Posted on 04/20/2010 7:12:25 PM PDT by Man50D
A group of Americans who believe the federal government overstepped its constitutional bounds in passing the recent health-care legislation is rallying allies to a bold and controversial initiative: state nullification of the federal law.
"Now that health-care reform has been signed into law, the question people ask most is, 'What do we do about it?'" said Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenth Amendment Center, in a statement. "The status quo response includes lobbying Congress, marching on D.C., 'voting the bums out,' suing in federal court and more. But the last 100 years have proven that none of these really work, and government continues to grow year in and year out."
Instead, the Center is reaching back into the history books to suggest states take up "nullification," a controversial measure that would essentially involve states saying to the federal government, "Not in our borders, you don't. That law has no effect here."
The Center is partnering with WeRefuse.com to announce release of model nullification legislation for states, called the Federal Health Care Nullification Act, and a call for 100,000 Americans to join a state-by-state petition to prompt legislators into action.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
That's an excellent argument!
Dukakis ran for president and BOTH his parents were from another country.
How many other presidents?
This is approching tinfoil hat land.
The House did go first, The senate then did their thing. Then, just before reconciliation, Scott Brown was elected. So the House just accepted the Senate bill.
The Dems would be claiming that the bill ultimately passed (or at least the main part of it) originated in the House, but really what originated in the House bore no resemblance whatsoever to the final product. In their thinking, the original House bill was not the massive House health care bill that passed just before Christmas.
It’s a unconstitutional bill and illegal..
How many other presidents?
This is approching tinfoil hat land."
And, did he violate the Constitutional requirements by assuming the office?
You are aware that the Constitution doesn not say one must be a Natural Born Citizen to RUN for office. Right? Heck, even an alien green card holder (& previous felon) ran for office in 2008.
What I think is worthy of being labeled "tinfoil hat land" is people in this country that believe someone born a subject to the crown of her majesty the Queen of England could possibly be considered a Natural Born Citizen of the United States, and thus Commander in Chief of the armed forces. THATS crazy!
bump
I thought it was two religious groups, Amish and Muslims. Is it just Muslims, then?
OTOH, muslims reap all the benefits of the system, yet are exempt from paying into it. This amounts to al jizyah - a sharia law inspired tax on all non-muslims to benefit muslims.
As such it is a recognition that sharia is senior to US law and our Constitution, IF we let it stand.
Oh, I see.
This entire thing is Hell with a capital H.
If 0thugga is not removed and everything he signed and everyone he hired is not made - oops - null and void, we are extremely toasted and in order to get back our Republic, I cannot imagine (well, I can) what it will take.
“It’s possible she did, but what about SR? Isn’t he listed FIRST on those announcements? “Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama” Did HE ever live there? If not, doesn’t that call into question the accuracy of the announcements?”
Senior definitely did NOT live there, at least according to Polk Directory. Ann did.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=107337
The Health Dept. released the living address given to them; perhaps the default was residence of mother or residence of infant following discharge. Ann and Senior allegedly were married, so “Mr. and Mrs.” isn’t a lie. No, they didn’t live together, but the “cookie-cutter” nature of the birth announcements apparently precluded including 2 addresses (and it’s not at all unlikely Ann lied about address or didn’t think the fact that Senior was living elsewhere was relevant. I don’t think it’s legitimate to discard the newspaper notices entirely based on the “taint” of this untruth.
“Do you know for a fact that she did live there, and that the address of that (guest) house is in fact the same address as the grandparents house?”
Jerome Corsi has investigated this in person and seems satisfied that Ann lived there (see link above). I think we have to presume he was competent enough to double-check that address of cottage matched the main house etc. That said, I don’t know based on my own investigation what the answer is to your question. Of necessity, I am relying on Corsi, but if anything, he would be biased away from showing Ann lived at that address, since if this were true, it would “explosive” news. So if a skeptic positioned to explore the evidence accepts Ann’s residence at this address, that’s good enough for me.
“the original House bill was not the massive House health care bill that passed just before Christmas.”
To clarify, the House DID move first. They passed a major HOUSE health care reform bill AND a revenue bill prior to December.
The Senate didn’t want to act on the HOUSE version of HCR, but constitutionally, it could not initiate a new revenue-raising bill. So the SENATE health care reform plan simply used the previously passed House revenue bill as a “shell” and substituted a massive health plan. All perfectly legal and described in more detail here:
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55081
Note that this procedure was chosen well before Scott Brown was elected. What changed after his election was that the Senate could no longer afford to vote on a revised House version of its bill, as that would be subject to filibuster. But the House didn’t like certain elements of the Senate bill. Ultimately they agreed to vote for it exactly as is, but to simultaneously vote for the “fixes” so that members wouldn’t get in trouble for a “bad” bill.
Thus, the Senate never had to vote again on the “bad” bill and it had more than 60 votes to pass the “fixes”.
A technicality, sure, but together those missing and incorrect facts give those announcements less credible weight for "proving" Barry was born in HI.
On the contrary, I believe that this gives a bit more credibility to the possibility that the grandparents (grandma more likely) were the ones who filled out the paperwork (giving HER documented address as that of Sr. and her daughter....even though Sr. never lived there) and filed it with the registrar in order to get her foreign born grandson American citizenship.
Such a filing would (as the current theory goes), generate those birth announcements (which again, don't corroborate a birth in HI).
BTW, thank you rxsid for all of your research and efforts on these threads, it is very much appreciated!
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.