![\"tolerant](\"http:\/\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/12\/tolerant-liberal.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The usual suspect is FBI Director, James Comey. They\u2019ve also blamed racist white people, sexist white people, angry white people, you know, the Deplorables. Since they still haven\u2019t figured out that they lost due to a corrupt and incompetent candidate, and that their ideas, well, suck, the Precious Snowflakes have been looking for some other way to \u201cFix the problem\u201d. (The problem being people not agreeing with them and voting)<\/p>\n
One idea they\u2019ve had is to do away with the Electoral College. The Precious Snowflakes, Moonbats and Progressives, (I know, redundant), think that ending the EC and going to a pure democracy would fix the problem of the \u201cDeplorable\u201d vote in flyover country. It would since the Moonbats control most of the cities and that\u2019s where most of the Democrats live. Add in a little, (Ok massive), fraud and you will have a Democrat president forever. (Or until the shooting starts)<\/p>\n This isn\u2019t the only stupid idea to come out of the recent election. Another one, written by Lawrence R. Samuel in the Washington Post<\/a>, would do away with the States and just have a single centralized federal government run by the Progressive Elite. Here is what Mr. Samuel has to say:<\/p>\n While Donald Trump resoundingly won the electoral college \u2014 the state-based \u201cpoint system\u201d we\u2019ve used in presidential elections for more than two centuries \u2014 Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by about 780,000 as of a week out of the election. In other words, more Americans wanted Clinton to win, reason enough to revisit the wisdom of using the electoral college to determine elections. But a larger, more important argument is often overlooked in this ongoing debate.<\/b><\/p>\n I\u2019m hearing there have been a few areas where there\u2019s been some serious accusations of voter and election fraud. We\u2019ve already seen prior to the election, a number of investigations into confirmed attempts to rig the election. I\u2019ve heard one rumor, unverified, that they think some 3 million illegal aliens may have voted. Oh, there goes your popular vote numbnuts. However, doing away with the EC is only the first part of this idiots plan.<\/p>\n The United States of America: We use the phrase all the time but rarely think of what the words actually mean. In 1776, when this country officially became the United States of America, the words signified a bold idea. Geographic neighbors had formed alliances previously in history to form nations, of course, but these united states shared a vision and philosophy that was literally revolutionary.<\/b><\/p>\n Yep, Freedom, Liberty, Justice, and being left alone by the government. Three things the Democrats and Progressives despise.<\/p>\n The coming together of 13 disparate colonies was itself a historic achievement; never before, perhaps, had a collection of diverse, often contrarian regions merged to create a country whose leaders so vigorously rejected the political and religious doctrines of the times. (The people were not as enthusiastic.) We tend to forget how difficult a process the uniting of the original states was, as the cultural boundaries of the 13 regions persisted after the Founding Fathers joined forces to form a federated republic.<\/b><\/p>\n The first attempt was the Articles of Confederation<\/a>. It didn\u2019t work to well, so they decided to have a convention to see if they could fix it. They couldn\u2019t and came up with our current constitution. That document has worked out fairly well for over 200 years. It\u2019s been amended a few times, and could stand a few more. (One of which is NOT ending the Electoral Collage) However, this isn\u2019t what Comrade Samuel has in mind.<\/p>\n But times have changed, and we need to rethink the notion of the \u201cUnited States of America.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n And here it comes!!<\/p>\n Our states are no longer culturally diverse regions with their own respective identities; rather, they are artificially constructed geographic entities that certainly would not be formed today.<\/b><\/p>\n Borderlines between states are especially nonsensical. Pensacola, Fla., is a lot more like Mobile, Ala., than Miami. Upstate New Yorkers are less than happy about being in the same tax pool as Manhattanites.<\/b><\/p>\n I can\u2019t speak to Pensacola and Mobile. I haven\u2019t been there. However, Upstaters in NY? They would like nothing better than to kick New York City out of the state. NYC would agree, except that they like bossing around everyone else in New York, and looting their wallets to pay for their idea of \u201cUtopia\u201d. Now Larry starts getting really silly. He goes on to say that American share a remarkably similar way of thinking. (We don\u2019t) He also states:<\/p>\n Regional differences have drastically dissipated over the course of the past 240 years, turning the once radical proposition of the \u201cUnited States\u201d into an anachronism that now has little or no real value. <\/b><\/p>\n Suburbanization \u2014 as well as the kudzu-like spread of strip malls, chain stores and franchises \u2014 transformed much of the country\u2019s physical landscape into something that makes it difficult to know where one is.<\/b><\/p>\n Why do I get the feeling this clown doesn\u2019t get out much? Then he starts going into why continuing to have states is a bad idea.<\/p>\n Why does any of this matter? Quite a bit, as the problem with states goes far beyond their illogic and irrelevance. State governments are expensive to run and taxpayers are forced to foot most of the bill. We can\u2019t afford them anymore \u2014 and we don\u2019t need them.<\/b><\/p>\n And there it is. His \u201cTotally great idea!\u201d<\/p>\n A federation of states was a wonderful idea in the late 18th century, but represents an unnecessary and costly burden in the early 21st. Two layers of government \u2014 federal and local \u2014 offers a cleaner, more sensible and much more affordable system than our current one, a notion not unlike cutting out the middle layer of an overly bureaucratic, inefficient company. Eliminating this middle layer would save the American people billions of dollars a year, the kind of money that could go a long way toward paying down our national debt or preparing for our looming crises in Social Security and health care. <\/b><\/p>\n Would abandoning the \u201cUnited States of America\u201d for something different present challenges? Absolutely. <\/b><\/p>\n Yeah, like about 200 million people telling you to stick that idea where the sun to shine, and willing to back it up with things that go bang.<\/p>\n The dismantling of anything more than two centuries old would naturally require considerable effort, a step almost as radical as the uniting of colonies to form states. Not just the political system, but the legal system would have to be overhauled. (Probably a good thing in itself given the vast inconsistencies in laws across state lines<\/a>.) <\/b><\/p>\n I think I see where Comrade Elitist Samuel is going with this, and I don\u2019t think I\u2019m going to like it. He obviously does though.<\/p>\n It might well take time to get used to things such as national driver\u2019s licenses and license plates, though some kind of tracking system is likely to arrive soon for other reasons related to homeland security<\/a>.<\/b><\/p>\n I followed the link provided. DHS is once again trying to become the \u201cUnited States Police Force and Internal Security Service. It looks like they need to be stepped on again, but that\u2019s something for another day.<\/p>\n State affinities will likely never completely disappear, and there is no reason that the University of Florida or the New York Jets could not keep their names (even if the latter plays their games in New Jersey). But it\u2019s time we start thinking of ourselves as one people \u2014 Americans \u2014 who live in real, local communities rather than as 50 kinds of people living in imaginary regions. <\/b><\/p>\n Alright now, where shall I begin? What this jerk wants is essentially an end to the greatest nation in History, and the creation of a nice socialist totalitarian state ruled from Washington DC. Per his comments, the first thing that would need to go would be the United States Constitution. After all, it is an archaic document that has no meaning in today\u2019s world, and besides, it was written to protect the states from the rampaging stupidity of, wait for it, the centralized power of an unrestrained Federal Government.<\/p>\n The comments section of the piece was not kind, in general to Larry\u2019s cunning plan<\/a>. Actually, they pretty much rip him into small pieces. According to the Washington Post, Samuel is an author with a couple of books on America published on Amazon. I looked him up on Amazon and he actually has a lot of books published. A quick look at them and I\u2019ve come to a conclusion.<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n