Posted on 02/10/2010 9:17:09 AM PST by Jim Robinson
Washington (CNN) -- Their message is loud and clear: Big government is out of control; states need to take back their constitutional rights.
A movement has been growing over the past two years of urging states to exert their rights under the 10th Amendment. The Amendment, part of the Bill of Rights, states: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." A number of states have passed resolutions that assert their rights. While the resolutions have no legal teeth, they're intended to carry a message: States' rights are being trampled on.
The anger behind the so-called 'Tenther' movement comes from what advocates see as the federal government's forcing policies on the states -- most notably on health care reform, economic recovery measures and social issues.
But critics of the movement say the resolutions go too far by nullifying or ignoring federal laws.
After the Georgia Senate's move in April 2009 for sovereignty, Atlanta Journal-Constitution columnist Jay Bookman wrote that this push has a "particularly nasty legacy."
"It helped precipitate the Civil War, and in the 1950s and early '60s it was cited by Southern states claiming the right to ignore Supreme Court rulings ordering the end of segregation," he wrote.
Bookman added: "You have to question the judgment of those who would have any truck whatsoever with such nonsense and who would jeopardize the reputation of the Georgia Senate to lend aid and comfort to such radical causes and fringe groups."
Other critics point out that if states want to send a clear message to Washington -- and not just pass resolutions -- they would refuse federal money or other services...
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Other critics point out that if states want to send a clear message to Washington -- and not just pass resolutions -- they would refuse federal money or other services...
this is the key. states are addicted to the "federal govt. money" game and somehow need to be set free from that.
Bingo! It really is the key, and is even more insidious than just the surficial federally adminstered trough of programs, given the fact that the federal govt. is the only legitimate printer of the ubiquitous dollar, and hence can do whatever it wants in that venue.
In fact we were keenly waiting for the CA IOU thing to play out further, thus making it obvious that a State can internally deal (for better or worse) with its own monetary economics above and beyond the US dollar. When Palin was refuting the feds on stimulus money, similarly we had suggested Alaska create its own internal certificates; there's a situation (Alaska) which really could prosper on its own, i.e. I'd invest. What does the Constitution say about this?
In Alaska for instance there would be an immediate decoupling of government and Goldman Sachs, government and the Federal Reserve, etc. It would not quite be, as in the Confederate States, secession from the Union, but rather secession from the federal protection racket.
Leftism (centralized dependence) is not going to be blown out by the Republican Party, that has been proven, but there are other ways.
"Tea Parties" I suppose are one of those. This internet is another. Internal State monetization(?) another.
If you aren't finding people "around" you that don't understand the concept, then you aren't getting "out" much my friend. Bring it up at a dinner party and half the people won't even know there "is" a 10th Amendment. I got tired of explaining it, that's why I wrote the post on the blog. Now I can give folks my biz card that has The Patriot's Flag on it and give them the URL so they can read for themselves. Don't go and assume ... go and TEACH! One vote at a time, we'll get our country back. That guy sitting beside you in the Starbucks? How did he vote last November? Does he know about the 10th? ask him. If he doesn't, then he's a potential vote. If he does, you'll have made a friend. TEACHING this gets people to LEARN why they made a very bad mistake last November and why they should vote "conservative" next time.
Been there, done that, got the T-shirt AND the coffee mug. It just seemed you weren't aware you were replying to the HMFIC of this web site, Jim Robinson. He tends to keep up pretty well.
Nope didn’t realize I was replying to Jim. But I’d reply the same way.(and I’m one of his biggest fans! :-) I read the post to indicate (in the three short words) that “yeah, everybody knows about that...” And that’s why I made my statement. Thank heavens for FR so we can keep everyone up to date on this kind of subject. Even on a misunderstood post, like this one for me, (and missing a Chance to say THANK YOU to Jim), it still creates a teach-able moment. I think that is FR’s main feature. It TEACHES. I got 6 private emails on the post asking where I got some of the information ... so people are HUNGRY, that’s for sure. Sorry if I offended Jim, wasn’t meant to do so at all, I simply misread the meaning of the post and was darned sure going to correct it. (I’ve got a mug and a shirt with FR on it too! :-)
Doug
Freep on! ;^)
reading the commits several things strike me:
1: Corporate person hood is anther states rights issues as corporations are incorporated by states.
2: Insolently so are ALL elections in the United States state issues, there are NO “federal” elections in the united states period. Even the election for president is simply an election for your State’s electors. So any and all campaign rules should be State campaign rules.
3: The dilution by some Washington leftist that if states were to retake their position as masters of domestic policy’s would somehow create either anarchy or “big business” domination is nuts. In fact the centralization of power makes cooperate big money domination easy as they only have to pay off 1 set of senators and reps to reap the rewards from the whole Federation, rather then 50 sets of politicians, to reap the same rewards.
Look at the numbers: http://www.ncsl.org/LegislaturesElections/Redistricting/ConstituentsperStateLegislativeDistrict/tabid/16643/Default.aspx
There are a lot fewer people per state legislator number usually in the 10’s of thousands per legislator then there are per congressman.
At the same time the benefit of buying off any particular legislator is much, much less, as they can only benift you in so far as the state’s laws and thus economy are concerned.
The economic which enables “Big business” to buy undue influence over our leaders just doesn’t work out so well with State legislators as it does with congressmen. The people have a much stronger share of control over them vs the economic value of their power.
If you want to get rid of and fight corruption keeping government limit is the only way. because when it comes to corruption your talking about the economic value(How much the power can be used to economically benefit a particular company.) of power vs the political value of power(the hold of the people).
The simplest response is “now that you have insulted your intelligence and mine, can we have an adult discussion?”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.