, I would ask Ben to explain tons of things to me. As for my firearms knowledge, the Internet is a wondrous place and so are many people in the Second Amendment world. Any questions I would ask or have, people didn’t hesitate in explaining things to me. Many times I would explain to people that I am a novice. I want to understand. When you approach someone looking to learn, you would be surprised how forthcoming people can be. I constantly am reading about different approaches in the world to get a more full circle understanding. Another thing, especially in the firearms industry, there is no such thing as a stupid question, unlike in other places.

JF: Why do you think the Second Amendment is important? Obviously, as a conservative, we know the answers to this, but would love to hear from your perspective.

YR: I mean, the Second Amendment is the one that protects them all. Without it, we would not be able to keep and protect the freedoms we all hold dear. We would end up like another England, and we all know how well that worked out for them 250 years ago.

JF: How did you turn this passion from a hobby to a career in writing and media?

YR: Well, Ben Shapiro gave me my first real break when I began writing for his old site, Truth Revolt. I started helping him with the back end but that turned to a full-time writing gig. From there, I transitioned into children’s books. I needed a way to educate my children on gun safety and was shocked to find out that there were no books geared towards kids about firearms safety. You have some organizations out there and they do a fine job. But I wanted something where I can climb into my kids’ beds with them and read them a book before they went to bed. After tons of research and finding nothing, I decided to write my first book, Safety On, as a tool to teach my kids about gun safety.

JF: How did you break out into public media, appearing on NRATV many times, getting media credentials to the SHOT show and being interviewed on major gun radio shows?

YR: Wow! Great question. A few months after my first book came out, I applied for a media badge as an author to the NRA Convention in Atlanta. I was shocked that I actually got it. But it paid off. I went there, not knowing anyone and planned on walking around in circles, just handing my book out. Two huge things happened. The first was I literally bumped in Cam Edwards of NRATV and the host of Cam & Co. As a huge fan, I found myself tongue-tied and feeling like a 14-year-old girl at a Justin Bieber concert. Luckily, I quickly snapped out of my daze and offered Cam a signed copy of my book. He took one look at it and told me to wait right there, he is putting me on TV. That was my first appearance on NRATV. Since then, Cam has had me on many more times and even helped me get on some other shows. He has been a blessing. But at one point while I was there, I went to the media room to take a break. Someone walked up to me and asked me if I was the guy who wrote the kids book on gun safety. To this day, Rob Morse of the Polite Society Podcast and I are still friends. Being on that show opened up so many doors for me into the Second Amendment radio world. It truly was a blessing.

As for SHOT Show, one of the connections I made was to the Firearms Chat Podcast and they invited me to be a co-host of their show at SHOT. So getting in was super easy.

JF: When you moved to Texas, did that help you bring this passion out more, considering that Texas is much more gun friendly?

YR: Of course it did. Within six weeks of moving to Texas, I had my license to carry. Life became instantly safer and better.

JF: Your work on this is an inspiration and the Second Amendment and gun rights are something we all need to hold dear. Thanks for being a voice for that.

Where can everyone find your work and appearances, and if they want to follow you?

YR: So all four of my books are available on Amazon. If you want to find out more about me and my appearances I have made, you can visit my website, www.yehudaremer.com.


Yehuda Remer is the author of Safety On: An introduction to the world of firearms for kids, Safety On: The Coloring Book, 10 Little Liberals: A Tale of Hope, and The ABCs of Guns. He lives in Texas with his wife and kids and can be found shooting, writing, and trolling.

Continue Reading

Guns and Crime

Gun control: Washington doublespeak used to void the Second Amendment

Published

on

When it comes to measuring the political dishonesty of our elected officials in Washington, I often recall the old joke “How do you know if a politician is lying? His lips are moving.”

While some of the untruths told by these lying liars aren’t obvious until after they get caught—such as the GOP promise to repeal Obamacare root and branch—others are obvious before the fact if we keep our ears tuned-in to the use of Washington doublespeak.

Once the proprietary property of the liberal-left, Washington doublespeak has found its way into the lexicon of the so-called conservative-right as well.

  • Immigration reform? Doublespeak for amnesty and citizenship for millions of illegal aliens.
  • Budget reform? Doublespeak for abandoning fiscal responsibility in order to build bigger government.
  • Tax cuts? Doublespeak for tax increases to pay for bigger government.
  • NSA data collection? Doublespeak for unconstitutional, warrantless electronic spying on Americans.

In the aftermath of the 17 murders at a Florida High School, we are once again hearing the words “gun control,” which is doublespeak for creating ways to void the Second Amendment.

As he did as a candidate following the Orlando Night Club shooting in 2016, Trump is backing an effort to “improve” gun laws as a way to keep firearms out of the hands of “mentally disturbed” individuals—an idea strongly supported by many Republicans. Besides the fact that “erratic behavior” pretty much describes Donald Trump and the GOP, who gets to decide who fits the definition of mentally disturbed?

Is it people like Joy Behar, who believes Christians who hear God’s voice suffer from a mental illness? Or would it be psychiatrists who believe that conservatism is a sign of mental instability?

Not content with anything coming out of Washington, the Brady Center is using the Florida tragedy to renew its push for Extreme Risk Protection Orders. These laws empower those who are close to an individual “in crisis” to ask a judge to seize that individual’s guns. Once again, who decides what “in crisis” looks like?

As an individual who holds a Biblical worldview, I know that violence will never end unless the heart of man is healed. However, passing arbitrary gun control laws won’t bring an end to gun violence either. In fact, it’s likely to increase the violence. But that won’t stop politicians in Washington from using doublespeak to pass gun control laws anyway.

Originally posted on The Strident Conservative.

 

David Leach is the owner of The Strident Conservative. His daily radio commentary is nationally syndicated with Salem Radio Network and can be heard on stations across America.

Follow the Strident Conservative on Twitter and Facebook. Subscribe to receive podcasts of radio commentaries: iTunes | Stitcher | Tune In | RSS

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.