D-Day is in November 2010.
"With their procedural options in the Senate exhausted, Republicans are looking to the Constitution for a way to fight the Democrats' health care reform bill.
South Carolina's attorney general said Tuesday his office was exploring whether the horse-trading used to secure the last few Democratic votes for the bill violates the Constitution; now a separate challenge is headed for a vote on the Senate floor on Wednesday.
Sen. John Ensign, Nevada Republican, has raised a constitutional point of order, arguing that the founding document does not give Congress the right to insist that Americans buy health insurance, nor to punish them with a tax if they don't."
Why would we want to stop this before it becomes a white-hot, full-fledged Civil War II? There are ways we could, of course, but that would involve the other side (the Soros-supported Democrats) either surrendering or at least making some huge concessions. And they are inclined to do neither.
A plebiscite here in the United States may be in order, based not on state lines, but Congressional districts.
The question being, do you accept the original founding doucments of the United States, or do you favor the reinterpretation that has been given to the Constitution, and the amendments that have been added subsequent to the Fifteenth Amendment?
Those districts that vote for the first alternative are allowed to join the “red state” America, and those districts that choose the second set of terms are obligated to join the “blue states”. The two countries could exist side by side, but the “red states” may be permitted to keep stern and vigilant control of those borders, only accepting those who would abide by the governing compact in force within their boundaries. Those who abuse this permission would be expelled forthwithly, without appeal. In a similar manner, should there be a dissatisfied citizen of the “red states”, the exit is always open.
The people who choose to live in the “blue states” could set up whatever the blazes kind of immigration and governance policy they want. But any incursions upon “red states” would be met with the full force of arms and diplomatic resistance, until such time as the incursion ends.
Of course, neither you or I can decide if any given piece of legislation is unconstitutional, so you may very well be operating on a faulty premise.
SCOTUS, of course, is the body constitutionally charged with making these determinations, so the first step would be challenging the law up to that level.
Neither you or I, again, can make that happen.
Perhaps a bit of research on how that all works would enlighten you a bit more before you post again on this topic.