Carrollton Conservative Republican Club

CCRC is committed to preserve, protect, defend and promote Liberty and Freedoms of the US and Texas

07/17/2022

Get your business noticed. Applications are still being accepted for food or craft vendors and sponsors at the annual Carrollton Festival at the Switchyard on Saturday, Nov. 5 in Historic Downtown Carrollton. Booth spaces are available on a first-come, first-served basis. Details at: https://www.cityofcarrollton.com/Home/Components/News/News/4350/27

11/20/2020

Trump Campaign Alleges Voter Fraud in Several States, Plans Further Lawsuits The Trump campaign provided an update on their election legal challenges from the Republican National Committee. Personal attorney for President Trump, Rudy Giuliani said the campaign will likely file a lawsuit in Georgia and are looking into filing lawsuits in New Mexico and Virginia.

10/09/2020

The federal government is NOT the ruling class of our Constitutional Republic, We The People are.

Many people seem to have the impression that federal law supercedes all else, but that is not the case. Or at least it's not supposed to be, Constitutionally speaking. Federal law ONLY takes precedent over state law in the areas ENUMERATED in the Constitution as federal powers.

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.

However, the Constitution DOES limit the states, in some cases. The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution (Article VI, Clause 2), establishes that the Constitution, federal laws made pursuant to it, and treaties made under its authority, constitute the "supreme law of the land". Read that again, federal laws made "PURSUANT TO" the Constitution, ie. within the limits of enumerated federal powers, NOT any federal law. So, state laws cannot supercede federal law in those areas of enumerated power. Which means states cannot pass laws that violate Constitutional protections, ie. the Bill of Rights, that violate free speech, freedom of religion, right to bear arms, due process, etc. The rights protectioned in the Constitution and Bill of Rights are, in fact, the "Supreme Law of the Land."

9th Amendment: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

We The People are the final authority on our rights. Just because a right is not specifically protected by the Constitution or Bill of Rights does NOT mean we don't have it. However, it is up to us, as citizens, to fully understand the difference between a Right and a want, desire or privilege. A right is equally applicable to ALL Americans, not any subgroup. If it is not universally applicable, then it's probably not a right.

Jon Britton aka Doubletap

10/07/2020

During this week in 1787, a signer of the Declaration of Independence passes away. It’s been said that Thomas Stone died of a broken heart.

You’ve probably never heard of Stone. He wasn’t a big, famous personality like Benjamin Franklin. He didn’t do anything flashy, like Caesar Rodney did when he made a midnight ride from Delaware to Philadelphia, making it just in time to vote in favor of the Declaration. Stone didn’t go on to become President like John Adams or Vice President like Elbridge Gerry. Instead, Stone was simply a Patriot who worked hard, served his country, and put his life on the line by signing the Declaration of Independence—a document that King George III viewed as treason.

How wonderful to live in a country where such a statement can be made. He “simply” put his life on the line. Nothing too flashy?! ;)

Unfortunately, Stone’s wife became sickly at about the time that the Declaration was approved. Margaret Stone had decided to get inoculated against small pox, but the process didn’t go well. She was never the same again. For 11 years, she struggled with ill health before finally passing away in 1787.

The grief-stricken Thomas Stone died just four months later. Shortly before his death, he wrote a letter. “I am now in a weak state,” he told his 12-year-old son, “about to travel, and probably shall not see you more.” He was saying good-bye! What would he wish his son to know? What principles would enable his son to live a good and successful life?

“Shun all giddy, loose and wicked company,” Stone told his son, “they will corrupt and lead you into vice, and bring you to ruin. Seek the company of sober, virtuous and good people, who will always shew you examples of rectitude of conduct and propriety of behaviour which will lead to solid happiness. . . . Take care not to be seduced by the professions of any person to do what your heart tells you is wrong . . . .”

Good advice that still rings true today, doesn’t it?

---------------------------
If you enjoy these history posts, please see my note below. :)

Gentle reminder: History posts are copyright © 2013-2020 by Tara Ross. I appreciate it when you use the shar e feature instead of cutting/pasting.

09/28/2020

As has become my habit during presidential election years, I am running a series about the Electoral College: What myths persist about the system and what is the reality?

Last week, I addressed the myth that "only swing states matter." Here is Myth #2:

Myth: The Founders created the Electoral College because they did not trust the people to pick the President.

Fact: The Founders knew that the voice of the people must be reflected in any government if it is to be legitimate. At the Constitutional Convention, George Mason, delegate from Virginia, expressed this sentiment when he declared that “the genius of the people must be consulted.”

There are two angles to consider when discussing this issue.

First, the Founders did distrust human nature, but this distrust has been misinterpreted.

The Founders were students of history—and realists about human nature. They knew that humans are fallible and that power corrupts. They also knew that ambition, selfishness, and greed are constant dangers. “All power in human hands is liable to be abused,” James Madison would later observe.

Unfortunately, the Founders' pragmatism about human nature has been twisted into a claim that they were simply elitists who didn’t trust the people. The allegation misunderstands the point: The Founders didn’t trust ANYONE. They might not have completely trusted the people, but they didn’t trust elected officials, either. Likewise, they didn't completely trust the states or the national government. When push came to shove, they didn't even trust themselves.

Think about that for a minute. The delegates to the Constitutional Convention sat and discussed checks and balances on elected offices they expected to inhabit. “These powerful men gathered in Independence Hall, the most likely candidates for the Senate and the presidency, continued to fear themselves,” historian Carol Berkin concludes.

Second, consider that the delegates to the Constitutional Convention were faced with a very difficult task.

Remember: They'd just fought a Revolution because they had no representation in the British Parliament. They’d laid their lives on the line for important principles of democracy and self-governance. They weren't likely to give up on that so soon. But they also remembered something that we tend to forget: Even if the American colonies had been given representation in Parliament, as they'd wanted, it would not have been enough. Americans still would have been a minority, outvoted time and time again by the majority of citizens at home in England.

Americans still would have been tyrannized.

Thus. the question that faced the delegates to the Constitutional Convention was a difficult one: How could they preserve important principles of self-governance, even as they protect minority groups from the tyranny of the majority?

It's been said that simple democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner. The Founders had to figure out how to create a self-governing society that would never let the sheep end up on the dinner plate.

The Founders' solution was to blend the best elements of many forms of government into their new Constitution. Thus, American government contains some democratic elements (self-governance), but it also contains elements of republicanism (deliberation and compromise) and federalism (states are able to act on their own behalves). Other checks and balances give minorities tools with which to protect themselves from tyrannical majorities. For instance, we have presidential vetoes. We have supermajority requirements to amend the Constitution. We have a Senate (one state, one vote representation), as opposed to the House (one person, one vote representation). The Electoral College is simply another of these protective devices.

The delegates to the Convention felt that they had created a presidential election system that would allow reasonable majorities to rule, even as it protected political minorities from tyranny. It is for this reason that Madison declared, “He [the President] is now to be elected by the people.” Another delegate, Alexander Hamilton, agreed that the new election system would allow the “sense of the people” to “operate in the choice of the [President].”

“The Founders did not trust the people” makes a snazzy sound bite. But the history of the Constitution and its Electoral College shows a much more nuanced picture.

09/21/2020

As has become my habit during presidential election years, I will start running a series about the Electoral College: What myths persist about the system and what is the reality?

Note: I am reprinting a short version of the myths/facts here, but a longer version appears on my website (link appears below).

Myth #1:
Most states are ignored by presidential campaigns because of the Electoral College. Only swing states matter. A direct election system would fix this.

Fact:
There are two reasons why this perception is incorrect.

First, an honest assessment of American history shows that no state is permanently “safe” or “swing.” The identity of these states changes all the time.

History is replete with examples. As recently as 2016, several blue wall states surprised everyone: They voted red for the first time in decades. It would seem they felt taken for granted by the Democratic Party. On the other side of the political aisle, the tiny, safe, red state of Utah threatened to go rogue. Voters didn’t like Donald Trump, but they didn’t like Hillary Clinton, either. For several weeks, the nation wondered if Utah might vote third party.

If a small, safe, red state like Utah “doesn’t matter,” then why did the Republican Party immediately dispatch vice presidential candidate Mike Pence to the state in the closing days of the campaign? Pence's action was important, as it helped bring Utah back into the fold. Meanwhile, if Hillary Clinton had taken similar measures in her blue wall states, she probably could have brought those states back into the fold, too. She would have won the election. It was that close.

(More examples in the long version! 🙂)

Second, presidential elections are not only about the TV commercials and campaign visits in the final weeks and months leading into Election Day.

Presidential elections are as much about the four years of governance before the election as they are about the final commercials. What do voters think of Donald Trump's decisions to build a border wall? How many voters will be influenced by Brett Kavanaugh's 2018 nomination to the Supreme Court and the response of each party? Such decisions and their ramifications are part of governing, but they are also at least a part of “campaigning.” They do as much as a TV commercial (if not more) to influence voting decisions—as candidates and incumbents certainly know.

“Safe” states are not being ignored. They simply made up their minds earlier in the process, based upon the years of decisions that preceded the election.

Finally, consider that all of this is better than the incentives inherent in a national popular vote system.

In a national popular vote system, victory goes to the candidate who can get the most individual votes. Naturally, the states and cities with the most individuals can expect to benefit. Rather than "swing states," the focus will be on a handful of big urban areas.

The Electoral College forces presidential candidates to build a support base that is national in character. Focusing too exclusively on one region or one special interest group causes candidacies to fail. A national popular vote cannot provide this security.

BLM leader: If change doesn’t happen, then ‘we will burn down this system’

09/02/2020

BLM leader: If change doesn’t happen, then ‘we will burn down this system’ The president of Greater New York Black Lives Matter said that if the movement fails to achieve meaningful change during nationwide protests over George Floyd’s killing by Minneapolis police …

08/22/2020

On this day in 1798, a signer of the Declaration of Independence passes away. James Wilson was one of only six men who signed both the Declaration and the United States Constitution.

But why have so few heard of James Wilson? Theodore Roosevelt’s Attorney General called it “one of the mysteries of history, which I have not been able to solve, why [Wilson’s] fame has not kept pace with his service.”

Indeed, Wilson was considered one of the leading political and legal thinkers of his day—“the closest the Founding had to an Aristotle,” as one historian concludes. Wilson litigated several important cases during the Revolutionary War years, including one in which he served as defense counsel for Quakers who had been charged with treason.

It didn’t exactly make him popular at the time.

Wilson also served in the Continental and Confederation Congresses, and he was later appointed to the United States Supreme Court. Nevertheless, his most important contribution may have occurred during the Constitutional Convention in 1787.

Wilson served as a delegate from Pennsylvania.

“Scholars of the Constitutional Convention of 1787 have long recognized the importance of James Wilson to the framing of the Constitution,” Professor William Ewald writes. “He is generally acknowledged to have been one of its principal architects, second in importance only to [James] Madison.”

Wilson has been called “the driving force on the Committee on Detail” that summer. The committee filled in important gaps that had been left undecided on the main convention floor.

After the Convention, the newly proposed Constitution faced charges from anti-Federalists who worried about that document’s lack of a Bill of Rights (among other issues). Wilson was among the first to respond. On October 6, 1787, he delivered a speech at the State House in Philadelphia. The “State House Speech” was printed and distributed throughout the colonies.

In his speech, Wilson noted that a Bill of Rights was not needed because the federal government has only those powers specifically delegated to it by the Constitution.

If the Constitution doesn’t specifically give the federal government power over a free press, then why would we need an amendment protecting the free press from the federal government? “[T]hat very declaration,” Wilson noted, “might have been construed to imply that some degree of power was given, since we undertook to define its extent.”

Wilson’s State House Speech played an important role in ensuring that our Constitution was ratified, despite its initial lack of a Bill of Rights.

Wilson’s legacy has perhaps been lost because of his ignominious end. He’d made some bad investments, and he landed in debtor’s prison—twice! Wilson is thus our only United States Supreme Court Justice to sit in prison while he also sat on the Court. He died, destitute, in 1798.

It was a sad end to an accomplished life, and Wilson surely deserves better. He was one of 55 men to gather in Philadelphia during the summer of 1787. The assembled delegates were students of history—and they had no partisan bias because political parties hadn’t been created yet. Instead, they spent the summer involved in a deep, philosophical debate. How can a diverse nation composed of both large and small states govern itself, even as it treats minority groups fairly? How can the tyranny of the majority be prevented, even as important principles of self-governance are protected?

Those men hammered out the parameters of the new American government, a unique experiment in self-governance that has endured for more than 230 years.

And Wilson was an important part of that.

---------------------------
If you enjoy these history posts, please see my note below. :)

Gentle reminder: History posts are copyright © 2013-2020 by Tara Ross. I appreciate it when you use the shar e feature instead of cutting/pasting.

08/12/2015

August 25th Meeting

Abortion advocates censor Black Lives Matter protest outside Planned Parenthood | Life Dynamics

05/22/2015

Reality of Planned Parenthood's True Agenda - black genocide! Stand for life, support Maafa21

Abortion advocates censor Black Lives Matter protest outside Planned Parenthood | Life Dynamics Radical communist protesters tried to censor a Black Lives Matter demonstration outside Planned Parenthood which targets the Black community with abortion.

05/22/2015

May 26, 2015 Meeting!

Claim ownership or report listing

Want your business to be the top-listed Government Service in Dallas?

Click here to claim your Sponsored Listing.

Location

Dallas

Contact the business

Click here to send a message to the business

Telephone

+14695465639

Website

facebook.com

Address

Dallas, TX