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


1 posted on 03/21/2010 6:27:55 PM PDT by Pantera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Pantera

bump


2 posted on 03/21/2010 6:29:19 PM PDT by dalebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera
...so states must be influenced to pass state legislation that denies the federal government what they covet most, tax revenue.


3 posted on 03/21/2010 6:37:30 PM PDT by Plutarch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera
Kansas one of 37 states challenging federal health care reform (STOPPING THE COMMUNIST TAKEOVER!)

Virginia Lawmakers Say "No" To Health Care Reform (First in the Nation)

Idaho first to sign law against health care reform

4 posted on 03/21/2010 6:44:05 PM PDT by TigersEye (It's the Marxism, stupid! ... And they call themselves Progressives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera

As I have been expecting to be the case for quite some time despite my great hopes that it would not need to come to this, Nullification of this unconstitutional usurpation of our rights may be very much necessary.

But lets do this the right way.

1st: We must give the Federal government in the form of the Federal court a fair chance to right themselves and overturn this evil. So we will challenge this in court.

2nd: When that fails we must prepare for the practical measures necessarily to implement nullification. In this case we may need to look at the Federal tax escrow accounts being proposed in Georgia among other state.

We will need to practically deny the IRS the information necessary to enforce their unconstitutional individual mandate. There are probably many ways to do that, every state will have to experiment with and develop their own which they think shall work best in their situation.

We don’t need to agree on how to effectively nully this at the state level in the event the court should side with their employees rather then our Free Constitution of civil government, and the subsequent rights of We the people.

Fortunately We have been for making preparations maneuvering our States into a position where active nullification and interposition is political possible. Lets hope it doesn’t have to come to that, but let us prepare to take such actions none the less.

Take heart my countrymen this fight is FAR from over. Indeed this is something many of us have been laying into place the needed foundation for.


5 posted on 03/21/2010 6:45:11 PM PDT by Monorprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera

Unfortunately, I’m afraid the courts will judge that to be a slippery slope. They won’t strike down 90 years of law.


8 posted on 03/21/2010 7:26:10 PM PDT by dr_who
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera
This falls right in line with my thinking, and I am right next door in Arkansas.

We can pick a new Capitol and cut them out of the loop while we cleanup our own front yards.

14 posted on 03/21/2010 10:38:25 PM PDT by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera
I hope other states can carry the 10th, because we sure don't want California having any more regulatory power over its subjects than it already has exerted. Are you sure that you aren't jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire?

If you really want to use a technique that could work, the states should refuse federal funding attached to federal programs. As I understand it, this nasty piece of work has an expanded Medicaid component for which the states will have to cough up a substantial match. They will also probably be required to enact legislation allowing for certain minimum coverage under state Medicaid, Healthy Families and other such programs. As this bill is an extra-Constitutional federal program, if the states send all the federal health money back and opt out of the program, then the feds are cut off at the ankles on that portion of the scheme.

Mark Levin can take care of the requirement to purchase individual insurance with his lawsuit on the Constitutionality of such a mandate. That would give individuals relief.

20 posted on 03/22/2010 2:15:39 AM PDT by marsh2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera

9th Amendment, too.


25 posted on 03/22/2010 8:31:14 AM PDT by ConjunctionJunction (LOLcat sez: "ObamaCare: Do Not Want!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Pantera
"Once states exhibit defiance it will not be long before the federal government shifts it’s focus to the states not the individuals. That’s when you will know that you are not being ignored anymore."
27 posted on 03/22/2010 9:03:55 AM PDT by caww
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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