LopingAlong wrote: Um, yeah, California educated, older than Park County and still, I know nothing. Like I said, memorize it, regurgitate it, forget it. I was really really good at that. College was a whole different animal. College, I loved and learned as much as I could...soaked it all in like a sponge.
Which is why, from my point of view anyway, that rich and relevant history has been lost in our modern day world. It is why most people tend to think of their state as a county within the nation rather than as a separate and sovereign entity unto itself.
We have done a lot of damage to that which was left for us to care for due to our inattention. We have taken for granted all that was sacrificed that we might live in a nation such as this. From my POV, as a conservative and a constructionist, that was, and is, an intentional undermining of the foundation that started around 1900 or so. When you look at the changes that have been made to our Constitution since that time, either by directly amending it, via the "interpreting" of the meaning by our courts or by the laws that Congress has passed, it is easy to see when the assault upon the history of our nation and its Constitution began.
One of my favorites to dislike is Amendment 17, which provided for the direct election of Senators by the people.
The Senate was envisioned as the voice of the individual states at the federal level, which is why each state received the same representation in that congressional body. The Senators were initially selected by the legislatures of the individual states, whose members were elected by the people by their direct vote. Thus, the Senate was also a representative body, not a democratically selected one. The House of Representatives were elected directly by the people and in proportion to their number in the individual states and were supposed to be the voice of the people in the federal Congress. Now we have two houses of Congress that are both populated by direct vote of the people in the state, and the voices of the governor and the legislature in each state has been silenced as a result, which significantly limits the power of the states, and states' rights, at the federal level.
It also brings us career Senators such as Edward Kennedy, all but unheard of prior to the ratification of the 17th Amendment. This is what gives incentives to the Senators to "bring home the bacon" to make them popular with the citizens instead of protecting the states from intrusion by the federal government. Do you think Senators charged with representing their state legislature would have voted to encumber the state budget with a 50% match of Medicare spending? Perhaps, but I think it would have been far less likely than having the Senators engaged in a popularity contest for reelection by the people who were the direct beneficiaries of the program.