Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: AzaleaCity5691
The idea that, as this book that came out in the 80’s laid out, we’re not one nation per se, but rather a collection of nations united into the U.S.A.

Well, they tried that with a little thing called the Articles of Confederation. Didn't work out too well.

23 posted on 06/17/2007 10:01:04 PM PDT by EternalVigilance ("You will have your bipartisanship." - Fred Thompson, May 4, 2007)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]


To: EternalVigilance

And actually, the constitution was only a modification of that. How can I say this with confidence, because when the rest of the nation had a vibrant two party system, in our state, you had a poll tax, and the real election was the Democratic runoff. I should also note that here, we don’t hold “Lincoln” dinners as Republican fundraisers.

When you consider what classically defines a nation as a nation, the United States contains several of them. And I still personally believe that nullification is a valid doctrine. The reason Republicans took the majority is because of state’s rights. The fact is, California should be governed under a different set of laws than my state is. We believe different things, and our laws should reflect that.


31 posted on 06/17/2007 10:13:53 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson