AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

If the feds want to force a state to do something (or not do something), that is a violation of the 10th amendment.

Your referring to Obama as an 'Abomination' is racist speech and you really should cut it out.

Can you provide a link to a post from 2007 or whenever, where you complained specifically about Bush's use of signing statements? I wager you cannot.

The majority view was pretty much the government should be able to deal with whatever it needed to deal with, and naming only specific powers limited too much future c.ontingencies--read any good history of the Constitutional Convention.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html
Amendment X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/federal/fed.htm
THE FEDERALIST PAPERS
Specifically:
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed36.asp
Hamilton No. 36
Let it be recollected that the proportion of these taxes is not to be left to the discretion of the national legislature, but is to be determined by the numbers of each State, as described in the second section of the first article. An actual census or enumeration of the people must furnish the rule, a circumstance which effectually shuts the door to partiality or oppression. The abuse of this power of taxation seems to have been provided against with guarded circumspection. In addition to the precaution just mentioned, there is a provision that "all duties, imposts, and excises shall be UNIFORM throughout the United States.''

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed41.asp
Madison No. 41
Some, who have not denied the necessity of the power of taxation, have grounded a very fierce attack against the Constitution, on the language in which it is defined. It has been urged and echoed, that the power "to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, to pay the debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States,'' amounts to an unlimited commission to exercise every power which may be alleged to be necessary for the common defense or general welfare. No stronger proof could be given of the distress under which these writers labor for objections, than their stooping to such a misconstruction. Had no other enumeration or definition of the powers of the Congress been found in the Constitution, than the general expressions just cited, the authors of the objection might have had some color for it; though it would have been difficult to find a reason for so awkward a form of describing an authority to legislate in all possible cases. A power to destroy the freedom of the press, the trial by jury, or even to regulate the course of descents, or the forms of conveyances, must be very singularly expressed by the terms "to raise money for the general welfare.

''But what color can the objection have, when a specification of the objects alluded to by these general terms immediately follows, and is not even separated by a longer pause than a semicolon? If the different parts of the same instrument ought to be so expounded, as to give meaning to every part which will bear it, shall one part of the same sentence be excluded altogether from a share in the meaning; and shall the more doubtful and indefinite terms be retained in their full extent, and the clear and precise expressions be denied any signification whatsoever? For what purpose could the enumeration of particular powers be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power? Nothing is more natural nor common than first to use a general phrase, and then to explain and qualify it by a recital of particulars.
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed45.asp
Madison No. 45
The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected.

The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_transcript.html
Article I.
...
Section 8. The Congress shall have power
To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
To borrow money on the credit of the United States;
To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;
To establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States;
To coin money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the standard of weights and measures;
To provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the United States;
To establish post offices and post roads;
To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;
To constitute tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court;
To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the law of nations;
To declare war, grant letters of marque and reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water;
To raise and support armies, but no appropriation of money to that use shall be for a longer term than two years;
To provide and maintain a navy;
To make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces;
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings;--And
To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

http://www.cordair.com/apotheosis/ecards/poetry/guest/cant.htm
Can't
by Edgar A. Guest
Can't is the worst word that's written or
spoken;
Doing more harm here than slander and lies;
On it is many a strong spirit broken,
And with it many a good purpose dies.
It springs from the lips of the thoughtless each
morning
And robs us of courage we need through the
day:
It rings in our ears like a timely-sent warning
And laughs when we falter and fall by the
way.
Can't is the father of feeble endeavor,
The parent of terror and half-hearted work;
It weakens the efforts of artisans clever,
And makes of the toiler an indolent shirk.
It poisons the soul of the man with a vision,
It stifles in infancy many a plan;
It greets honest toiling with open derision
And mocks at the hopes and the dreams of a
man.
Can't is a word none should speak without
blushing;
To utter it should be a symbol of shame;
Ambition and courage it daily is crushing;
It blights a man's purpose and shortens his
aim.
Despise it with all of your hatred of error;
Refuse it the lodgment it seeks in your brain;
Arm against it as a creature of terror,
And all that you dream of you some day shall
gain.
Can't is the word that is foe to ambition,
An enemy ambushed to shatter your will;
Its prey is forever the man with a mission
And bows but to courage and patience and
skill.
Hate it, with hatred that's deep and undying,
For once it is welcomed 'twill break any
man;
Whatever the goal you are seeking, keep trying
And answer this demon by saying: "I can."

this is a pretty interesting thread.

one question, though. about this idea;

mysteryman wrote:

If the feds want to force a state to do something (or not do something), that is a violation of the 10th amendment.

it kind of calls into question why we even have a country. i mean wasn't the idea that we are stronger as a nation than as independent, or sovereign, states.

seriously, at what point does it become ludicrous to even bother anymore? if rick perry thinks that texas would be better off on their own, hey, be my guest. it's worth noting though, that there would be business ramifications that are not so great.

like this one; should texas leave the u.s.a., they would no longer be able to do military, tech or aeronautical work for the u.s. government. that work is reserved for u.s. companies. not for hostile foreign entities.

why do i say hostile? because if your state is part of the u.s.a., it's not logical that you'd secede because you loved being part of the union. and perry on his own has voiced his distaste for the federal government.

what about disaster relief? another big hurricane rips the buttsky off of galveston again. why should i spend a dime bailing out (pun intended??) the hostile sovereign republic of texas.

what guarantees would the republic of texas give the u.s. regarding border security?

seeing as how governor perry hasn't been able to keep mob violence from spilling over into laredo and all, i have zero confidence that he or any other governor would have much luck in locking that **** down on their own.

and one last thought; there would be impacts on the travel from the republic of texas to the u.s. what about money exchanges? i mean does someone like perry really believe that a state can secede from the union and still have the right to free movement to and around the u.s. ?

and anyone living in the new republic of texas would be s.o.l. when it came to their life savings, because it would need to be converted from american dollars to texas dollars. not legal tender in the u.s. and what would the conversion rate be? and would that rate be sustainable ?



goodbye nasa, goodbye silicon hills, goodbye all kinds of jobs and income.

Here are the white tax-protestors being led by the new talking head of the GOP, Joe the Plumber.

LINK: Joe the Plumber at Michigan Tea Party: Saying ‘In God We Trust’ Will Get You Shot In Some Places

I want to hear them defend themselves with my questions, in person.

T
K
O

Texas gets back more money from the feds than it pays in taxes. Maybe they should secede. It might teach them self-reliance instead of being leeches on the rest of us (i.e. those of us in the blue states who pay more than we get back so the red state whiners can complain about their taxes, which are less than they get back from the government).

Perry said the stimulus money would come with strings attached that would leave Texas paying the bill once the federal money ran out.

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, also Republicans, have been outspoken against the federal economic stimulus spending and were supportive of tea parties in their states. The protests were being held throughout the country on federal income tax deadline day to imitate the original Boston Tea Party of American revolutionary times.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D97J48IO2.html

'Hundreds of thousands' is a little bit of an exaggeration, Fox. A lot of exaggeration actually.

None of you protested the expansion in government and government spending under Bush. At all.

I would remind you that if you wish to see the government shrank in size, all you have to do is get leaders elected who will do that. It isn't like you aren't being represented; you ARE being represented. The system is working exactly as it was designed to. You just don't like the outcome.

There is no 'spontaneous grassroots movement.' The whole thing was ginned up and organized by Republican lobbyists.

Cycloptichorn

Re Governor Perry of Texas: His motivation may come from the fact that Texas Republicans might choose Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison in the next gubernatorial primary.

To say that none of us protested the expansion of government under Bush is a lie. A BIG lie. And you know it.

But the reports we are seeing is that an average of thousands attended most.

The Republican Party and Republican lobbyists had absolutely nothing to do with it and you will not be able to provide any credible source to support your assertion about that.

If this spontaneous grassroots movement was to support Obama's policies, the same CNN and the same looney left would be praising and defending it to the heavens.

To say that none of us protested the expansion of government under Bush is a lie. A BIG lie. And you know it.