On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 20:12:41 -0000, wrote:

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:30:24 -0000, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 01 Dec 2016 19:23:00 -0000, Phil Kangas wrote:


"James Wilkinson Sword"

If 90% of you live in one half of the country,
and 10% in the other half, why the hell should
the two groups get equal votes?


Why should the 90% be able to tell the 10%
how to govern their states? We are a
republic of states not a democracy. States
have rights of their own. That's the idea of
the EC.

But you're not voting for states, you're voting for the national government.

If the "national government" only governed "national issues" it would
not be a problem but since FDR the federal government has expanded
it's powers into state issues in a way that is specialty prohibited by
the 9th and 10th amendments. In some cases they use the power to tax
and distribute that money. In other cases it is at the point of a gun.
Perhaps you folks are OK with an abusive central power but you still
have a queen so I am not surprised. Doesn't the queen pick your PM?

I never said they should be poking their noses into state affairs, but who gets into power should be on a per person decision. No one person is more important just because they live in another state.

--
The longest word word has 189,819 letters, and takes three hours to pronounce:
http://www.digitalspy.com/fun/news/a...-to-pronounce/