Join the Debate!
All comments and users are subject to Townhall's new comments policy.
Login in to Post Your Comments
Frank130 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 9:28 AM
All 3 branches of the Federal Government are increasingly tyrannical and cannot be trusted. Just because the Supreme Court rules a law in "Constitutional", does not make it so when compared with the actual language in the Constitution. It's now up to the States to NULLIFY any Unconstitutional laws or SECEDE from the Union to protect their citizens. Failing our States to do their duty & to protect their citizens, it might go all the way down to each individual citizen deciding to PASSIVELY DISOBEY the Federal Government (I do not want a new hot War of Secession, one Civil War was enough). Now is the time for the States to stand up against the Federal tyranny.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
Len196 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 9:43 AM
You are naive, Frank. And who are the politicians in the states. These are inspiring future politicians in the Federal government. They would do nothing. And, unfortunately, it all would end up in a HOT war or, at least, in riots as in Greece, but much worse.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
Vic156 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 10:51 AM
Read Jefferson on what is necessary. War may well be the answer. That is a shame, For if we fight among ourselves then we will surely lose to our enemies.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
Seawolf Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 9:24 AM
Actually, they are correct. I would be curious to see how they would vote if someone made a constitutional challenge to welfare as I posted earlier. Or ANY gov't largesse for that matter..these corrupt clowns buy votes with our money like money was going out of style and we stand around like children and do nothing, we complain, but they do it anyway..I'd love to see some congress critter grow a set of balls and demand a stop to all of this and call for the impeachment of this marxist for good measure.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
George257 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 9:29 AM
They'd probably have some clever way of justifying it. They'd say it was covered by the commerce between the states clause. For a crooked lawyer, it's easy to interpret the constitution to mean what they want it to mean. And that includes crooked supremes.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
Vic156 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 10:49 AM
We must bite the bullet and unelect the whole of the house! All senate seats up for reelection should change to a challenger too.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
renny4 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 9:02 AM
Our job now is to take the Sen. in 2014 and the WH in 2016. Nothing else matters.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
agitator Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 9:24 AM
Repubs will not win the WH again until 2028!
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
Vic156 Wrote: Jan 14, 2013 10:48 AM
TEA party anyone?
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
agitator Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 9:37 AM
You mean violence?
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
It's often good fun and sometimes revealing to divide American history into distinct periods of uniform length. In working on my forthcoming book on American migrations, internal and immigrant, it occurred to me that you could do this using the American-sounding interval of 76 years, just a few years more than the Biblical lifespan of three score and 10.
It was 76 years from Washington's First Inaugural in 1789 to Lincoln's Second Inaugural in 1865. It was 76 years from the surrender at Appomattox Courthouse in 1865 to the attack at Pearl Harbor in 1941.
Going backward, it was 76 years...
History Suggests That Entitlement Era Is Winding Down