No. of Recommendations: 0
Those things are a bit specific for my intentions, or at least some of them are. For example, in the original Founding Documents, black people could be enslaved and counted as 3/5 of a person. We fixed that later because the Constitution is a living document. Increasing dependency? Not in the documents, and is (to me) more of a discussion of policy/policies.
I did not intend "single party rule" in that manner. You will never be rid of those who want to tell you how to live. I'm sure you think Dems do it all the time. I think Republicans do. We're probably both right, at different times and in different circumstances. I was thinking more about making all other parties non-viable so there was only one party, one voice. Bad things happen when that occurs.
From what I recall of Paine's work, I'm more or less aligned with him. Been a long time since I read Common Sense.
I am not averse to our system changing as long as we still have free speech, free press, are secure in our persons, etc. If they amended the Constitution to create a parliamentary system, that's fine with me. If I can still vote, and other rights/freedoms are preserved, I can live with it. It would need to be done by Amendment, not "make it up as you go". But that's why there is an amendment process.
