[Radar]

Radar wants a government that doesn't represent what the people want - or one that forces the "correct" choices (i.e., his choices) on a public that won't volunteer for them.

I want no such thing. i don't want to force anything on anyone but I also don't want it forced on me. The people of America didn't choose to have their income taxed and most would like income taxes to disappear. Most know paying income tax is not a patriotic duty and they're not even necessary.

What many of you fail to grasp is that the majority does not always rule and that the powers of government may not exceed the rights of individuals. Although the majority of Americans do agree with the constitution and all of the limits it places on the powers of government.

Is it tyrannical to establish a set of rules that the majority does not agree with, in order to maintain a set of abstract principles that may be absolutely correct?

Let's say yes. And that being said it must be tyrranical to force Americans to pay income taxes when the majority of Americans don't agree with them. Claiming that the majority always rules over the minority is also tyrranical. So is a government with unlimited power.

Is it even possible? I don't think the people would accept Radar's non-Government; I think they would abandon it quickly and establish a new one that represents their wishes.

I'm not an anarchist in any sense of the term. I recognize the need for governemnt and also the need to keep it as small as possible to do only what is listed in the constitution to prevent the tyrrany already mentioned. And yes, the people would accept it as they did for over 100 years when this country started.

I notice that many of the very authors of the Absolutely Correct Constitution were slave owners? Jefferson, Mason, Washington, Madison, all slave owners. How to square the idea that the very authors of this very rigid document should have been prosecuted under it?

Typical lame "white slave owner" comment. The founding fathers risked their lives, fortunes, and sacred honor to promote liberty and freedom (as they were back then) for everyone. Slaves were considered property at the time and not people and women weren't considered fit to vote. But the founders did know that they didn't know everything and that's why they designed the constitution so it could be amended but wanted changes to be taken seriously so they made it difficult to pass an amendment (which is why government now violates the constitution rather than try to amend it - see war powers act, patriot act, etc.). That is why the constitution is just as relevant, and perfect today as the day it was written.

How to square the idea that the LP and CP have, on occasion, put up Constitutional hardasses in free elections and these candidates have always been routed?

Easy to square. The LP doesn't accept dirty money and the major two parties take every step to ensure to keep the LP out of important debates (because they know they'd get thier asses handed to them), and outspend the LP in every race using money stolen from the American public.

In the world of ideas, compromise is poison. In the real world, it is the antidote.

No, it's poison in the real world too, but it's slow acting poison like ciggarettes.