> “I may be from Massachusetts; but I’m “state’s rights,” right down to the ground.”
Just a suggestion ...
I am writing to my state’s grassroots and COS persons that we should avoid the phrase “state’s rights” because it is a trigger for unneeded and unwarranted adversity.
The phrase “state’s rights” is a trigger for the history of segregation as espoused vociferously by democrat Governor George Wallace of Alabama during the 1960s.
In its place I am thinking to propose using “State’s Role”, “State Sovereignty”, “State’s Realm”. “State’s Sphere”, “State’s Prerogative”, “State’s Area”, “State’s Domain”.
I am not advocating political correctness but rather political expediency. No need to get bogged down by the usage of trigger words that set a discussion off on a tangent of segregation or other unrelated issues and history.
Although the 1960s are by now quite a time ago, the trigger words still persist in the media.
A most excellent suggestion, Hostage! I didn't think of that. But I'm sure you're right. Once the COS hits the MSM radar screen, I expect all Hell will break loose. There'll be such quantities of MUCK stirred up that it will be difficult to see straight. We had better not be providing the enemy with ammo he'll use to try to kill us.
So, I'm swearing off "states' rights" language from now on. "Tenth Amendment Powers" would be my suggestion for a new moniker. That sounds harmless enuf. What talking head would want to rail against something that "abstract?"