Could This Really End In War?

vanity | January 31, 2009 | Jim Noble

[MortMan]

But a constitutional convention opens the door for wholesale rewriting of the constitution to enshrine socialism and/or communism in the highest law of the land.

Adhering to the constitution as written is a more peaceful solution, IMO.

[Vn_survivor_67-68]

here is a link to Cornell US Codes and a supremacy clause search ....skroogoogle

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/

http://web.search.cornell.edu/search?q=supremacy+clause&btnG=Search&entqr=0&output=xml_no_dtd&sa=Search&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&ud=1&ie=UTF-8&client=default_frontend&oe=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=default_frontend

[SERE_DOC]

"I would rather die on my feet, than live on my knees. Period."

Well said

Semper Fi!

[pepperdog]

I think Texas lost the right to secede when they lost the Civil War, before that they did have that right I believe. I believe they still retain the right to split into five separate states. Someone from Texas please set me straight, my Texas history class is very dim in my mind these days...long in the past.

[jetson]

As I stated months ago the first skirmishes will start between blacks and Mexicans. As the economy fails ( due to being Obamanized) the blacks will be demanding more and more and the Mexicans will feel they are getting pushed out of the welfare gig. The inner cities will turn into battle fields and spread out as gun owners begin protecting their properties.

[AuntB]

"but I’d rather spend my life in turmoil so my children have a chance at a good life. As it stands now, their futures are being mortgaged by our government."

Me, too.

“If there must be trouble let it be in my day, that my child may have peace. “ Thomas Paine

[jetson]

I also forgot to mention that gun dealers have to have proof Mexicans are legal before selling them guns (a new law). The feds are getting nervous.

[blam]

"The inner cities will turn into battle fields and spread out as gun owners begin protecting their properties. "

I believe the riots/violence will begin with the first food panic and the store shelves are stripped and then the FEMA (emergency resupply) food trucks are hijacked before they make it to the cities. Our JIT system is ripe for such an event.

Having a good supply of storeable food on hand in these times is a very good idea.

[going hot]

Ca will not cede to Mexico.

Ca is blue only because of the three population centers. County by county, is is mostly red.

So, what happens to the pop centers if they wake up to no food, energy, sewer, water, medicine, shelter, safety? All these things disappear at the drop of a hat during turmoil.

The perti dish with bacteria goes to billions in short order, then outpaces supply and smothers itself.

The blue regions of this state have other ideas.

[jetson]

I believe the riots/violence will begin with the first food panic and the store shelves are stripped and then the FEMA (emergency resupply) food trucks are hijacked before they make it to the cities. Our JIT system is ripe for such an event. Having a good supply of storeable food on hand in these times is a very good idea.

Good point. With the coming cold weather worrying wheat farmers in the north and possible volcanic eruption that could effect growing we could see food problems.

[perfect_rovian_storm]

When a loaf of bread costs $50, that’ll cause problems in and of itself.

[AuntB]

“In that sense we’re already in a civil war and it has weakened us. “

I think you’re right, cripplecreek. We are certainly a nation divided...by several factors.

Something I didn’t realize and I found interesting when I researched my book, was how long the ‘confederacy’ was talked about before it happened. I found a letter to an ancestor written in 1849 that talks about the hope of joining ‘The Confederacy of the United States’.

Some of the states weren’t for just one side. Arkansas joined the Confederacy, but many did not and fought for the Union. At the start of the war, many wanted nothing to do with either and in NW Arkansas, formed the “peace society”, which didn’t last long before most of them were either locked up or forced to join the Confederates.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Thanks,...this thread gets the wheels turning....mentally that is!

[cripplecreek]

At the start of the war, many wanted nothing to do with either and in NW Arkansas, formed the “peace society”, which didn’t last long before most of them were either locked up or forced to join the Confederates.

That's another issue I have with the whole secessionist idea. They talk about escaping tyranny or oppression but when you point out that there will be opposition within the secessionist areas, they now have a new problem. They have to kill, lock up or evict that opposition from their own homes. (become the oppressor)

[seoul62]

I am a resident of New York State and not a loser. There are other Freepers who are New Yorkers, do you paint all people that you meet with a broad brush? I have been an American Citizen since I was born: 1962 - Camp Casey - Korea and came here when I was two. My home is here in America not Camp Casey - Korea. I was raised by two fine individuals: My late Father: who served proudly in the United States Army and my Mother who is a proud American of Japanese descent./Just Asking - seoul62......

[AuntB]

Yep.

[Uri’el-2012]

A peaceful way out would be a Constitutional Convention.

I don't think so.

That is the fastest way to communism.

[nominal]

"The supremacy clause, read a certain way, negates the rest of the Constitution.

That reading, although it doesn't make much sense, is perfectly defensible and logical. And there are Leftist opinions all over the web which support exactly that interpretation."

It isn't logical to be contradictory.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding."

No treaty can nullify the Constitution. e.g. Seery v United States and Reid v Covert, which were pretty much in line with the some of the Bricker Amendment.

Gibbons v Ogden and McCullough v Maryland show how the supremacy clause is interpreted.

I'm not saying they wouldn't -try-, as there are large, well funded groups who have been trying for a long, long time. The latest move shows how the use of 'process law' to shoehorn Obama into the office of the president works, claiming some 'loophole' exists. This is an example of the methodology they use in the pursuit of communism and global governance.

But you can't legislate the Constitution away. Saying that the supremacy clause can negate the Constitution is -not- a tautology, or anything like that, because it's directly contradictory.

[ought-six]

“Which state would have the biggest impact, or the most logical?”

Texas.

[blam]

"I am a resident of New York State and not a loser. There are other Freepers who are New Yorkers, do you paint all people that you meet with a broad brush?"

I've been from Alabama for 65 years...it's been a lot of fun too.