« | »

AP Rages At Obama-Care ‘Nullification’

From a spittle flecked Associated Press:

Tea party vision for Mont. raising concerns

By Matt Gouras, Associated Press Thu Feb 24, 2011

HELENA, Mont. – With each bill, newly elected tea party lawmakers are offering Montanans a vision of the future.

Their state would be a place where officials can ignore U.S. laws, force FBI agents to get a sheriff’s OK before arresting anyone, ban abortions, limit sex education in schools and create armed citizen militias.

It’s the tea party world. But not everyone is buying their vision.

Some residents, Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer and even some Republican lawmakers say the bills are making Montana into a laughingstock. And, they say, the push to nullify federal laws could be dangerous.

You mean like when a President deems a law to be unconstitutional? Or when a President ignores various court rulings?

"We are the United States of America," said Schweitzer. "This talk of nullifying is pretty toxic talk. That led to the Civil War."

Whatever their merits, the ideas are increasingly popping up in legislatures across the nation, as a wave of tea party-backed conservatives push their anti-spending, anti-federal government agenda.

Arizona, Missouri and Tennessee are discussing the creation of a joint compact, like a treaty, opposing the 2010 health care law. Idaho is considering a plan to nullify it, as is Montana.

How crazy. In fact it’s almost as crazy as ramming healthcare reform through Congress via ‘budget reconciliation’ – which was not intended to be used for actual legislation.

In Montana, the GOP gained a supermajority in the Montana House in last year’s election, giving Republicans control of both legislative chambers. Half of the 68 House Republicans are freshman, many sympathetic to the new political movement.

Over the first 45 days of the new legislature, they have steadily pushed their proposals. Some have moved out of committee.

Examples include a bill making it illegal to enforce some federal gun laws in the state, and another aimed at establishing state authority over federal regulation of greenhouse gasses…

Wasn’t it Mr. Obama who told us that elections have consequences? Does the AP want these representatives to ignore the wishes of the electorate?

Hardly a day goes by, however, that the merits of "nullification" aren’t discussed.

Proponents draw on Thomas Jefferson’s late 18th-century argument that aimed to give states the ultimate say in constitutional matters and let them ban certain federal laws in their borders.

Supporters are not dissuaded by the legal scholars who say the notion runs afoul of the clause in the U.S. Constitution that declares federal law "the supreme law of the land."

You mean like the way the Defense Of Marriage Act is "the supreme law of the land"?

Backers of nullification say they can get the federal government to back down off a law if enough states band together against it.

They point to the REAL ID act — a Bush-era plan to assert federal control over state identifications as a way to combat terrorism. The law has been put in limbo after 25 states adopted legislation opposing it…

But George Bush was a Republican President. That’s different.

This article was posted by Steve on Friday, February 25th, 2011. Comments are currently closed.

12 Responses to “AP Rages At Obama-Care ‘Nullification’”

  1. wardmama4 says:

    So let me get this right the people in MT who were ‘representated’ by Max Baucus – who wasn’t he one of the Dems in the Sen – who lied about Obamacare (math wasn’t it) to get Obamacare through the Senate – and into law – woke up in NOv 2010 and voted in a Repub majority – who are now putting into sessions, legislation that the people obviously want – since they voted for these actual representatives and now that they LOST, the Dems aren’t happy – cry me a river.

    I just hope that this change is permanent and that the Dems are in the 20% minority where they truly belong. Forever.

  2. tranquil.night says:

    “Spittle flecked” and frothing. These rats really hate Democracy when they lose, to say the least at this point. Desperation is a repugnant Cologne, so I hope.

    No retreat.

  3. TerryAnne says:

    But not everyone is buying their vision.

    Oh…so you mean the AP isn’t and they’re going to waste ink and paper (uncaring Gaia abusers!) to do everything but explain this statement. One vocal Democratic governor (is that redundant?…) isn’t “everyone”, despite the AP and liberal’s belief their “leaders” are omniscient.

  4. beautyofreason says:

    “Supporters are not dissuaded by the legal scholars who say the notion runs afoul of the clause in the U.S. Constitution that declares federal law “the supreme law of the land.””

    Oh, NOW they’re pulling out those big unnamed “legal scholars.” Will the AP crash the notion of sanctuary cities or medical marijuana next? Somehow I think not.

  5. oldpuppydixie says:

    Federal law is the “supreme law of the land???” And here I thought, if it wasn’t specified in the Constitution, it was considered the right of the people or of the states!!! Silly me, huh!

  6. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Been watching my DVD collection of “Stargate SG-1” of late and I find myself constantly noticing how one particular antagonist, Apophis, a “Goa’uld ” (human with a worm parasite that makes them do bad things) so much resembles the liar-in-chief. Acts like him too. Pretty easy to pick him out from this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r78wu5dkWMo&feature=related

  7. Petronius says:

    “We are the United States of America,” said [Democrat Gov. Brian] Schweitzer. “This talk of nullifying is pretty toxic talk. That led to the Civil War.”

    Gosh. And here I thought the Civil War was entirely about black slavery and white oppression. Or so we’ve been told.

    Indeed, States’ rights was the primary motive for the War Between the States. The chief authors of the doctrine were two Virginians, Thomas Jefferson, author of the Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, and James Madison, the father of the Constitution and co-author of the Federalist Papers, who wrote the 1798 Virginia Resolutions.

    The doctrine of States’ rights set forth in the Resolutions views the Federal government as the creature and agent of the States, and warns against the accumulation of power in Washington.

    The War Between the States sealed the fate of the founding fathers’ republic. The limited government of Jefferson and Madison became the runaway military government of Lincoln and the Reconstruction tyranny of the Radical Republicans, and later the all-powerful social welfare state of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Lyndon B. Johnson, and Jimmy Carter, and evolved finally into the socialist tyranny of Nerobama.

    For 17 years the Radical Republicans ruled the South with an iron hand –– a cruel military occupation, governing harshly according to their theory of the “conquered province.” In 1870, Robert E. Lee told former Texas Governor Fletcher Stockdale, ”Governor, if I had foreseen the use those people [Yankees] designed to make of their victory, there would have been no surrender at Appomattox Courthouse; no sir, not by me. Had I foreseen these results of subjugation, I would have preferred to die at Appomattox with my brave men, my sword in my right hand.”

    Since 1865, the United States has grown in size, population, commerce, and power. However, there is –– apart from the end of black slavery –– less freedom in America today than there was in the original English colonies.

    And so it is worth remembering that, before the Civil War, sovereignty resided in the people of the States. Since 1865, power has rested in Washington DC, and not in the people, as was recently illustrated by the Obamacare cram-down. Hopefully Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli’s lawsuit will help restore some of the balance of States’ rights and individual liberty.

  8. wardmama4 says:

    Very good post – years ago when I first heard about states rights as the point of the Civil War – it took on a whole new meaning. And proves that the dumbed down/agenda teaching has been going on for a long, long time (and that homeschooling doesn’t always turn out right- i.e. Lincoln).

    As Billy Joel so rightly sang – We didn’t start the fire, it’s always been burning.

    Because there have always been power hungry people whose only goal is to dominate and control other people and who hate the freedom, individual respecting and success of the US – even from the beginning.

    Now, the Leftists think that they are in control but greatly under-estimate the determination of Americans to NOT be told what to do and how to think.

    WI – is not the Middle East, it is not Egypt, it is not Cairo, it is not Selma – Forcing other people to pay for your life at a rate twice what they make is not a RIGHT – and the taxpayers are sick and tired of forking out – for almost nothing in return.

    WI – the first shot in the New War to Win American Freedom from the Leftists who want to convince the gullible, the lazy, the criminal and the stuck on stupid that the American Dream is about having the right to command what your benefits are, the ‘ladder for everyone’ – and certainly is not about the Individual but the collective.

    I am not Borg – nor will anyone in America make me ever, ever want to be under the lie that being the collective is ‘the’ American Dream.

    Talk to a recent (legal) immigrant – most especially those from former communist countries – they will tell you what the American Dream is – to work hard and rise to the greatest heights of personal freedom and success possible.

    It takes everyone – but it isn’t one-size/job/paycheck/belief-fits-all. Never was, never will be.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      Very salient. i would add that in the 1950’s and to the 60’s, Americans were taught that “rugged individualism” was a great strength to our nation. I submit that it still is but has been dangerously hampered by the thoughts that “to belong” is more important that to protect yourself/find how to be successful and win. Noting the behavioral change in the 60’s, that being hippies protesting at whatever didn’t fit their collectivist/utopian mindset, it was truly unique. And I don’t mean that in a good way. Essentially, you had middle class kids, who never went hungry, never struggled for the basics in life (shelter, clothing) having little tantrums when the country demanded military service of them and to leave home and go fight a war for someone else’s chance at freedom. Their own mantra “give peace a chance” is antithetical to what freedom is about and the notion that to be free, one has to fight for it every day. Ipso-facto, they were LAZY. “Dude, do your own thing, whatever…just don’t bogart that joint, my friend.” And we have thus arrived to a very mentally lazy, intellectually challenged place in our history where this “collective” has determined it is better to teach that whitey is bad and kills native peoples and enslaves everyone instead of the object lessons of great people throughout history who have fought for freedom. It is a tired concept to them because they have always been free. Their parents were unsuccessful in passing along the obligations that freedom entails because, as I have learned, the vast majority of WWII vets chose not to talk about their exploits. The ones who did, that I can recall, noted how they knew they were fighting for freedom and to break the shackles of violently oppressive systems.

      But being so free to think/do/say whatever they want, they lashed out at ‘the establishment, man”. Not realizing that it was, as intended, a fair system that needed some work. Words like “buzz-kill”, “downer” and such became part of the lexicon of colloquial language. Being “cool” trumped being responsible. Agitating against the machine became a popular endeavor. I’ll admit, it had its attraction but it was that system, that “machine” that afforded these hippies the latitude to be such whiny brats. Not all, but a great number. I work with many Vietnam veterans. All of whom are conservative. The one who is of the same age/generation who refused to be in the military and fled to Canada is always 180 out from the rest of the group. He hates republicans categorically because “Nixon was a republican”. I respond with “Yeah and you had Johnson and Carter…whoopee!”.

      But, getting to the point (finally, you said) I find it a fair bet that we won’t be able to fix this nation until the entire bell curve of 1960’s era collectivists have had their day. We are going through this agony because even the conservative candidates find it more important to belong and be cool than it is to be right. Being right very often means getting ridiculed by those who do not or will not understand. I think the right understands the left a lot more than they give us credit for. But because of much personal experience and not having lots of time to smoke weed and party and insulate ourselves with “the party crowd” we have found the correct answers and know what works.

      Sadly, when the day comes when the ship stops listing to one side, teetering on capsizing, I will be much older and less likely to be friendly to others. Life is too short to constantly have to deal with petulant children, especially in our government. But they are having their “moment” and I see no difference between their actions in office than I do during the turbulent 60’s with ‘demonstrations’ and riots and destroying things and that marvelous billboard of history Woodstock. I laughed at it when I was young and I still laugh at it now. I really irked one guy who said he had been there…and the first thing that came to my mind was “If you remember Woodstock then you weren’t really there” but as he finished talking about it, with pride, I said, “I don’t think the US had ever had such a huge opportunity to rid itself of such a collection of losers in its history. Shame, that.” to which he called me a bunch of graphic names and I said, “Yeah, dude…peace and love is what it’s all about…..dude.”

      And for the record, “dude” is perhaps the most culturally cross-wired term in our language. When a cowboy calls someone “dude” it is tantamount to questioning their manhood, etc. Or calling their momma a you-know-what. So, I laugh when hippies call each other “dude”. They don’t get the joke.

      Well, again, enough out of me. Call me cranky….just don’t call me late for supper.

  9. wardmama4 says:

    I remember that these very people (hippies, peace, love and all that crappola) – whom I refused to join when they would condemn me for the clothing I wore – and I’d come back with that they weren’t free spirits and weren’t very accepting as they were as conformist (if not more so) as ‘the man’ that they were railing against, since what I wore wasn’t acceptable to them (believe me back in the day I was more afraid of my Mom than any teacher, cop or fellow student). I also find it a bit ironic (NOT) that these people who had apoplexy (and still do) over Nixon (and Bush) are now part of/behind a President that is a 100 times more deceptive, more illegal and more amoral.

    It is a shame that those with the power to demand BHO’s Impeachment and/or fight him remain silent/do not act – be it in Congress, the Supreme Court or even the State Houses. I won’t even get into the media – as true journalism died so long ago, the body is beyond putrefaction – it is a fossil. This lack of honor, remembrance of their oath of Office (to support and uphold the Constitution) is possibly the only thing that will lead to America’s destruction.

    But I still hold tight – read their (Leftists) books – they continue to believe (in the face of repeated historical failures) that ‘they are indeed the ones who will do socialism right’. And they truly try to convince themselves that their heyday of 125,000 or 1 million marches of the past are being repeated today – except that most of the marches today are with paid/bussed in ‘protesters’ – not the same thing at all. It is because, as the 7% of private businesses being Unionized show – their numbers are dwindling not even staying stagnant. Much less rising.

    And there are many reasons for that. One being – still way too many people in the US believe in God. Too many families are just having 2 children and too many liberal/Leftists are aborting theirs. And because of the New Media – way too many people are seeing that whatever ‘ism’ it is – has been, is and always will be a complete and utter failure with millions of people dying during the ‘revolution’ and afterward.

    How many sane people want to sign up/on to that – most especially as you point out – the ‘Social’ Generation of Cult of Personality tech addicts – whose greatest desire is not be left out of ‘the crowd’.

    Also – from my younger two children – I see a real danger of today’s public educational system – they are so afraid of failure and embarrassment that they end up attempting/doing nothing. Attempting without harsh tones to push the youngest one out of the door as soon as we can – but in this job market – it is very, very hard.

    The next couple of years will be interesting – and a pain in the *ss for those of us who have worked hard and just wanted the pc police/nanny statists to butt out of our lives.

« Front Page | To Top
« | »