The Winds Of Civil War: Illinois-Driven Marxist Attempt To Conquer Union

Pat Dollard ^ | Feb 20, 2009 | Pat Dollard

[Islander7]

New Hampshire fired the first shot. Although 7 other states have similar pending resolutions and bills, Oklahoma is the first to actually pass one. Another 27 states are expected to make similar moves in the coming months. That’ll leave the country split 71-29.

Now, before you get too excited, bear in mind that all of this was likely Obama’s goal. Boiled down, all of these state measures are threats of secession. Recall, if you will, Obama’s obsession to be the 21st Century Abraham Lincoln, and his ominous calls to recreate and rebuild America. Who was Lincoln? Why, he was the man who “preserved” the Union by way of implementing military force against states that had seceded. Lincoln knew full well that he would not be preserving the Union, but that he would be conquering sovereign nations, and that he would then have to destroy their cultures and ideologies, remaking both in the image of the North’s. And that is precisely what happened in the aftermath of Lincoln’s war of aggression. He didn’t preserve the Union, he changed it forever and handed unprecedented powers to the Federal Government.

Okay, so now I’m going to run with a theory.

[seoul62]

All noted, thank you./Just Asking - seoul62......

[El Gato]

The only exemption has to do with nuclear materials (18 U.S.C. 831 (e)

That is not the only exception, there are many. Most related to the War on Drugs.

[El Gato]

Marines and Army Navy.

oops.

[MeekOneGOP]

The Winds Of Civil War: Illinois-Driven Marxist Attempt
To Conquer Union Threatened With Military Challenges

Pingin' my Texas and General Interest list here!

Ping! Ping! Ping!

[JDoutrider]

***

[smokingfrog]

bookmark for later

[ForGod'sSake]

Are States Sovereign in America?

There have been many articles the last two weeks concerning the moves of several states to introduce legislation claiming certain rights under the 10th Amendment. When these articles are posted or socially bookmarked discussions seem to rise as to whether states are sovereign or not, in many people�s stated views they are not.

---

by Gary Wood
(conservative libertarian)
Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Reading through many postings I kept seeing recurring themes of disobedience, division, and a movement bent on secession and civil war. It became obvious that despite many Internet political readers being more rooted in our history there is a representative voice echoing the belief of a large number of citizens. Sparking the discussion were legislatures in Arizona, New Hampshire, Washington, and Oklahoma introducing a general warning the 10^th Amendment still applies. (In June of 2008 Oklahoma actually passed the legislation by a 92 to 3 margin while most of us slept.)  Montana and Missouri are two examples of specific claims under the 10^th Amendment with their focus on firearms and abortion.

There should be no surprise by those who believe this is a good movement others see it as a bad movement. In our lifetime states have not appeared to be sovereign nations unto themselves but merely a sub-category of government between the federal and city levels. Just as many believe we are a democracy the way history is taught combined with the changes we've instituted through Constitutional amendments and Supreme Court rulings it is easy to understand why opponents to this movement are confused.

The 16^th Amendment created a system where the federal powers took money directly from the people and a funneling back to states began to occur. The 17^th Amendment stripped the Legislative Branch from a true bicameral system of a Senate representing the states and a House representing the people to the facade of bicameralism as both chambers now represented the people. Even further back were the 14th Amendment alterations weakening the states sovereignty. Supreme Court cases over the past 60 years have given little credence to the 10^th Amendment. However, we must remember the Supreme Court has given little credence to any of the founding principles since the 1930s. (For an analysis of SCOTUS assault read "The Constitution in Exile" or "Who Killed the Constitution.") When we consider Constitutional Law classes in our country focus more on modern events than any attempt to first embrace the original intent of those founding the United States of America it is easier to understand the confusion over the sovereignty question.

Combine this with what many mayors across the country asked President Obama to do this past week and we cannot blame any citizen for believing we are one nation and states are merely a sub-category. Articulated during news appearances by Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa, the mayors traveling to Washington D.C. did so to encourage the Stimulus Bill's quick passage and funds for cities are sent directly to the city without being filtered through the states. When mayors bypass governors while citizen watch without batting an eye who is to believe states are sovereign?

We've had this debate before when Federalist supporters (those actually wanting one nation) clashed ideologically with Anti-Federalists (those wanting recognition of states as sovereign nations). Would it surprise you to learn states, in the language of the day, were considered nations rather than a sub-category within a nation? In the Treaty of Paris King George III did not recognize one independent nation but 13 sovereign nations. According to Dr. Kevin Gutzman, "[b]ut sovereignty lay in the states. That was the first principle of American government." (Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution, p. 16) When this was last debated the words of the 10^th Amendment were crafted to protect the power and sovereignty in the states as the Anti-Federalist clearly understood the tyrannical nature of a single, federal level control.

Are we to clearly abandon, once and for all, the key principles that helped in making us a great United States of America? Many of us have grown to accept two very dangerous ideas already. As this recent movement points out too many believe states are not now, nor should they be, sovereign. Also, as we will discuss in another article, too many believe we are a democracy. As keystones for securing our grand experiment are abandoned we crumble. Pause long enough to study our history and attempt to clearly understand your beliefs so you more clearly understand the direction you support.

[snippy_about_it]

I think required reading for those who don’t fully understand what our Founders and the citizens of the day meant this country to be should be:

A Leap in the Dark, The Struggle to Create the American Republic by John Ferling.

Please for those who want their eyes opened to truly understand, get this book.

[Defender of American Liberty]

This is all a lost cause in the United States, IMHO.

Democracies have a 200 year shelf life. They always collapse once the lower economic classes realize they can vote en masse to confiscate wealth from the upper classes.

This last election 45% of the electorate paid NOTHING in federal taxes or received a net gain from their tax filings. Once 50% is reached, turn out the lights--it's over. The "Porkulus" package more or less guarantees it.

Class warfare rhetoric + a majority with no skin in the game = socialist tyranny

We'd all be better off to move to Alaska, get liberty-loving leaders elected to the State legislature, and secede from the Union. Start over.

Yes, it's cold, but with all those natural resources, combined with the implementation of private and secure banking, extremely low corporate tax rates, a VAT system rather than income tax, and severe limits on union activity (only collective bargaining operations--no lobbying or pension management permitted), we could turn the entire State into a free market economic powerhouse.

That's my solution.

[snowrip]

We'd all be better off to move to Alaska, get liberty-loving leaders elected to the State legislature, and secede from the Union. Start over.

Or organize tax revolt on a massive scale. All it would take is one or two tax cycles; when the government wakes up on April 15th to find it has lost 50-80% of its tax revenue, the house of cards would crumble. How many IRS agents are going to show up to raid businesses and homes when there is no paycheck in their mailbox?

[enviros_kill]

DoD Directive 1404.10, dated 23 January 2009, “DoD Civilian Expeditionary Workforce” gets the gears turning already. Wouldn’t take much for this to be directed inward.

http://westernrifleshooters.blogspot.com/2009/02/obamessiahs-civilian-expeditionary.html

[enviros_kill]

This April door-to-door weapon confiscation drills in Iowa (lots of things happen in April: Lexington, Warsaw Ghetto Uprising, Waco, OKC)

Iowa National Guard Weapons Confiscation Drills

http://westernrifleshooters.blogspot.com/2009/02/follow-up-iowa-national-guard-weapons.html

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Nowhere Man]

This is all a lost cause in the United States, IMHO.

Democracies have a 200 year shelf life. They always collapse once the lower economic classes realize they can vote en masse to confiscate wealth from the upper classes.

There is an interesting observation that empires, well in a sense we are one, we control a lot of land, we have a lot of military might, large economy (for now) and influence in the world (for now), last around 200 years, give or take for some wiggle room.

You had the Spanish Empire from 1492 until 1713 when Spain lost it's European possessions and started downhill although it took them a while, but when you start losing territories and/or influence, that is when you "jump the shark" as an empire. That was a little over 200 years.

From the conclusion of the French and Indian War (we here in Pittsburgh and the U.S. call it that, for the rest of the world, Seven Years War) in 1763, Britain knocked France down and she began her reign as the world's greatest superpower of the time. Yes, she lost colonies in the American Revolution but she gained others all over the world so I cannot say that Britain jumped the shark in 1776. If you go forward 200 years, you get 1963. In 1963, it was a time of rapid decolonization for the British Empire so you hit the 200 year mark in that case.

United States, well, I say our power was secured, at least we were a power to be reckoned with was the War of 1812. Many historian see it as a draw, perhaps so, but it showed that our nations, as young as it was, was able to fend off invaders. This was the beginning of our "empire." Go forward 200 year's you get 2012, we are at that point now or almost so.

Right now, we have two views in this country. You might have subdivisions thereof, but most of those can fit into one side or another. One side is us, the tradition America where we believe in God or a higher power and if you leave people alone for the most part, they will learn to take care of themselves and excellence is rewarded. The other side want's the government to care for everyone, from the womb to the tomb, that is unless you are aborted, but that's for another time. You have a nanny state that spreads the wealth and everyone is poor and if you are "medium," you're lucky. The two sides are diametrically opposed to each other, they will fight each other like two rabid rotweillers. You have a set of irreconcilable differences. We keep beating each other over the head like two cavemen. We are in an ideological cold war right now. There will be some point that some nimrod, doesn't matter which side, will do something and we will have a hot war. God forbid, if it happens like that, I just hope God will give me the courage, wisdom and strength to see it through and fight for the right side and survive to make it to the other side, whatever that might be.

My opinions are my own and not Free Republic's. I sometimes wonder if we should take the Red States and other places we can save, practice triage if you will. Cut the rest loose and the libs can have it. However, if they cannot make it on their own and want readmitted by us, then we call the shots and condition.

This last election 45% of the electorate paid NOTHING in federal taxes or received a net gain from their tax filings. Once 50% is reached, turn out the lights--it's over. The "Porkulus" package more or less guarantees it.

Class warfare rhetoric + a majority with no skin in the game = socialist tyranny

Well, there is a saying that "when people can vote themselves money from others, it is over". I know some wise man said it a long time ago, one of the Founding Fathers IIRC, but that's the gist of it. If you are out there working trying to get by at least, you got skin in the game. I work as a delivery driver of auto parts, my other duties, if not on the road, is stocking shelfs and unloading what comes in on the truck. I had to stock brake rotors and drums today, I'm tired and sore. Middle age is creeping up on me. Still, I bust my butt and hustle to get by, we all do as it should be.

We'd all be better off to move to Alaska, get liberty-loving leaders elected to the State legislature, and secede from the Union. Start over.

Yes, it's cold, but with all those natural resources, combined with the implementation of private and secure banking, extremely low corporate tax rates, a VAT system rather than income tax, and severe limits on union activity (only collective bargaining operations--no lobbying or pension management permitted), we could turn the entire State into a free market economic powerhouse.

That's my solution.

Well, I used to be in IT and one of my customers was as well. We see it this way, we are like a computer with a bloated operating system and we are running slow and like we have a lobotomy. The solution is to reformat the hard drive and reinstall the operation system at its minimal level and reboot.

[Neoliberalnot]

Dick Cheney is going to lead the forces?

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

The bloodshed could be avoided by repeal of the 17th Amendment, but I doubt that’s going to happen.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

You need a 3/4 supermajority of states to ratify the constitution. Also, you con-con should also implement repeal of the 17th Amendment. As long as we believe states should have some sovereignty, they should have access to the Federal Government to ensure that the laws that are created respect their sovereignty.

[Errant]

Thanks,

You are correct of course about the 3/4ths supermajoriy. I agree the 17th could go but it may be better to not complicate the issue.

Errant

[April Lexington]

Beat drum. Beat!

[April Lexington]

Look, Hitler tried this. It was beyond terrible but, in the end, he failed and freedom was restored. All we have to do is suffer hell for 40 years and then, everything will then be ok!

OR... we could ask the bastard to show us his birth certificate and then kick him out!