Will California say NO to NDAA? Nullification catching fire across the nation

page: 2
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Hopechest
 


How can you say that what was meant or said at the Convention means nothing today?? That is a red herring argument if I have ever heard one. Of course what was meant matters more than anything. The Supreme Court is not the law of the land, the United States Constitution is.

If you had taken time to watch the video, nullification CAN happen when it comes to powers not delegated to the federal government in the Constitution. Point out to me where it states that the feds have power to demand that I MUST participate in commerce or be punished.

You might bring some argument of the Interstate Commerce Clause, but that has been grossly misinterpreted for years.

"As we've seen throughout the Courts history, they often change their views on the same issue multiple times depending on who's sitting on the bench." I am not sure about you, but I find this view very disturbing. This is why the courts should have NEVER moved towards case law instead of original intent. With a view like this, a law could be interpreted by the whim of men instead of years of legal precedent.

I don't think the Constitution is a mess. I think lawmakers and judges and lawyers muck it up by injecting personal opinions or feelings into how they think the law should be defined. Sure, the Founders could have never foreseen some of the ways our culture would change, but that is why they made the document with the language it currently has. If something needs to be changed down the road, there is a process for amendments. Problem is that nowadays, the roadblocks to surpass the Constitution by certain branches of government have been removed over the course of time and slowly our institutions are being eroded.

What I fear most is the rhetoric you speak with. Why is it that we have just a small segment, a couple thousand folks, determining what is best for me? Why is it that in the end 12 men in black robes determine how I spend my own hard earned money?




posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:25 PM
link   
Many states may follow but they will all accept the NDAA because the Feds will threaten to cut state funding.

"Oh you don't want NDAA state XYZ, then we can't send a half trillion dollars to your state for enforcement (which the state would just use to bonus the governor and other elected officials and tell the population they have a balanced budget and concerned for their safety because of a missle from North Korea).

Further, if states push back, they will just exempt all Federal/State representatives from being prosecuted under NDAA, just like they're exempt from any gun confiscation, and have life long pensions. This way the state legislatures will feel comfortable passing the law as will protect them and their family while also getting them more power and money.

I don't know how to stop the mess.
edit on 11-4-2013 by LastStarfighter because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by LastStarfighter
Many states may follow but they will all accept the NDAA because the Feds will threaten to cut state funding.

"Oh you don't want NDAA state XYZ, then we can't send a half trillion dollars to your state for enforcement (which the state would just use to bonus the governor and other elected officials and tell the population they have a balanced budget and concerned for their safety because of a missle from North Korea).

Further, if states push back, they will just exempt all Federal/State representatives from being prosecuted under NDAA, just like they're exempt from any gun confiscation, and have life long pensions. This way the state legislatures will feel comfortable passing the law as will protect them and their family while also getting them more power and money.

I don't know how to stop the mess.
edit on 11-4-2013 by LastStarfighter because: (no reason given)


In my opinion, the federal government aka Obama administration will not want to be exposed at that level, they will not fight to push the states to de-nullify the NDAA, that just looks horrible for Obama and his approval ratings will surely go down the toilet because the MSM will have no choice but to cover news as big as that.

Obama doesn't even want you to know that he is being fought in court over NDAA, how many people on ATS even know that?



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 02:44 PM
link   
You may be correct however since they stuffed Obamacare down every states throat using a similar strategy, I'd imagine they'd keep the NDAA in place in the same way.

They'll make it out as if the feds are trying to help but the evil state governments don't want to protect their citizens.

The NDAA is imperative for the Feds to control the folks as the standard of living goes down ad infitum



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 03:33 PM
link   
No, it is not catching fire. It is unconstitutional. It is meaningless.

Next.



posted on Apr, 11 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by LastStarfighter
Many states may follow but they will all accept the NDAA because the Feds will threaten to cut state funding.

"Oh you don't want NDAA state XYZ, then we can't send a half trillion dollars to your state for enforcement (which the state would just use to bonus the governor and other elected officials and tell the population they have a balanced budget and concerned for their safety because of a missle from North Korea).

Further, if states push back, they will just exempt all Federal/State representatives from being prosecuted under NDAA, just like they're exempt from any gun confiscation, and have life long pensions. This way the state legislatures will feel comfortable passing the law as will protect them and their family while also getting them more power and money.

I don't know how to stop the mess.
edit on 11-4-2013 by LastStarfighter because: (no reason given)


And this has been a problem with the federal government coercing the states to fall in line. IMHO, I believe this a fight the states need to start having. Gov. Brownback of Kansas has decided to cut down on state income tax for personal and business. Lots of worries on the Missouri side that businesses on the border will pack up and move across the state line. When we push back on federal government regs and they pull federal funds for certain programs, states will need a lot of incentive to entice businesses to move in. Will be the only way to ease some of the pain. But I also know that with the right leadership, a lot of waste can be cut too. Don't quote me on this, but I heard that the Obama Administration has pushed back implementing the state health care exchanges cuz something like 39 states have opted not let the feds set them up. This is really wreaking havoc for the administration and making it tougher for the small businesses to provide health insurance for their employees. It will be interesting to see what the year holds politically...





top topics
 
15
<< 1   >>

log in

join