House bypasses governor’s veto to claim Oklahoma’s sovereignty

Another state added to the growing states rights/states sovereignty list.

article w/video

House bypasses governor’s veto to claim Oklahoma’s sovereignty

Although Gov. Brad Henry vetoed similar legislation 10 days earlier, House members Monday again approved a resolution claiming Oklahoma’s sovereignty. Unlike House Joint Resolution 1003, House Concurrent Resolution 1028 does not need the governor’s approval.

The House passed the measure 73-22. It now goes to the Senate.

"We’re going to get it done one way or the other,” said the resolutions’ author, Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City.

"I think our governor is out of step.”

So, when will the federal government start to pay attention?

[edit on 5/6/2009 by centurion1211]

Im happy and a little put on edge about this. Anybody else smell revolution or civil war brewing?

Centurion, just asking... what would have you said if democrats would have done the same thing in 2002 because of Bush abuses of the laws and power?

Anyway, the governor should be impeached on this issue alone. The state is sovereign under the tenth amendment, this is only establishing a fact. This is not secession, the governor should have a neutral standpoint and go along with establishing that fact.

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Centurion, just asking... what would have you said if democrats would have done the same thing in 2002 because of Bush abuses of the laws and power?

Anyway, the governor should be impeached on this issue alone. The state is sovereign under the tenth amendment, this is only establishing a fact. This is not secession, the governor should have a neutral standpoint and go along with establishing that fact.

This is not a Bush or Obama issue IMO, or even a democrat vs. republican issue since states controlled by democrats have also passed similar resolutions. It is an issue with Congress, who actually passes the laws here in the U.S. that have been and are violations of the 10th Amendment. Bush and Obama may just end up with footnotes on their "legacies" for being the 2nd to last and last president of the United States as we currently know it.

Also IMO, those democrats trying to make this into a republican vs. democrats issue are only doing so because they don't want this happening on Obama's watch and making him look bad. Sadly, many of the same people that were hoping the U.S. would lose the iraq war simply to make Bush look bad.

[edit on 5/6/2009 by centurion1211]