Bio not provided
@Gabriel Alan King While I sympathize with your ideals and sentiment I think we are going at this the wrong way. I may be wrong but I think it would be much more effective if we, the states, would direct their citizens to pay any and all taxes they owe to the states as well as the fed directly to the state. The states then could send along that portion they believe is owed along to the feds. The state legislatures could balance their own budgets and starve the feds at the same time. There isn't anything that the feds could do about it in that they couldn't make war on all the independent states.
12 months ago on 2nd Amendment Preservation Act Passes Utah House, 49-17 – Tenth Amendment Center Blog
@KimberlyBoldt @Michael Boldin I've long maintained that the only way to stop this federal government is to starve it down to size. The only way to do that is for each state to direct their citizens to pay any and all taxes to the state and to only the state and then the state can determine how much of that money to send on to the feds.
12 months ago on Idaho House Approves 2nd Amendment Preservation Act, 55-13 – Tenth Amendment Center Blog
While all this rhetoric may have merit, the test will be one of force. Sooner or later the feds are going to try to enforce their decrees. Maybe they will start with the marijuana laws or with guns but, it will come. I believe they will do it one state at a time, probably starting with Tennessee or Oklahoma (the two states that seem to have found hind legs on which to stand) to set an example. To the extent they use force and coercion to accomplish this will determine who will and who will not stand for the constitution.
Those who put the value of their paycheck over the value of the constitution, I believe, will cave. Threats of detention will cull others. A further number will succumb to bribery. The patriots may become penniless and, if caught, confined.
The question to ask is: Do you have faith that your sheriff will stand up to those who will use federal leverage against him? I live in Wisconsin and, looking around, sadly don't see a Sheriff conservative enough with the required intestinal fortitude to stand firm. Hopefully, I'm wrong.
If the answer to the question about your sheriff is 'no' then you have to ask if you are willing to stand against this infringement by the feds either alone or with you neighbors?
That path will be extraordinarily rough because, it seems to me, that we are so dependent upon the feds that I doubt that enough people can be found to stymie this push for further power. We all use federal currency for our transactions and our wealth can now be erased with the click of a computer key, the feds confiscate our labor (money, wealth) through our tax withholding system before we even see it, federal monies are doled out to our school systems and local and state governments as a control on their behavior (does the 55mph speed limit ring a bell?) and those on social security who have had their labor confiscated lo these many years will be left without that check which, in some cases, is a sole income source. No, I seriously doubt that the line can be held.
For people to be able to stand against the fed they will have to come up with other ways of feeding and caring for their families which means getting off the grid. They will have to invent their own trading systems so that they can obtain those things necessary to live, learn to do without luxuries and become more self sufficient in their habits. The public also has to refuse to use the banknotes issued by the government and resort to hard currency.
The only way to choke this snake is to withhold your labor (money, wealth) en mass. That is what they live on. First they take it away from you, then they return some of it. The patriot has to be able and willing to withhold that labor (money, wealth), that's the only way. (I have long advocated the funneling of all taxes extorted from the citizens through the state. If the state passed a law stating that they and they alone were the only 'collectors' of taxes within the state they could receive the taxes from their citizens and dole out the amount OUR STATE LEGISLATORS deemed necessary for the feds to run the national government. THAT would be state control.)
Finally, I feel such sorrow for the way this country has turned out. We started out with those representing us seriously interested in the rights of the citizens. What we have now is a group of people re-elected each term on the basis of the amount of labor they can steal from some citizens to deliver to others. Citizen and states rights? That is a concept that has seemingly fallen by the wayside.
1 year, 1 month ago on Sheriffs, States and the Supreme Court
@calinb7 @gypsynovus @RedTulie Calinb7,
Bet you said that before Benghazi, too. Fools abound.
1 year, 3 months ago on Texas NDAA Nullification Bill Includes Criminal Charges for Federal Agents
All due respect, Lincoln proved that they can do what they want given that they have gained the acquiescence of a slight majority of the population. Even Roosevelt showed us that.
I, too, am 63yr old (born in 49 when things were a bit more black and white (that is not a racial reference)) and have seen what can happen when the left decides they will do something. I remember soldiers returning from war being spit upon. In the end, we ended that war dishonorably and those in this country who were responsible for the millions of deaths in Viet Nam and at the hands of the Khmer Rouge were never held responsible. Just look at Hanoi Jane's career. Her traitorous behavior hasn't seemed to affected that.
No, I think they will get away with what they want. If you are in the way you will be steamrolled. If they can spit on warriors coming home from battle what makes you think they will stop at anything?
Just saying, with all due respect.
@RedTulie @jtrailroad You can always go online and sign a petition for secession but I don't see that happening. You can leave the country which might be the best alternative (Panama uses US currency and has very good medical services left in place after we gave it away). Or you can revolt but I don't see too many joining you as we have become a nation of cowards.
If you think, however, that you are going to stop him you need to do a little review of history, the Romans, even just as far back as A. Lincoln. Once Lincoln decided that we would have a war nothing stood in his way and he even resorted to using soldiers to close down and destroy dissenting newspapers, imprisoning and deporting a dissenting representative and swearing out a warrant for a sitting supreme court justice. So, you see, there isn't really anything they cannot do once they decide to do it.
Obviously you watch and listen to the MSM. Just about anyone with sense would have preferred any of the 'also rans' over what we have just re-subjected ourselves to.
Having said that, I didn't like the choice that was thrust upon us in this last election by the republicans. Of all those who ran in the primaries I liked Mittens the least. He proved in Mass that he was, is and never will be conservative.
If you think the last 4 yrs have been bad, it might be best to leave the country now because you will not recognize it after 4 more of this crook. Look at every municipality and political subdivision run by blacks and that is how the nation is going before this guy is done with it. His and the attorney general's penchant for corruption is just breath taking.
good,I have the judge's order and have attached it. The order permanently enjoins the government from detaining anyone indefinitely and says that the terms are so ill-defined in the law that it cannot stand.
Yeah, that'll stop em.
@West Texan @RK1 West,
Wish I could be that flippant about it. They are the ones making and laws now and laws are backed up by threat of force. They are in a position now to be able to take anything they want, including your freedom or life if necessary to get their way.
This isn't something so easily dismissed.
Lincoln couldn't either under US law but he did. He set aside habeas corpus, swore out an arrest warrant for a sitting US supreme court justice for ruling against him on a constitutional issue, made war against civilians in violation of the rules of war that existed at that time, closed down newspapers in violation of the first amendment and interfered with elections in several states among other crimes. He got away with it the same way this guy is getting away with what he wants to do.
As far as limited and separate powers is concerned evidently you have not heard of the commerce clause of the constitution. That clause is being used by the federal government with the blessing of the SCOTUS to interfere in the internal affairs of each and every state. Federal law is now the supreme law of this union in direct contradiction to the constitution.
My lad, I think you have come to the game a little late.
Been saying that for years. The best thing we ALL can do is vote for the other guy.
Our representatives are not representing us any more. If they were they wouldn't pass laws that exempt them from the laws they pass. They consider themselves princes of the country and when one finally does lose his or her office he or she is given a government no-show job that costs the taxpayers plenty. Our system has become one of corruption and 'get what you can and let the other guy pay for it' at a national level.
To top it off you have people like Alan Simpson telling seniors that they are stingy for wanting what was promised them by a government that didn't give them a choice as to whether or not to participate in the system, all the while he was living off the government.
These people have become arrogant and aloof and should be brought back down to the level of those whom they live off of.
The federal government cannot be stopped unless it is strangled. Unless the states impell their citizens to pay all federal taxes and fees to their respective states and the states decide how much to send on to the federal government nothing will happen. Control of the money is everything. He who controls the gold is golden. A government without resources cannot govern.
I feel, at this juncture in the conversation, that a history lesson is needed with a possible solution proposed.
This country had a weak central government until Abraham Lincoln started the War Between the States by forcing the south to fire on Fort Sumpter. The bone of contention, as everyone knows, was not slavery but the state’s right to either allow or not allow slavery within their borders.
Lincoln had another motive in mind however. He, like Hamilton, believed in a large central government and he owed plenty to those who got him elected. His plan was to raid the treasury by having the federal government fund public works projects (read: the railroads) thereby enriching his friends and allies.
Up to this point in our history roads and canals were built by private enterprise or lottery and the costs of those projects were relatively low. Because these projects were funded privately they were built efficiently and by the shortest route possible.
From the end of that war forward our country has had a government that has ignored the constitution. The office of the president has gotten stronger while local governments have become weaker and weaker. Lincoln’s suspension of habeas corpus started the course that has brought us to a president who thinks that he can do as he wants without restraint. The sad part is that they are getting away with it.
There is a solution, however, available to you and me. Juries have it within their power to nullify laws written and passed by lawmakers and deemed constitutional by the Supreme Court. Because the government, it seems, is in the hands of the elites this, I believe, is the only way the common man can affect jurisprudence. As Mark D. Ledbetter said in his book, America’s Forgotten History, “We The People, sitting as a jury, are competent to nullify law we consider unjust or unconstitutional.” He goes on to state that the principle was established by the Magna Carta and proved in this country by the case brought against a Peter Zenger involving freedom of the press and the sedition law passed in 1798. The jury not only found Mr. Zenger innocent but also found the law “wanting”.
Although a judge will not tell the jury they have this power and in some cases even deny it, this power does exist to the people and should be used to slow or even reverse what history is showing us as a progressive power grab by the elites who think they should be and are the final arbiters of our collective fate. This may be our only way to regain the power the constitution has given us without resorting to violent revolution. What has become clear is that those we elect to represent us will not reverse the trend.
2 years, 1 month ago on NDAA Nullification: Tennessee Bills Propose Kidnapping Charges for Federal Agents
I'm afraid you are wrong, my friend. The only thing I see in our future is a stronger fed govt. We are not like we were in the late 1700's where we dumped tea into the harbor to show the English that we would not put up with their control nor their taxation. We thought the English were especially controlling back then. They don't hold a candle to this central govt.
As far as the states are concerned, in the state in which I live, should you find yourself in possession of a house within a certain distance to a moving body of water (they all move here), the DNR dictates to you what color you can paint your house. Talk about controlling.
The thing I find so disconcerting is that people just accept it. The only ones that do any protesting are the ones with whom I would not associate (people like the occupy Wall Street crowd). Normal people are either too lazy or too complacent to get 'up in arms'. I am thoroughly demoralized.
What has happened to my country where a man was a man and a woman was all he could marry, where the boy scouts were the good guys and homosexual predators were the bad guys and if you had children out of wedlock you bore the shame and were not rewarded by a govt handout for keeping the father out of the house?
We are circling the drain, my friend.
I'm afraid I have to agree with 'legalinvestigations' on this.
You can pass all the laws and regulations you want but if you don't back them up with action they are meaningless. This country has been going down hill since the civil war and it seems now we are circling the drain. We have a president of dubious nationality and the republicans are trying to get a Massachusetts liberal elected to replace him. We have nearly a majority of people who have figured out that if they vote right they can live off of the rest of the population. We have borders so porous that they may as well not even exist and most of the professional politicians are doing what they can to not just justify it but encourage others to come across and enjoy the benefits of citizenship without making the commitment.
I just sit back and shake my head. I don't hold out much hope.