Brian
20p16 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0
13 years ago @ Virginia Tenth Amendme... - VA Attorney General Ex... · 0 replies · 0 points
13 years ago @ Texas Tenth Amendment ... - 14 Governors Threatene... · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Texas Tenth Amendment ... - The EPA can go to Hell... · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Texas Tenth Amendment ... - The EPA can go to Hell... · 3 replies · +1 points
I write articles in the hopes that more people will better understand the problem and begin to feel the way you do about the crooks in DC. I will bet you that 90% of the people think that the federal govt has a constitutionally sound argument for the EPA or Obamacare or any of thousands of issues. The fact is they do not. Most people are still asleep, many will stay asleep, but right now there is some level of awakening and I think (maybe I'm wrong) that articles can help drive that in the right direction.
But then again, your point is well taken, it doesn't take everyone:
"It does not require a majority to prevail but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set bush fires in people's minds." - Samuel Adams
13 years ago @ Tenth Amendment Center - Welcome to the Constit... · 1 reply · +1 points
In other words "we the people" will decide whether to judge constitutionality based on the Supreme Court precedent or the nullification precedent. And if there are countering views across the country then it will eventually be determined by who blinks.
13 years ago @ Tenth Amendment Center - Welcome to the Constit... · 3 replies · +1 points
This article was about education. If you ask someone on the street who has authority, he will say the supreme court. Constitutionally speaking, that is simply not true. Using precedent as a guide, there are two conflicting answers to the question and the “nullification answer” requires much greater awareness.
If we give the power of ultimate interpretation to the Supreme Court then there is simply no use for nullification and interposition. None, because the Supremacy Clause clearly states that ***constitutional*** federal laws are the supreme law of the land.
Therefore, if we accept only decisions from the Supreme Court regarding Constitutionality, then when the people are at odds with the Supreme Court’s interpretation there are only 3 options left to defend liberty; all of them varying degrees of a nuclear response. Many would argue that the article V convention is not nuclear but since out Constitution only has limited amendments and this type of convention has never occurred in our history I’d say it’s pretty radical. The other two options would be secession and violent revolution. I guess subjugation to unconstitutional laws is always an option too.
13 years ago @ Texas Tenth Amendment ... - Is the Tennessee AG wr... · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Texas Tenth Amendment ... - Comments from Perry's ... · 1 reply · +1 points
Here's a start: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2...
13 years ago @ Texas Tenth Amendment ... - Comments from Perry's ... · 1 reply · +1 points
So the question really is, will we see a special session or are we going to have to wait until 2011 to see action from Texas?
14 years ago @ Tenth Amendment Center - What is a Right? · 3 replies · +1 points
In general, states could then be free to manage themselves based on the regional cultures, needs and desires.
However, without the chains of the Constitution placed on the federal politicians, this is impossible. Here's why... local and state politicians reflecting regional values are the most likely to run for national office and when they get there, guess what, they feel that they are free to push for their system to be put in place over all of the other states.
Therein lies the problem... you can't enforce what type of person ends up in Washington; however the solution is that you can place chains upon their action when they get there. And the Constitution and the 10th are those chains... too bad our nation badly needs a reminder...