Posted on 04/16/2009 3:35:59 PM PDT by Federalist Patriot
Here is video of former House Majority Leader Tom Delay talking with MSNBC's Chris Matthews tonight about Texas Gov. Rick Perry's comments supporting Texas Sovereignty. Matthews is hysterical about Perry's comments being threats to secede, and Delay makes it clear that Perry is simply standing for the sovereign rights of the state of Texas. Matthews also plays a clip of what Rush Limbaugh had to say about Perry's comments. . . . . . (Watch Video)
(Excerpt) Read more at freedomslighthouse.com ...
Delay vs. Matthews is always a good time.
so what happened to tom delay court case? Shouldn’t he be in jail by now?
Are you kidding. The Dems got what they wanted and after that they could care less about whether he was guilty or not
Wow.... didn’t know that Texas could divide up into 5 states like that... I would love to see them do it, just so we could watch Pelosi and Reid have a total cow.
The melodrama emanating from that leg-tingling queen begs the question 'who actually watches this clown?'
thats hilarious. All the clips Matthew put up, don’t back his argument :)
Matthews is scared sh!tless that Obama is going to cause a breakup of the United States, and he should be.
Matthew tell us what was said in this clip, then he shows the clip, the clip don’t support his conclusion
Texas should leave and I wish them God speed!
We must wonder if these some liberal told the former States of the Soviet union they couldn’t secede either? If Texas does leave I’m moving to help defend her!!
Alexander Hamilton wrote in Federalist No. 33 on January 3, 1788, “If the federal government should overpass the just bounds of its authority and make a tyrannical use of its powers, the people, whose creature it is, must appeal to the standard they have formed, and take such measures to redress the injury done to the Constitution as the exigency may suggest and prudence justify.”
Declarations of Mr. Madison, in the Federalist, No. 39. Speaking of the ratifications by the States, he says: “This assent and ratification is to be given by the people, not as individuals composing an entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they respectively belong. * * * Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act.”
Republicans should stay off Matthew’s show....IMO
I got tickled listening to Matthews...he just doesn’t have a clue how Texans think. Most of us just want to be left alone...the rest can go back where they came from.
Well said, my fellow Texan.
—
It is simple.
Go away, and let us live in Peace.
If you can not accept that then bring it on and we will deal with it.
The essential difference between a free Government and Governments not free, is that the former is founded in compact, the parties to which are mutually and equally bound by it. Neither of them therefore can have a greater right to break off from the bargain, than the other or others have to hold them to it.
James Madison
In his First Inaugural Address he declared, “If there be any among us who would wish to dissolve this union . . . let them stand undisturbed as monuments of the safety with which error of opinion may be tolerated where reason is left free to combat it.” He was championing the right of free speech here, but also the right of secession.
In a letter to James Madison in 1816 Jefferson reiterated his support of the right of secession by saying, “If any state in the Union will declare that it prefers separation . . . to a continuance in union . . . I have no hesitation in saying, let us separate.”
.But ambitious encroachments of the federal government, on the authority of the State governments, would not excite the opposition of a single State, or of a few States only. They would be signals of general alarm. Every government would espouse the common cause. A correspondence would be opened. Plans of resistance would be concerted. One spirit would animate and conduct the whole. The same combinations, in short, would result from an apprehension of the federal, as was produced by the dread of a foreign, yoke; and unless the projected innovations should be voluntarily renounced, the same appeal to a trial of force would be made in the one case as was made in the other. But what degree of madness could ever drive the federal government to such an extremity?” —James Madison, from Federalist Paper No. 46
Mr. Madison believed it was up to the individual States to “decide...such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.” Secession would most certainly fall in that category.“[The Constitution] was constantly justified and recommended on the ground that the powers not given to the government were withheld from it; and that, if any doubt could have existed on this subject, under the original text of the Constitution, it is removed, as far as words could remove it, by the [10th] amendment, now a part of the Constitution, which expressly declares, ‘that the powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.’
”The other position involved in this branch of the resolution, namely, ‘that the states are parties to the Constitution,’ or compact, is, in the judgment of the committee, equally free from objection... It appears to your committee to be a plain principle, founded in common sense, illustrated by common practice, and essential to the nature of compacts, that, where resort can be had to no tribunal superior to the authority of the parties, the parties themselves must be the rightful judges, in the last resort, whether the bargain made has been pursued or violated. The Constitution of the United States was formed by the sanction of the states, given by each in its sovereign capacity. It adds to the stability and dignity, as well as to the authority, of the Constitution, that it rests on this legitimate and solid foundation. The states, then, being the parties to the constitutional compact, and in their sovereign capacity, it follows of necessity that there can be no tribunal, above their authority, to decide, in the last resort, whether the compact made by them be violated; and consequently, that, as the parties to it, they must themselves decide, in the last resort, such questions as may be of sufficient magnitude to require their interposition.”
Yet another Texan to another, well said.
Tom Delay just KO’d Chrissy and as a bonus Rush’s ratings will go even higher.
I know secession still turns some people on, but it's a complete waste of time, and it drives energy in precisely the wrong direction.
I love Madison as much as anybody, but man, this quote shows his shocking naivete. He had a massive blind spot, assuming that common sense and love of liberty would control gubmint power.
“Well, I don’t have time or inclination to rehash the 1830s-1860s here. But I will say that A) Jefferson was not talking about secession, he was talking about speech, and more specifically, he was referring to the Alien and Sedition acts. B) Jefferson’s thoughts in a letter are interesting, but completely without weight. He wasn’t even a delegate to the Constitutional Convention. C) Madison, in your quote, is referring not to secession but to nullification. And his view was that one state did NOT have the right even to nullify a law, let alone to break the compact. His view was that the Union had to be dissolved by the same authority it was created—by the whole of the people.
I know secession still turns some people on, but it’s a complete waste of time, and it drives energy in precisely the wrong direction”
We, the delegates of the people of Virginia . . . Do, in the name and behalf of the people of Virginia, declare and make known that the powers granted under the Constitution being derived from the people of the United States may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or oppression, and that every power not granted thereby remains with them at their will . . .
“We, the delegates of the people of Rhode Island and Plantations, duly elected . . . do declare and make known . . . that the powers of government may be resumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness . .
“We, the delegates of the people of New York . . . do declare and make known that the powers of government may be reassumed by the people whenever it shall become necessary to their happiness .”
Mr. Madison’s comments in Federalist No. 39 ”In order to ascertain the real character of the government, it may be considered in relation to the foundation on which it is to be established...it appears, on one hand, that the Constitution is to be founded on the assent and ratification of the people of America [that’s your argument], given by deputies elected for the special purpose; but on the other, that this assent and ratification is to be given by the people, not as individuals composing one entire nation, but as composing the distinct and independent States to which they respectively belong. It is to be the assent and ratification of the several States, derived from the supreme authority in each State - the authority of the people themselves. ...That it will be a federal and not a national act, as these terms are understood by the objectors - the act of the people, as forming so many independent States, not as forming one aggregate nation - is obvious from this single consideration: that it is to result neither from the decision of a majority of the people of the Union, nor from that of a majority of the States. It must result from the unanimous assent of the several States that are parties to it...Were the people regarded in this transaction as forming one nation, the will of the majority of the whole people of the United States would bind the minority, in the same manner as the majority in each State must bind the minority; and the will of the majority must be determined either by a comparison of the individual votes, or by considering the will of the majority of the States as evidence of the will of a majority of the people of the United States. Neither of these rules has been adopted. Each State, in ratifying the Constitution, is considered as a sovereign body independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act...”
Mr. Madison obviously didn't figure on 50% of voters either being outright Marxist or living off others hard work!
Whatever transpires in days ahead we can both say that our Founders never envisioned times such as these...
God Bless
“I, George Washington, do further declare, that because the people of Massachusetts have perpetrated this brazen treason, all their rights are forthwith revoked. Of course, if any Massachusetts resident disavows his state’s dastardly decision, and swears an oath of loyalty to the federal government, his rights shall be restored. Such cases excepted, federal soldiers should feel free to loot any Massachusetts home. Crops not seized for army provisions should be destroyed without regards to the needs of the rebels and their families. After all, war is hell.
I think the anti-federalists forsaw a lot of this.
“Whither is the spirit of America gone? Whither is the genius of America fled? ... We drew the spirit of liberty from our British ancestors. But now, Sir, the American spirit, assisted by the ropes and chains of consolidation, is about to convert this country into a powerful and mighty empire ... There will be no checks, no real balances, in this government. What can avail your specious imaginary balances, your rope-dancing, chain-rattling, ridiculous ideal checks and contrivances?”
Patrick Henry
Just before the American Revolution Samuel Adams said: “If ye love wealth better than freedom; the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsel, nor you arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you. And may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”
Just in case, we need some kind of symbol so the Texan’s don’t shoot the ones like us coming to help them.
I don't know if you know it or not but the founder of this web site, Jim Robinson, is secesh to the max. Why don't you start a web site yourself and call it FreeConstitutionalDictatorship.com. And waste your energy there you Federal Boot Licking /deleted/.
I'm still hoping this is a bad dream! No way on God's green Earth could the anti-federalist of foresaw ZERO...I'm still in denial
Sam Adams is another one who was opposed to the Constitution. He eventually came around, but his first instinct was correct.
At this point, I consider the USA to be a failure. I consider the Constitution to be a failure, and I think if the founders were around today, they'd come to the same conclusion. I think the anti-federalists, particulary George Mason and Patrick Henry, were correct in just about everything they argued against the Constitution. I believe America has terminal cancer. I believe the trend line has been going in the wrong direction pretty much since 1787. I believe the only solution, in the long run, is to dissolve the union. I believe that if there were any strong thinkers/leaders in our country, they'd be trying to figure out how to design a better system than the one our founders left us. They gave it a good try, but it has clearly failed. But one or two or seven states waging war on the US is a lost cause, as has already been proven. I believe we should call another Constitutional Convention. Let the lefties rewrite the Constitution to their lefty satisfaction, and then simply don't ratify it. Bow out of the union. That would be legal. It would be fair. And it could be done without any bloodshed, and without ending up even more under the bootheels of the statists.
I understand it. It's very difficult to give up on the dream. But I am sure the founders themselves would toss the Constitution in the trash if they came back today. They'd also say 50 states is far, far, too many for a republic. It's unmanagable.
I no longer believe there is any solution to our problems under the Constitution. It's a failure. There were the obvious failures, like the "general welfare" clause, the "necessary and proper" clause, the "interstate commerce" clause. There was the mistake of creating a Supreme Court with unlimited power. There was the mistake of not including term limits. Many, many errors which are obvious to us now.
Conservatives need to stop revering the constitution and start judging it by the results. Then maybe the way will become clear on how to create a better republican system.
I believe the US is too big, and needs to be broken up into smaller republics. I envision roughly 5 smaller unions--Northeast, Southeast, Midwest, Mountain, and West Coast. With their own Constitutions. In the meantime, we'll continue to slowly and consistently sink further and further into servitude.
tagged for later viewing and discussion
I would normally take offense to statements such as this...However being you seem like a freedom lover such as I- The South went off and accomplished the one out of three choices it had and loosing was the worst...Stay in the Union and we most likely wouldn't have the 14th Amendment nor the 16th & 17th..Win the fight and all other points are mute...But the lose cost everyone both North and South dearly
I still believe that Succession is within the States Rights especially if one of the Party's to the Compact is violating it.We lost our Republic and will not get it back without a fight..We went from {These United State{S} to United State of America..
You option works also...Whatever works to rid us of these parasite liberal
Or the 13th. That was the main problem with the South. They did it all for slavery. It's all so brutally tragic and ironic. It's like a curse. Personally, I think the Constitution was a mistake. They gave the national gubmint far too much power. They basically killed the states.
Secession and nullification are both very problematic, to say the least. I can't see how either is workable. It basically shows yet another mistake the framers made, by not dealing with those questions in the document itself. It defaulted to the Supreme Court, which is to say, to the Feds.
Secession and nullification are both very problematic, to say the least. I can't see how either is workable. It basically shows yet another mistake the framers made, by not dealing with those questions in the document itself. It defaulted to the Supreme Court, which is to say, to the Feds.”
If slavery was the only issue then they would have agreed to the original 13th...That fight was coming regardless of the underlining issue.
When {we} Southerners and Northerners talk civilly regarding today's issues on ‘laws’ restricting our God given Rights much can be agreed upon!
I'm speaking as a “sovereign” A “citizen” is a corporate expression and is a servant. A sovereign is an independent person domiciled on the land. Since I believe that Government derives it's power by the CONSENT of the Governed..I revoke my consent & secede both from Tennessee and Fedzilla
Nice chattin' with ya.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.