Publius-Huldah's Blog

Understanding the Constitution

Term Limits: A Palliative not a Cure

By Publius Huldah

What’s the real problem with our federal government? That people in Congress serve too many terms? And if we get an Amendment to limit their terms, will our Land be healed?

Of course not! The real problem is that the politicians we elect ignore our Constitution – yet we keep reelecting them.

As a result, the federal government exercises thousands of powers not delegated; but everyone goes along with it. The State and local governments get federal funds for going along with unconstitutional federal programs; the People get all sorts of benefits, subsidies, and free stuff; and many live altogether at other peoples’ expense. And all this free money is added to the national debt.1

Members of Congress also profit from ignoring our Constitution: By exercising the thousands of powers not delegated, they obtain endless opportunities to become rich, powerful, and “important”.

So, unless we turn over a new leaf, learn our Constitution and obey it, renounce unconstitutional federal programs and handouts, and demand that people in Congress also obey it; limiting their terms by an Amendment merely increases the turnover of politicians in Congress who ignore our Constitution – and to whom we must pay luxurious lifetime pensions.

What would happen if we turned over a new leaf?

For starters, if we required Congress to stay within the enumerated powers, two things would happen:

1. The job of US Senator or Representative would be so boring, few would want to be reelected. After all, how many times can you revise the bankruptcy code (authorized by Art. I, § 8, cl. 4); fix the Standard of Weights and Measures (authorized by Art. I, §8, cl.5); and organize the Patent and Copyright Office (authorized by Art. I, §8, cl.8)?

2. There would be no opportunity to get rich while in Congress, build a power base, and have “prestige”.  So the office would no longer attract those who go into politics for the sake of their own egos, pocketbooks, and depraved lust for power.

And if we also stopped pouring out the blood of our young people and incurring ever more debt to pay for our constant military meddling all over the world, there would be very little for Congress to do. 2

After the cleanup period [see footnote 2], the job of US Senator or Representative would become so boring – and so financially unrewarding – it would be seen as a civic duty to be stoically endured for a short time – instead of a cushy ticket to personal wealth, power, prestige, and a luxurious taxpayer funded retirement for life.

So a term limits amendment is a feel good palliative 3 which distracts us from dealing with the real problem: People in Congress disregard the Constitution – but we keep re-electing them.

Unintended consequences

Take heed of this “unintended consequence” of a term limits amendment:  As you decrease the powers of elected members of the US Senate and House by making them transient beings – you increase the powers of the “deep state”.  With a term limits amendment, elected members of Congress would be like train cars passing in the night – the real power would be solidified in the nameless, faceless, un-elected bureaucrats who infest the Executive Branch and all its agencies.

Man up and face the Truth and do what’s Right!

We could turn over a new leaf and fix our Country. Do we have the wit and the will? Who among you is willing to challenge the status quo and urge that we change direction? If ever a nation needed to turn from its wicked ways, it is us.

You have a moral choice before you: Consider this advice from a friend; or jump on the bandwagon pulled by the globalists and clamor for an Article V convention.


1 The PEW Report shows what percentage of each State government’s revenue (for FY 2016) came from federal funds [click on “select a state” to see your State].  In addition to the funds paid by the federal government to the State governments; billions in additional funds are paid by the federal government into each State to local governments, non-governmental organizations, research grants, price supports, food stamps, rent subsidies, utility subsidies, free cell phones, Medicare, social security, etc., etc., etc.  Yet the “Convention of States Project” and “balanced budget” amendment lobby blame the federal government for out of control spending!  But it is the State and local governments, and the people in this Country, who have their hands out for every penny they can get from the federal government.

2 A Congress which obeyed the Constitution would be very busy during the glorious time they were repealing unconstitutional federal statutes; dismantling unconstitutional federal programs, departments, and agencies; and impeaching and removing usurping federal judges.

3 Unlike a “balanced budget” amendment, or the “regulation freedom” amendment, a term limits amendment is not one of the worst ideas since sin. But it doesn’t address the problem. We need to focus on the real problem, not on palliatives.

Revised January 6, 2019; revised Feb. 10, 2019; revised November 1, 2019.

Add to DeliciousAdd to DiggAdd to FaceBookAdd to Google BookmarkAdd to MySpaceAdd to NewsvineAdd to RedditAdd to StumbleUponAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Twitter

June 3, 2017 - Posted by | Term Limits Amendment | ,


  1. Interesting. Some of the noted “consequences” of term limits don’t sound bad! And those limits could run for 8-12 years, enough time for change. Seems to me some of the “worst” federally elected congress people are the older, been-there-forever group. Sounds like a combination of changes needed, which, of course, will never happen because the same group abusing the system would have to vote to change it.


    Comment by Bruce Reid | June 26, 2020 | Reply

    • They “don’t sound bad” to whom? Some would applaud the dreadful consequences I describe. Are you really among them?

      The real question for patriots is whether the consequences I describe would in fact occur.

      And there is the additional issue of the dangers of an Article V convention.


      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 26, 2020 | Reply

  2. […] Wolf PAC’s Amendment for “fair and free elections,” andTerm Limits: A Palliative not a Cure [5] […]


    Pingback by Article 5 of the U.S. Constitution: What “Convention of States Project” (COS) isn’t telling you | Topcat1957's Blog | November 8, 2019 | Reply

  3. Ma’am,

    I must differ with you on this issue. You say we keep re-electing the congress critters, but what happens when, as happened in my district, they run UNOPPOSED?! That is, there is NO CHOICE other than the congress critter in question. How are we supposed to limit their terms, hmmm? If a congress critter runs unopposed, then they’re going to get re-elected no matter what!

    Secondly, I think we do need term limits. One, by being in Washington so long, they get the urge to go outside the Constitution; they go along to get along, get prestigious committee assignments, etc.. Secondly, most folks are busy with their jobs and families that they cannot keep up with everything going on. Thirdly, even if folks received a good education about the Constitution, they may not remember everything about it; they may not remember the delegated powers. Finally, it’s good to have some turnover; it’s good to change personnel every now and then. We see this all the time in organizations of all kinds where they decline because you have the same people doing the same thing all the time; it’s good to bring in new blood with new ideas.



    Comment by MarkyMark | March 7, 2018 | Reply

    • So you are guided by your own opinions.

      Can anything go wrong when constitutionally illiterate people are guided by their opinions instead of fixed Principles?

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | March 17, 2018 | Reply

      • Ma’am,

        None of my points were addressed. Please keep in mind that I agree with you; it is you who persuaded me that Mark Levin was wrong about the whole COS thing. However, what does one do when their Congress critter runs unopposed? What does one do when there is no choice? And what about turnover and new blood? For example, John Conyers was in Congress 52 YEARS! Why should anyone remain in Washington that long? Finally, the President is term limited; why shouldn’t Congress be term limited also?



        Comment by MarkyMark | March 22, 2018 | Reply

        • Set your personal opinions aside. Think in terms of Constitutional Principles. As a People, we are enamored of our worthless opinions even on matters of which we are completely ignorant.
          The candidates we get for office reflect the intellectual and moral degeneration of the American People. We are not innocent victims who are wrongly plagued with worthless candidates. Can YOU name by heart the enumerated powers delegated to Congress? If not, don’t blame shift to the people who run for office – why should they know any more than you know? and if you don’t know, how could you determine whether they knew?
          So don’t blame the candidates for office for our problems.

          Read the paper – term limits: A palliative not a cure. What is the point of the paper? Can you figure it out?


          Comment by Publius Huldah | March 30, 2018 | Reply

          • Ma’am,

            You have a point about naming the enumerated powers-shame on me.

            That said, there is a lot of corruption built into the system; the system is designed and built in such a way as to PREVENT an outsider making it on the ballot, let alone to Washington. For example, just to run for the House of Representatives, takes millions of dollars now. Thanks to the campaign finance laws, one cannot take large, individual contributions; the limit, last time I checked, was $2,500. However, the amount of PAC and ‘soft’ money (i.e. money donated to the party machinery) is unlimited; that means the parties can determine who runs.

            There’s also the aforementioned matter of Congressmen running unopposed. The parties will cede certain districts to one another. In that instance, there’s nothing that can be done. Whether or not one votes for the unopposed Congressmen doesn’t matter; he’ll win the election no matter what. I know, because that happened to me where I live. I fail to see how morals or virtue have anything to do with the lack of choice.


            Comment by MarkyMark | April 12, 2018

          • The connection is clear: Americans are too lazy & apathetic & immoral to get to work and learn our founding documents. So they are ignorant.

            Because they are ignorant, they can’t see that the Candidates they think are so wonderful [because the candidates tell the People what they want to hear] don’t know any more about our Founding Documents than the People do. So the People continue to elect ignorant fools to office.

            For example: I know the Founding Documents like the back of my hand. So after a few moments of hearing a candidate talk, I can see that the candidate doesn’t know ANYTHING. But the ignorant Americans can’t see this ignorance in the Candidate because the Americans are themselves also ignorant.

            Whereas if more voters knew as much as I know, we would elect only virtuous and wise men to office.

            Bottom line: Unless you KNOW our Founding Documents like the back of your hand, you are incapable of electing wise & virtuous men to office.


            Comment by Publius Huldah | April 12, 2018

          • But if someone runs UNOPPOSED (i.e. there’s only ONE choice on the ballot), how can being virtuous prevent the unopposed candidate from attaining office? If I were to vote, he wins; if I don’t vote, he still wins regardless. Granted, I haven’t lent legitimacy to a corrupt system by voting; I haven’t said via my actions that I agree with it. However, the bad candidate, by virtue of being unopposed, will attain office no matter what I do. Again, my now retired Congressman ran unopposed, so I HAD NO CHOICE. How would being an expert on our founding documents have helped get someone else into office? Since he was unopposed, does that not mean he’ll win whether or not I vote?

            I understand what you’re saying on a theoretical level, but my question is this: what does one do on a PRACTICAL level? Even if a candidate, say for Congress, isn’t running unopposed, the choices we have may both be bad choices; they may both be ignorant of the Constitution and/or against it. So, how do we elect virtuous people when the system is set up to WEED OUT virtuous people? I heard stories at Tea Party meetings about how corrupt the local party machines are, and how they try to weed out virtuous people.

            I understand what you’re saying about knowing the founding documents. I understand also what you’re saying about electing virtuous people. My question is this: with the roadblocks we face, how do we DO that? How does knowing the founding documents help us when we have no choice (i.e. our Congressman runs unopposed)? How does knowing our founding documents help us if both choices are bad, that is to say ignorant and/or opposed to the founding documents?


            Comment by MarkyMark | January 13, 2019

          • You are right! A candidate who runs unopposed is sure to win.

            “Conservative” people who want small government are easily deceived by “fakes” who pretend to be conservatives, who mouth “conservative talking points”, claim to be “Jeffersonians”, etc. “Conservative” people can be deceived because they are profoundly ignorant of our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution. Those fakes don’t fool me for an instant. But ignorant people are deceived.

            So people of good will, but who are PROFOUNDLY IGNORANT, throw their support to the fakes.

            And there aren’t enough people who are willing to make the effort to obtain a working knowledge of our Declaration of Independence and Constitution. Americans are not willing to read and learn those two documents. But if they did, they would get and support good candidates. If more Americans knew our two founding documents 1/4 as well as I do, we would never have gotten into this mess.

            The ignorance of the American People is so profound that if Ted Cruz and James Madison ran for President today, Ted Cruz, who is a colossal FAKE [in addition to not being a “Natural Born citizen”] would win.

            IGNORANCE is our Problem. Do you really mean to suggest that it isn’t??


            Comment by Publius Huldah | January 13, 2019

          • Ma’am,

            Thanks for the thoughtful response! Ignorance is a HUGE problem. Just listen to Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I loved her bit about the ‘three chambers of government. What’s scary is she’ll have power over us!

            Ted Cruz is a big time fake; I had an instinctive distrust of him from the beginning. Even before I found out about his Bush connections and his wife’s efforts to build the NAU, his citizenship issues, etc., I distrusted Cruz.

            Did you ever hear Mark Levin defend Ted Cruz? You do know that his now son-in-law WORKED for Ted Cruz, right?

            Speaking of Levin, ever since I found your site to research the COS (though it sounded good at first, I had misgivings about it), I could never look at him the same way. Since he’s one of the cabal pushing COS, he’s a traitor.

            Have a good night, and thanks for hosting this website… 🙂



            Comment by MarkyMark | January 14, 2019

          • Well, I think Levin has been – and may still be – sponsored by Americans for Prosperity, which is a Koch front organization. And the Kochs want an Article V convention. I haven’t listened to Levin for years [I thought he was an intellectual lightweight as well as crude and vulgar] even before his “liberty amendments” book came out.

            It seems that people will do anything for money.


            Comment by Publius Huldah | January 14, 2019

  4. […] This amendment is a feel-good palliative which caters to Americans’ pervasive desire for a quick “fix” which permits them to avoid dealing with the real causes of their problems. See Term Limits: A Palliative not a Cure. […]


    Pingback by COS Project’s “Simulated Convention” Dog and Pony Show and What They Did There « Publius-Huldah's Blog | January 14, 2018 | Reply

  5. What a cunundrum, I’ll post it to others…




    Comment by SFH | June 7, 2017 | Reply

  6. and they created whats called the mayors climate protection agreement ….. .. where did they get authority to do this ?


    Comment by steve | June 5, 2017 | Reply

  7. im gonna change the question a little.. heres what i ran across .. its called the compact of mayors.. united nation agreement with the usa mayors . where do the states get the authority to deal outside the united states with the united nation on agreements / treatys ?


    Comment by steve | June 5, 2017 | Reply

    • sorry heres the link


      Comment by steve | June 5, 2017 | Reply

    • States, cities, counties, etc., are prohibited from entering into treaties! See Art. I, Section 10, US Constitution. Only the President and the US Senate have authority to enter into treaties (Art. II, Sec. 2, clause 2).

      Furthermore, the President and US Senate can only enter into treaties which address the enumerated powers delegated to the federal government. So the President and Senate can make treaties addressing, e.g., international copyright protection, because that is one of the enumerated powers (Art. I, Sec. 8, clause 8). But the US government has no authority to enter into treaties addressing “climate change” and such like because “climate” is not one of the powers delegated to the federal government.

      See? You didn’t need me to tell you that!

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 5, 2017 | Reply

  8. And County Committee involvement.


    Comment by Edward Durfee | June 5, 2017 | Reply

  9. Reblogged this on stepman2001 and commented:
    The other side of the coin is OUR involvement in picking the candidates. We need to join our County Committee and only present Conservative, Constitutionally oriented candidates.


    Comment by Edward Durfee | June 5, 2017 | Reply

    • Your words are true. The key is for us to take over the County Republican Parties. But Americans are shallow – they only want the “glamor” stuff – they care about elections to Congress, to the US Senate, etc. They won’t show up on election day at their County Republican office to vote for a constitutional candidate for Chairman of the County Party. They promise they will show up to vote – but then don’t – and when confronted, they say, “Oh! We went to dinner with friends”; “Oh, I was so tired”.

      If the constitutionalists controlled the County Parties, they could control their State legislatures – and it wouldn’t matter who the governor was – or who was in Congress. The State legislatures could make Congress irrelevant.

      In Arizona, the former President of the Senate, Andy Biggs, always stopped applications for an Article V convention. But guess what? He ran for Congress – got elected – and no one was left in Arizona to stop the disastrous Art. V convention applications. Those stupid & weak & corrupt state legislators left in Arizona passed two applications for an Article V convention this past session and even passed the poisonous Compact for America!

      And so Andy Biggs has been neutralized – now that he is out of the way – the globalists got their way in the Arizona State Legislature.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 5, 2017 | Reply

      • Do you mind if I borrow one of your paragraphs? “If the constitutionalists controlled the County Parties, “.


        Comment by kp3ace | June 24, 2017 | Reply

        • feel free to quote me whenever you like. A link back is nice!


          Comment by Publius Huldah | June 24, 2017 | Reply

  10. Reblogged this on Starvin Larry.


    Comment by gamegetterII | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  11. Excellent!!


    Comment by Betty Wills | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  12. Certainly it would only take a few weeks or months out of the year to do what is mandated by the Constitution but, what do they do the rest of the year? Seeing the Federal Government pays their salaries for an entire year the Feds expect them to do something and that something is to work for the Feds in a Territorial capacity. This is where the damage is done. A recent experience is the Paris Climate Accord. The question that needs answering is: To what jurisdiction and extent does an Executive Order have when it affects all the people of America not just the people in Washington D.C. and the Territories? The Executive Order that Obama signed to enter us into the Paris Accord was not challenged by anyone as far as I know. Obama’s inner circle recognized it would not fly in a Senate vote so Obama signed an E.O. I read somewhat in a court case that if a Judge acts where he/she knows they do not have jurisdiction it is Treason. I think that should apple to E.O.s too. I am starting to hear the word ‘treason’ mentioned in legal circles with all this garbage that is going on since President Trump was elected. It is my considered opinion that just one prosecution for Treason would stop 90% of this B%^& S#@*. Douglas Smith

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Douglas Smith | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  13. We absolutely would not recognize our government if it were changed to only what is allowed under the Constitution. All of a sudden, personal responsibility and unbridled potential would raise their heads. We would go back to where Congress would assemble in early December to get the annual work done for the year, as it was in the beginning.

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Mike Foil | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  14. SO TRUE, PH. We forever attack the symptoms of our failures and problems. However, like you have done so well, we need to focus upon the CAUSE of our maladies, that being We the People!!!!!!


    Comment by jim delaney | June 3, 2017 | Reply

    • That is our modern day mindset. That’s what we do in medicine: our physicians are taught to treat the SYMPTOMS of diseases, not the cause of the disease! Amazing how people unthinkingly absorb this mindset – they believe stuff they have never thought about. The welfare state is based in part on treating symptoms not causes. It’s pervasive.

      I expect the reason is that we don’t want to deal with the causes – because then we would be confronted with the HORRIBLE TRUTH that WE caused the problem and the only way to fix it is for US to man-up and take responsibility and then repent.

      Liked by 1 person

      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 3, 2017 | Reply

      • BTW, PH, have you been able to write that analysis re the Congress’s intention to impose a right to carry across state lines law? Sadly, NRA’s justification for such an action is wildly ignorant.


        Comment by jim delaney | June 3, 2017 | Reply

      • “Time it takes to rig a voting machine? 7 minutes. Since we have started using these easily rigged voting machines, along with voter fraud, ” we” haven’t been the ones voting these people into office. I remember the big push to get the Diebold voting machines in place. I remember the software (privately owned, of course) problems.

        Liked by 1 person

        Comment by kp3ace | June 4, 2017 | Reply

        • Yes, I expect the machines are rigged [though such is out of my area of expertise].

          But I know from talking to citizens that they do keep voting for phony “conservatives” and RINOS over & over & over again.

          This last presidential election is interesting. I do believe the machines were rigged for Hillary to win – she couldn’t fill a high school gym at her rallies – yet we were told she was going to win. Yet Trump won, to the astonishment of the Hillary supporters. So perhaps the machines weren’t rigged enough to make up for the massive support Trump got?

          Liked by 1 person

          Comment by Publius Huldah | June 4, 2017 | Reply

          • Imposing term-limits is much worse than delaying the inevitable. Adopting such a provision would reward vs. punish an already ignorant population of voters, and further risk barring the few constitutionally knowledgeable members from serving. I do
            however believe age-related competency tests should be introduced as a requirement to serve successive terms.

            Restoring the integrity of elections must begin with the basics; a national Voter Registration process. We need national legislation that stipulates standardized proof of citizenship must be provided to validate the status of all current and new voters on each State’s rolls. This one step alone would give us the foundation needed to query federal databases.

            On the voting machines, yet another disaster. They have an inherent ‘fractional’ counting feature. The stupidity of introducing voting machines with ‘fractional’ counting ability allows for widespread, relatively undetectable fraud through the ability to manipulate the vote count on a per precinct basis. The other abuse occurring in many jurisdictions is deliberate non-preservation of the redundant paper tape (for recovery and/or auditing) that m/cs automatically produce. IMHO, the only fool proof fix is to strip these machines down to the absolute basics, and make preservation of the paper tape a legal requirement.

            Liked by 1 person

            Comment by filia.aurea | June 24, 2017

          • My dear, There are few ideas worse than delegating to the federal government constitutional authority over a nationwide system of voter registration and qualifications.

            Study this:

            and then this:

            under the subheading Levin’s amendment “to protect the vote” (p 183-184)

            You have committed a terrible crime against our Constitution! Slap your hand!!!

            Liked by 1 person

            Comment by Publius Huldah | June 24, 2017

          • I gladly accept both the slap and my weekend’s worth of reading/reference material. Thank you so much for responding so quickly. I hope to be enlightened. I truly value the voices of all of you with such deep knowledge and commitment. Since the States have repeatedly failed to QUALIFY their voters, (Estimated 5.8M invalid in 2016, incl the dead, illegal entrants, permanent residents, visa overstays, etc.); and the 14th A. was not legally ratified; and requiring proof of citizenship doesn’t violate any protected class; Neither time, place nor manner is involved; and the NVRA is unconstitutional anyway; – there must be a constitutional way to restore electoral integrity. If more people were convinced their vote was of value, it would encourage more informed participation. I’ll look to expert minds such as yours to find a Constitutional remedy that ensures ONLY the votes of Electors who represent CITIZENS (Unlike the proportional representation by ‘population’ we currently suffer in the House) are certifiable. Making the situation even worse are rogue States e.g. CA, who automatically register everyone who applies for a DL or welfare) Again, thank you so much for your reply.


            Comment by filia.aurea | June 24, 2017

          • At your service any time.

            There is a constitutional remedy: The STATES need to man-up and reclaim the authority over voter registration and qualifications which they retained at Article I, Section 2, clause 1, US Constitution.

            The States literally dropped the reins – now they must pick them up and start steering the Horses.

            The States have NEVER been victims of federal tyranny. The States have been cowards. Plus they sold the retained powers of the States and the People for federal funds.

            The federal government has very little constitutional power. If we had manly men and real women in our State legislatures, they could whip the feds into shape in no time at all!

            Americans let themselves get brainwashed with rubbish. We heard so often, “one man – one vote” – that People began to think that was a constitutional Principle! And they thought everyone should vote.

            I say, “no way!” No one should be allowed to register to vote unless he can pass a Logic Test, quote the 2nd para of the Declaration of Independence by heart, and pass a HARD test on the US Constitution. And of course, provide proof of US citizenship. He must also be a person of good moral character.

            Yes, Calif. allows illegal aliens to vote –

            But Janet Reno, AG under Clinton, babbled constantly about “Motor Voter”, and she brainwashed many.

            So we need fewer people voting – not more!!

            Liked by 1 person

            Comment by Publius Huldah | June 24, 2017

          • Voting is a privilege not a right. Certain requirements must be met before you can vote. Oregon, in 1921, passed statutes requiring 5 years of study of the U.S. Constitution and 5 years of U.S. History before you can graduate from high school. Here is ORS 336.057, Chapter 336, titled Conduct of Schools Generally:

            Now, if you graduate from a 4 year college or university tact on an additional 4 years. In addition at ORS 336.067)


            Comment by Douglas Smith | June 24, 2017

          • Thank you. I understand many of the issues you raise. Unless we find a legitimate way to quickly stem the decay, we’ll have no Republic left to fight for. Those who rant about a ‘popular’ vote, esp. given the added insult of non-citizen voting being condoned, simply display ignorance, Reducing the number of people voting has to begin somewhere – limiting that right to citizens alone would be a start. Since the States are susceptible to bribery, perhaps more of the same is needed to convince them that qualifying citizenry on the voting rolls gets rewarded. I understand that Judicial Watch is nibbling around the edges by suing at least one State for failure to ‘refresh’ their voter rolls. Unfortunately CA and others will certainly resist any measure that might cause their Representation in The House to decrease. Election integrity should be a top priority. Mid-Terms are fast approaching.


            Comment by filia.aurea | June 24, 2017

          • TY.


            Comment by filia.aurea | June 27, 2017

          • Voting is a privilege not a right. Certain requirements must be met before you can vote. Oregon, in 1923, passed statutes requiring 5 years of study of the U.S. Constitution and 5 years of U.S. History before you can graduate from high school. Here is ORS 336.057 and 336.067, Chapter 336, titled Conduct of Schools Generally:

            ORS 336.057 Courses in Constitution and history of United States.
            In all public schools courses of instruction shall be given in the Constitution of the United States and in the history of the United States.
            These courses shall:
            1. Begin not later than the opening of the eighth grade and shall continue in grades 9 through 12.
            2. Be required in all state institutions of higher education, except the Oregon Health and Science University, and in all state and local
            institutions that provide education for patients or inmates to an extent to be determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction.

            ORS 336.067 Instruction in ethics and morality.
            (1) In public schools special emphasis shall be given to instruction in:
            (a) Honesty, morality, courtesy, obedience to law, respect for the national flag, the Constitution of the United States and the
            Constitution of the State of Oregon, respect for parents and the home, the dignity and necessity of honest labor and other
            lessons which tend to promote and develop an upright and desirable citizenry.
            (b) Respect for all humans, regardless of race, color, creed, national origin, religion, age, sex or disability. Acknowledgment of
            the dignity and worth of individuals and groups and their participative roles in society.
            (c) Humane treatment of animals.
            (d) The effects of tobacco, alcohol, drugs and controlled substances upon the human system.

            (2) The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall prepare an outline with suggestions which will best accomplish the purpose of this
            section, and shall incorporate the outline in the courses of study for all public schools.

            I personally feel that you should have these requirements before you can vote. I have not seen any Constitutional courses as described in the above statutes in my 70 years in Oregon. The Superintendent of Public Schools has dropped the ball. Anybody know of some good attorneys from out of state or, if in Oregon, at least not afraid of the Oregon State Bar. I think its time to get tough and kick ass.


            Douglas R. Smith
            5th generation Oregonian


            Comment by Douglas Smith | June 24, 2017

          • Public education is an idea which was crafted in the pits of hell. Americans were home schooled before public education. It was the Unitarians during the early 1800s who lobbied for public education; then leftist Horace Mann lobbied for it in the 1840s; then leftist/atheist John Dewey took it over and got the Teachers’ Colleges established. Do see Samuel Blumenfeld’s excellent book, “Is public Education necessary? The left has ALWAYS been in control of public education and of the Teachers’ Colleges. Public education can’t possibly be fixed. Besides, God told Parents to educate their children. He NEVER gave this Responsibility to civil government. But we ignored what God says.

            I don’t know the Oregon Constitution or other Law or legal system. I suppose one could take some sort of action to force the Superintendent to teach the Constitution, history, and morality to the children. BUT I wouldn’t trust the public schools to do it rightly. You can’t force Teachers [who came from leftist Colleges of Education] to properly teach these subjects [or any other subjects, for that matter].

            Parents and others will have to be the ones to teach Americanism to their children. We should close down the public schools, return to home schools, and for the inner city poor, “free schools” operated by philanthropists with no government input. Retired citizens like me could be the volunteer teachers. Then, if we can bring back manufacturing to this Country, the graduates of the Teachers Colleges can get jobs in the factories or go into some other line of work. But keep them away from our children because most of them do far more harm than good. They got brainwashed while they were in school.


            Comment by Publius Huldah | June 25, 2017

  15. This is, as always, wonderful!!

    Cristi Ritchey

    Liked by 1 person

    Comment by Cristi Ritchey | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  16. Good morning PH

    Re: Turning over a new leaf

    Do you know of any society, historically, that has actually turned over a new leaf from where WE are now…where massive numbers of citizens believe the “leaf” is only now in the right position?

    God bless MCE


    Comment by M. Craig Elachie | June 3, 2017 | Reply

    • The only historical examples I can think of are those set forth in the Book of Judges. You know the pattern: When the people fell away from the Lord, they became oppressed by tyrants – then they cried out to the Lord – and then He sent them a good judge – and while that good judge was alive – all was well! But as soon as that judge was gone, the people fell back into apostasy.

      So what this tells me is that most people are totally worthless. They don’t learn.

      But I don’t think that massive numbers of citizens believe the “leaf” is now in the right position: Western civilization is collapsing – all the western countries are inviting the most retrograde culture ever – muslims – to come in and take over. We’re SURRENDERING to the barbarians because WE ALL KNOW THAT WHAT WE NOW HAVE ISN’T WORTH PRESERVING.

      What I can’t figure out is why people aren’t willing to repent and turn over a new leaf. Yet history shows they won’t – CS Lewis shows in “The Great Divorce” that they refuse.

      I write and speak about these things because I am called to do so. Also, remember those passages in Ezekiel which say that if we see danger coming and don’t warn the People; then when disaster comes, their blood will be on our hands.

      CS Lewis is my hero – I love that man. Last night, I read this:

      You can point this out to people in a simple, clear, factual, and logical manner and they still refuse to repent.

      Liked by 2 people

      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  17. You are so right. It’s not the system that’s broken; it’s the people. Besides, do we really want to create a permanent percentage of lame ducks in a body that is already unaccountable to the people who put them there?? NO TERM LIMITS.

    Liked by 2 people

    Comment by You Know I'm Right | June 3, 2017 | Reply

  18. Ok need time to read it…




    Comment by sicilianthing | June 3, 2017 | Reply

    • sounds like a good plan!


      Comment by Publius Huldah | June 3, 2017 | Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: