Daily Kos “Refutes” the Tenth Amendment(As if!)

Tenth Amendment Center ^ | Oct. 19, 2009 | Josh Eboch

[ForGod'sSake]

Although I don’t expect the state sovereignty movement to get a fair hearing over at Daily Kos, the total historical ignorance and vacuous credulity of some liberals never ceases to amaze me.

A recent post, which purports to offer intellectual firepower capable of refuting the arguments of “tenthers,” essentially states that “Everything the federal government does is constitutional because the federal government says so.”

Observe:

Obviously Medicare, Social Security, and the Air Force (yes, I’ve had tenthers tell me the Air Force is unconstitutional) are legal because we’ve had them for decades without being struck down by the Supreme Court.

Obviously. Except that the Constitution explicitly did not grant the federal government authority to do anything beyond its enumerated powers, and what was necessary and proper to exercise its enumerated powers. That would by definition render both Medicare and Social Security (the Air Force being a red herring) unconstitutional.

Apparently Daily Kos believes that, because the Supreme Court has found constitutional limitations on federal power to be politically inexpedient, those limits are moot. As if committing a crime often enough makes it legal.

I pity anyone whose life is lived in such contemptible obsequiousness to arbitrary power.

So what rights are granted under the Tenth Amendment? Well, [the states are] given the right to exist and form their own laws.

How arrogant! After all, it was the people of the states themselves that formed the federal government by ratifying the Constitution; their right to exist and make laws could not possibly have been surrendered by such action.

Unfortunately for the writers and readers at Daily Kos and the Huffington Post, the U.S. Supreme Court has never been legally able to bind the states with its decrees. In our federalist system, the power to decide the limits of federal authority has always necessarily resided with the states themselves.

When presented with these facts, those who scoff at state (and individual) sovereignty often resort to claiming the question of ultimate authority was answered by Lincoln through four years of hideous fratricide.

But citing the subjugation of principled logic through force of arms is hardly a definitive legal high ground; it only further demonstrates intellectual weakness.

So next time, when you hear a tenther jackass pretending that they know something about the Constitution, feel free to not just call them stupid, but to tell them why they’re stupid.

Don’t worry, we always do.

[ForGod'sSake]

This one is a bit of a hoot. You have GOT to take a look at what one of the kos kiddies OFFERED UP as a refutation of the States' powers re the 10th Amendment... Lame? You make the call...

The kos kiddies have entered the room!

Click the 10th Amendment button for articles tagged "10thamendment". A "statesrights" link is atop the forum page.

Please ~ping~ me to articles relating to the 10th Amendment/States Rights so I can engage the pinger.

I've stopped scouring threads and unilaterally adding names to the ping list, so if you want on or off the list just say so.

Additional Resources:

Tenth Amendment Chronicles Thread
Tenth Amendment Center
The Right Side of Life/State Initiatives
Sovereign States
Find Law(Brief narrative on 10th Amendment)

CLICK HERE TO FIND YOUR STATE REPRESENTATIVES

[manc]

I swear bozo voters have to be the dumbest voters this country has ever produced.

The funny thing is that they have no clue just how thick they really are because of the way they surround themselves with like minded folks or be told what is what by the way of bumper stickers.

[Jacquerie]

The 10th? To get a real blank stare, ask a rat to discuss the 9th.

[cranked]

"Everything the federal government does is constitutional because the federal government says so." *shakeshead* LMAO.

[cripplecreek]

The funniest thing is the fact that the morons aren’t smart enough to realize that democrats were pushing 10th amendment legislation when Bush was president.

[Army Air Corps]

You may be interested in this.

[manc]

I'll be honest now.
I have traveled to many countries , lived in many traveled around this country and lived in various places.
I have never met anyone on the left who actually has common sense and brains.
They bleat about what ivy league school they went to but have not an ounce of common sense. Even my sons teacher last year came up with a great one(my son was 10 at the time) The teacher said about global warming etc and my son asked why the south pole is getting colder then. His answer was well the glaciers are getting biggewr but the ice is still melting. Later in the class the teacher said about warming again and emissions . My son asked why was the earth warmer hundreds of years ago then went colder in the 70's and how did the earth warm up after the ice age when we didn;t have cars, emissions etc. The teacher had not got a clue and then refused to even pick my son for the rest of the year for a question. BTW My son is honor roll and A's all his life and now is on a programme with the Cambridge university (he is now nearly 12) He only ever got one B and guess which teacher gave him that B?

[Bushbacker1]

The kids over at Daily Kos have no idea what the Constitution is, let alone the 10th Amendment!

[reefdiver]

well the little piss ants are able to round up voters. they get their marching orders, and like the borg do what ever the collective tells them to do. i’ve met some, angry, defiant, hate the right. they have no idea of work, and want it all free now.

[ForGod'sSake]

The funny thing is that they have no clue just how thick they really are because of the way they surround themselves with like minded folks or be told what is what by the way of bumper stickers.

After years of engaging libtards one-on-one that rings exactly dead on. One has to add to the mix the efforts of Hollyweird, the dinomedia, and an added plus, Madison Avenue. ALL of which preserve, protect and defend libtard sensibilities. I suspect a fair proportion of them actually "feel" they are mainstream. The others just use these props to support their skewed vision of the world. But fact of the matter is, I have rarely engaged a libtard that used any independent thought to support their foolishness. "I saw it on the news" or "I read it in the paper" is about as far as any of them can go. Oh and, "They're(Dims) are for the little people. FEH!

[ForGod'sSake]

The 10th? To get a real blank stare, ask a rat to discuss the 9th.

Heh. That's only until the arm waving and frothing around the mouth kicks in. Tell one of them that Dims are a bunch of commie loving, America hating sociapaths and you may have just as well called their mama a female dog. They are somehow THAT attached to the ideology. Liberalism is a mental disorder.

[ForGod'sSake]

OOPS! I neglected one other MAJOR player in the mix: Academia. To include indoctrinaton from K through 12 and “higher” education up to and including PhD candidates. The dark side began getting to the kids somewhere along in the 60’s at the latest; maybe before. I suppose it’s a small wonder the country is STILL holding together — barely...

[manc]

I agree with that.

If you look at my past comment recently I mentioned how a teacher for my son tried to push an agenda and my son was punished because he brought good point , questions up.

If you don’;t mind me asking but do you find yourself more and more saying what is the use?

I have thought about it but then I think that people as many people as possible need to know what is going on as the so called media are not telling the facts

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks FGS, you “tenther” you. ;’)

[NTHockey]

Today on Hannity, a self-employed(??) LIB came up with this gem, regarding SS and Medicare:

“Just because they are bankrupt, doesn’t make it bad”.

[ForGod'sSake]

If you don’;t mind me asking but do you find yourself more and more saying what is the use?

Honestly, after the election of odinga and what amounts to a near bullteproof congress, I was really down. Fact is, and knowing full well what odinga was about, I began preparing mentally for the battle that was sure to come, sooner or later. The hardware is already in place FWIW. Then The States began making noises about reasserting their rightful position in the hierarchy and I grabbed onto it like a life raft in a stormy sea. THIS was a viable way to set the world aright IMHO. BUT we will have to get behind our State representatives to let them know that We The People want them back on the wall shielding us against the feral government. The States SHOULD have been our first line of defense all along, but many machinations by the federales have kept them quiet for the most part.

I have thought about it but then I think that people as many people as possible need to know what is going on as the so called media are not telling the facts

True enough, but even so, Americans by in large seem to have a grasp of what odinga's hope and change are all about. Glenn Beck has made a huge difference in giving us a rallying point or muster point. The turnout on 9/12, especially in DC, was a turning point for me. At MINIMUM, 1 million patriots filled the mall and the streets leading into the capitol. I don't think there's any real doubt it was the largest gathering of humanity ever assembled there. If one uses the old axiom about one person standing up actually represents one hundred that don't, but feel the same way, well -- do the math. VERY grafitying.

So, I have hope(ack, even using that word now makes me feel dirty) that Americans will come to life in the nick of time. I pray I'm right about that.

[ForGod'sSake]

I prefer being called a member of the “10th Amendment Division” thank you very much... But Tenther works. ;^)

[astyanax]

That’s exactly what I would expect from them.
If they had even the most basic grasp of the Constitution they would not be a Kos kiddie.

[ForGod'sSake]

If they had even the most basic grasp of the Constitution they would not be a Kos kiddie.

I'm not so sure I'd even give them that much credit. Even an idiot can be taught to understand basic principles as long as they have a willingness to learn. I've no doubt many of our antagonists fully understand the Constitution(one exception being the kiddie who wrote the piece in question) but like petulant adolescents feel compelled to rebel against a system that has actually worked pretty well for over 200 years. Still others with a grasp of our Constitution want to turn it into toilet paper for their own nefarious purposes. In the final analysis however, they're all, to varying degrees, dangerous to our constitutional republic and our way of life.

[ApplegateRanch]

Geeze, I thought honest working citizens were called “tenthers”, because the government only allows them to keep a tithe of what they earn.

[ForGod'sSake]

There may be more truth in that than a lot of us would care to contemplate. Last I heard fully half of our incomes go to fund government at all levels. THAT’S scary enough. The good news is, we may all be rolling in piles of $$$’s in a couple of years or so. The bad news is, it may not be worth anything. Maybe that’s when the “Tenther” thing kicks in... ;^)

[MrB]

So, he cites court cases. “Federal” court cases. “Created entity” court cases.
The created entity is but one side of the contract.

Who in their right mind would say that one party of a contract has the sole ability to modify that contract at will, and in its own favor?

[MrB]

Many have given up on the school system,
in essence, “segregating” their families from the leftist indoctrination. State level separation is just one of the last of many steps along this path.

I’m realizing more and more that it is going to be, if not already is, impossible to live with these people.

They have the same “options” for us that the Muslims have:
1) Convert and be like them
2) Live as slaves to them
3) Die

There is no way to live with people of this mindset. They must be defeated and made powerless, isolated and separated from us without the ability to impose their will on us, or physically fought against.

So, our options are
1) Political victory and purge (which will actually be harder than 3)
2) Complete state sovereignty
3) 2nd war of independence

[BP2]

IF Congress tries to RAM ObamaCare through, the Dems know many of the red states will invoke the 10th Amendment. If they do, ObamaCare is not financially viable.

That’s what this is really all about ...

[Tublecane]

“To get a real blank stare, ask a rat to discuss the 9th.”

Funny, I’d think they’d love the ninth, since it’s the only thing in the Constitution that gives credence to their “penumbras” and “emanations,” which whispered into their ears and granted us all the right to buy condoms, abort babies, and participate in anal sex.

[manc]

Today on Hannity, a self-employed(??) LIB came up with this gem, regarding SS and Medicare:

“Just because they are bankrupt, doesn’t make it bad”.

---

LOL
the Buffoonery continues from the left.
I really look at them as little kids who cannot last in the real world so they go into fantasy world

[ForGod'sSake]

Who in their right mind would say that one party of a contract has the sole ability to modify that contract at will, and in its own favor?

Dead on! For this to change back in favor of The States and The People, it will require The States to flex their considerable muscle which have atrophied over the last 150 years, give or take. Exercise and physical therapy will be necessary if The States are to get back into shape. Same goes for We The People, eh? It may be a painful exercise, certainly in the early going, but no pain, no gain(not exactly an original phrase, but it seems to fit). ;^)

[DustyMoment]

BUT we will have to get behind our State representatives to let them know that We The People want them back on the wall shielding us against the feral government.

If you follow the logical progression, the 17th Amendment was the point at which the Representative Republic became a Democracy. When Senators became elected by popular vote INSTEAD of being appointed by the state legislatures, the states sealed their own fate and lost their power over the feral government. Senators, like House members are now beholden to the highest bidder to keep their cushy job. This is why repealing the 17th Amendment AND enacting strong term limits are absolute necessities for restoring state control over the bloated, out-of-control feral government.

[ForGod'sSake]

Couldn't agree more! I've never done the research to see how the 17th came about; the who or what was the driving force behind this coup whereby the States shot themselves in the foot. I can almost hear the touch-feely arguments in favor of it though. Maybe one of these days I'll take the time to see if I can get a better idea about the whys and wherefores.

Professional politicians are absolutely a scourge on the nation. Would it take a constitutional amendment get term limits in place or would simple legislation get it done. I recall back during the Gingrich revolution that term limit legislation was the ONLY item in the Contract With America that didn't pass under Pubbie control. So, I gather simple legislation could have worked but wonder what the Constitution might have to say about it, if anything.

[DustyMoment]

Professional politicians are absolutely a scourge on the nation.

Whee doggies!!! You NAILED it; knocked it out of the park with THAT one!!! On any given day I could not agree MORE with that statement and it is one of the things I most want to see come out of the second revolution - TIGHT controls over the elected representatives in the government and even tighter controls on those who serve in appointed positions.

I don't recall what the reason for the 17th Amendment was so, if you are able to find something, I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind sharing the information.

[ForGod'sSake]

I don't recall what the reason for the 17th Amendment was so, if you are able to find something, I would really appreciate it if you wouldn't mind sharing the information.

After spending a couple hours digging I've discovered a couple of things:

TERM LIMITS would require a Constitutional amendment. After a couple of attempts, NEWT and his followers could not get the requisite number of votes(2/3) to initiate the process. Dims killed it??? More research required...

A good discussion HERE laying out a pretty decent history(if accurate) leading up to and surrounding the 17th Amendment. Heady stuff!

LS, could you shine any additional light, or make corrections to the information contained in the Wiki article re the 17th?

An aside, LS: Why didn't you alert the prospective reader your BOOK was large enough to be used as a counterweight for a medium to large crane. A Patriot's History was delivered along with Atlas Shrugged. I thought the UPS guy was gonna get a hernie!!! The good news is, I'll have another chock for my truck when I'm finished reading. Your book is next in line, so I should be starting it in a week or two. Wish me luck.

[LS]

Sorry about the book size, but realize they made us cut 20,000 words immediately before we went to press-—AFTER all the other cutting. I’d have to research this, and unfortunately right now, I don’t have time. Will get back to it.

[Zionist Conspirator]

Liberals make even poorer Hamiltonian Federalists than they do "anarchists." Do you suppose they even know it was the strict constructionist Jeffersonians who supported their beloved French Revolution?

If everything the government does is inherently Constitutional, let it institute a Theocracy. After all, whatever the government says goes.

[ForGod'sSake]

Not a problem with the book length. Based on page count, it's a bargain!!!

Oh, and don't spend any time on the environment in which the 17th Amendment came to be. It may take a little longer but I can do my own research. Thanks!

[ForGod'sSake]

Liberals make even poorer Hamiltonian Federalists than they do "anarchists."

Heh, about the only thing libtards are good at is instigating anarchy to arrive at big brother government. Create a problem/crisis, then "fix" it -- with more government. Easy work if you can get it...

If everything the government does is inherently Constitutional, let it institute a Theocracy thugocracy.

Fixed it!

After all, whatever the government says goes.

That's exactly the position the libtards are taking only they are a bit selective of the "issues" in which government should insert itself. It goes without saying they would not send out the jack boots to enforce, say, traditional marriage, just to pick one.

[Zionist Conspirator]

That's exactly the position the libtards are taking only they are a bit selective of the "issues" in which government should insert itself. It goes without saying they would not send out the jack boots to enforce, say, traditional marriage, just to pick one.

Sex is the only area in which liberals are libertarian. Everywhere else they're fascist pigs, but for some reason, since they put sex above all other considerations, they still think they're libertarians and they have all the self-righteousness of libertarians with almost none of the excuses.

The reason the libs are so into free sex is that sexual taboos are about the only thing in our society (since we don't have a sacrificial cult) that represents G-d, Whom they regard as a tyrant. By opposing sexual taboos they're shaking their puny little fists at this "tyrant" even as they outlaw not eating three square meals a day (doubtless with the nutrition content carefully regulated).

There have always been people who think that G-d's Commandments are onerous and man's are sweet and light, no matter how much the opposite might actually be true.

[ForGod'sSake]

Man's "wisdom" is folly to God, eh.

Sex is the only area in which liberals are libertarian.

I would add at least one more "libertarian" notion to your short list: A woman's "right" to choose, or in less PC terms, the murder of unborn children. That's really OUT there. "Tolerance" of crime and criminals is another feature of their belief system. I dunno, seems they have a wild streak in their makeup, not unlike spoiled brats.

[DustyMoment]

Thanks for the info, FGS. I can see the term limits issue being either a state issue or a federal one. Assuming that, at some point, we manage to suspend the federal government for a provisional one, I would hope that the provisional one would have the wisdom to effect a few “tweaks” to the Constitution that would include a term limits clause as well as clauses that preclude the Congress from raising their own pay and limits the number of laws they can enact and ties those laws to the Constitution.

In addition, I would hope that the “tweaks” would also restrict each bill to one issue - no “riders” or other legislative tricks that allow these slugs to cram bills with unrelated riders or other crapola.

I also found this illuminating from the Wikipedia article - “After the turn of the century, support of Senatorial election reform grew rapidly. William Randolph Hearst expanded his publishing empire with Cosmopolitan, which became a respected general-interest magazine at that time, and which championed the cause of direct election with muckraking articles and strong advocacy of reform. Hearst hired a veteran reporter, David Graham Phillips, who wrote scathing pieces on Senators, portraying them as corrupt pawns of industrialists and financiers.”

Sad to say but, today, we could make that last sentence shorter. Today we could make it “Hearst hired a veteran reporter, David Graham Phillips, who wrote scathing pieces on Senators, portraying them as corrupt”, and it would be true (although, I have strong doubts about the veracity of either Hearst’s intentions by hiring Phillips, or the content of the articles he wrote! Hearst’s reputation precedes him.)!!

[ForGod'sSake]

Good find on the Hearst involvement. I missed that altogether and it's exactly what I was looking for. Speed reading is not my forte. I suspected the comtemporary media was a player and Hearst's involvement, one of the original participants in "yellow" journalism, would certainly make sense. BTW, from some article I ran across years ago he claimed to have single-handedly instigated the War of 1812 - pretty bold. I wonder if he would also have laid claim to single-handedly bringing about the adoption of the 17th? Another feather in the cap of yellow journalism??? Maybe not since an "academic", George H Haynes was apparently instrumental also. Maybe he was working with Hearst on the Q.T.???

In any case, this one is a tough call given the apparent difficulties within many States to make the "appointment" of senators workable. It would seem the States themselves may have been equal partners in the death of the original plan of the Founders. Graft and corruption, in this case at the State level, sealed their fate?

[DustyMoment]

In any case, this one is a tough call given the apparent difficulties within many States to make the "appointment" of senators workable. It would seem the States themselves may have been equal partners in the death of the original plan of the Founders. Graft and corruption, in this case at the State level, sealed their fate?

This makes it all the more important to establish firm term limits at all levels of government. In addition, unlike today, I think there needs to be a strong oversight committee comprised of rotating citizens to oversee the whole ethics situation of our elected officials. If/when they are found guilty of ethics violations (including graft, corruption, bribery) the penalties must be exceptionally harsh since they are in positions of power and trust.

If the politicians set themselves above the laws they create for the rest of us, what good are the laws?? They must be held to the same standards we are, and THEN some!!