Republicans all over the country find themselves backed into an
ideological and political corner: Their dogma has brought the country,
and their party, to ruin. The candidate they called an evil,
terrorist-loving, foreign-born socialist is in office and widely
popular, while they and their beliefs are reduced to irrelevant
minority status.
If you thought they might try to re-assess their hardcore platform
of discredited beliefs or try to find ways to participate in, and
influence, the course of governmental action, you would be wrong.
As Rush Limbaugh has made clear, their path lies in seeking the
failure of President Barack Obama and the Democratically controlled
Congress — in predicting, and seeking, the massive and
catastrophic collapse of America. Only that result can prove them
right.
The stakes, to their mind, could not be higher: The American
experiment is on the verge of running off its constitutional rails. “We
are at a pivotal point in our nation’s history,” says Paul McKinley, a
Republican state senator from Iowa.
McKinley is among hundreds of Republican lawmakers all over the
country who are backing resolutions of “state sovereignty” —
essentially empty gestures toward declaring the illegitimacy of the
federal government. Of the many manifestations of conservative
anti-government hostility, none is more striking than this sudden
nationwide movement: Barely 50 days into Obama’s administration,
lawmakers in more than two dozen states (including Ohio, see sidebar)
have introduced these sovereignty declarations. Some appear headed for
passage; others have prompted raucous demonstrations and public
hearings.
Based on a thoroughly rejected reading of the 10th Amendment —
which states that “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” — the resolutions claim
the federal government, in usurping powers and issuing mandates to the
states, is in violation of the U.S. Constitution. They call for
Congress and the president to cease and desist in those (mostly
unspecified) violations.
The resolutions generally avoid specifying how they would assert
their claimed sovereignty — although a few threaten to defy the
federal government and to refuse to implement laws they dislike.
Some resolutions go further, claiming that the violations may
constitute a “nullification of the Constitution.” The most aggressive,
which was recently defeated in New Hampshire, explicitly threatened to
dissolve the Union.
As much as so-called Tenth Amendment Movement participants believe
they are responding to a unique circumstance, they are actually
treading old and predictable ground. The exact same movement arose when
the last Democratic president took office in 1993. In fact, most of the
resolutions circulating today are word-for-word copies of the ones
introduced 16 years ago.
By late 1994, at least eight states had passed versions, with
legislators in more than 20 states planning to introduce them in their
1995 sessions, according to a review at the time by the conservative
Heritage Foundation.
The state-sovereignty movement of that time was part of a fabric of
anti-government sentiment that also included a rise in the “militia”
movement — and the resolutions abruptly ceased in 1995, after
Timothy McVeigh blew a hole in the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in
Oklahoma City, killing 168 people.
Today’s version is moving even faster, thanks in large part to the
conservative-libertarian network that was formed and energized around
Ron Paul’s presidential candidacy, and the large online communities of
liberal-hating conservatives.
Some national conservative figures — including Fox News,
syndicated radio talk-show host Glenn Beck and commentator Michelle
Malkin — have applauded the idea. And a few prominent elected
Republicans, including South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, have
recently cited the same state-sovereignty talking points in discussing
their opposition to the federal stimulus bill.
Most other prominent Republicans have remained silent on the issue,
but none have denounced it. That’s hardly surprising; the angry
anti-government conservatives and Ron Paul libertarians are important
voting blocs in GOP primaries.
Sanford, who is courting both groups for his potential 2012
presidential bid, professes that he “loves the concept” of the
state-sovereignty bills, in a recent interview appearing in the
conservative John Birch Society publication The New American. He
recommends in that interview that Tenth Amendment Movement supporters
march on Washington, D.C., to “insist that the Constitution be
obeyed.”
The claims of these resolutions are indefensible on constitutional
grounds. “They rest on completely untenable interpretations of the
Constitution’s text, structure and history, and they proceed as though
the Civil War had been won by the Confederacy,” e-mails Laurence Tribe
of Harvard Law School. “These resolutions — not to put too fine a
point on it — are off the wall.”
Questioning federal overreach is not in itself unreasonable; it has
been debate fodder for more than two centuries.
Nor is it outrageous for a state’s lawmakers to collectively declare
their disapproval of federal government’s behavior. “That sounds to me
as American as apple pie,” says Richard Fallon, professor of
constitutional law at Harvard Law School.
But the intent of these resolutions — the underlying idea of
claiming “state sovereignty” — is not only to disagree with or
vilify the federal government but to provide a justification for
resisting it, and for denying its authority and even its
legitimacy.
The resolutions and their proponents are claiming that states can on
their own declare federal laws unconstitutional — even if the
Supreme Court disagrees — and refuse to recognize them within
their borders.
They are simply wrong, explains Robert Bloom, a constitutional-law
professor at Boston College Law School. “The Constitution allocates
responsibilities between the federal and state governments, and the
Supreme Court is the ultimate authority in interpreting that.”
But the antifederalists don’t like the courts’ answers. So they are
claiming the authority for themselves.
Dan Itse, the state representative sponsoring the resolution in New
Hampshire, explained how he imagines this would work in practice
— using as his example, unsurprisingly, the possibility of
Congress enacting a national firearm-licensing system. (This obscure
proposal, which is the idea of a single congressman and has no
possibility of becoming law, is perhaps the most often cited
sovereignty threat among Tenth Amendment Movement supporters.)
If the law were passed, says Itse, the New Hampshire legislature
could declare the law unconstitutional and its enforcement illegal
within the state’s borders. The Department of Justice would “start
sending people into New Hampshire to enforce it,” which the state would
challenge — perhaps even by arresting federal agents. A federal
judge would then likely “issue arrest warrants on the state
legislature,” says Itse.
“Would that constitute a nullification [of the Constitution]?” asks
Itse. “I would say so.”
Itse’s House Concurrent Resolution 106 is one of the most aggressive
of its kind — “walks right up to the door of secession,” as one
admiring South Carolina state senator put it in a televised
interview.
It declares that any act of the U.S. Congress, president or federal
courts “which assumes a power not delegated” to the federal government
“shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution.” In such an
event, it goes on, all powers revert to the individual states, until
and unless a brand new federal government is formed, and the states
choose to join it.
Itse and his co-sponsors even included several particular examples
of acts that would cause nullification. It is an odd and seemingly
random list — until one reads, in a press release issued by him
and three other state legislators, some of their specific fears.
For example, “involuntary servitude or governmental service of
persons under the age of 18,” other than a military draft or criminal
punishment, refers to Obama’s campaign endorsement of mandatory
community service for high-school students — “slavery,” according
to the press release. “Further limitations on freedom of political
speech” refers to the supposed re-institution of the Fairness
Doctrine.
Remarkably, nearly 90 percent of New Hampshire House Republicans
voted in favor of this resolution, calling for dissolution of the
United States government in the event that it imposes a
community-service requirement on teens.
Democrats, who gained the majority in 2006, were able to defeat the
resolution. But Itse intends to try again, with some of the more
controversial language removed. He has learned, as Tenth Amendment
Movement supporters did back in the early ’90s, that they must use
vague language to couch their intent.
And yet that relatively benign language barely covers a strong,
often paranoid anti-government fervor.
This Tenth Amendment Movement is being coordinated by libertarian
organizations, such as the Republican Liberty Caucus, Campaign for
Liberty and the Populist Party of America. Also instrumental is the
aforementioned John Birch Society, a long-controversial conservative
group that is now a leading promulgator of one-world-government fear
mongering.
These organizations spout all manner of anti-federal-government
rhetoric; the Ohio Freedom Alliance, for example, advocates for the
state to introduce its own gold and silver currency as an alternative
to federal money. Some of the groups have close ties with militia
groups as well.
Jerome R. Corsi, author of the wild-eyed smear tract The Obama
Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality (as well as
co-author of Ken Blackwell’s 2006 gubernatorial campaign tome
Rebuilding America) and one of the movement’s main spokespeople,
has frequently appeared on the nationally syndicated Alex Jones
Show to discuss sovereignty resolutions. So have several of the
state lawmakers. The eponymous host of that radio program is a big fan
of the state-sovereignty efforts — and a full-throated conspiracy
hawker. Jones’s latest documentary purports to show how “the Obama
phenomenon is a hoax carefully crafted by the captains of the New World
Order … in an attempt to con the American people into accepting
global slavery.”
Obama hatred and anti-government anger are also readily apparent
among many of the resolutions’ sponsors. South Carolina representative
Michael Pitts, in a recent interview about the resolution he is
sponsoring, said that “the trend toward federalism” is leading the
country “headlong” into “socialism and maybe even communism.” Pitts
added that he would “prefer” to reverse this trend without the course
of action “tried in 1861” — i.e., secession.
The resolution’s lead sponsor in Michigan has called it “the first
shot across the bow” for a movement to challenge the federal
government. In Oklahoma, lead sponsor Charles Key is best known for
chasing conspiracy theories regarding the federal government’s role in
the Murrah building bombing. The sponsor in another state has also
filed a bill to prevent the federal government from building the “NAFTA
Superhighway” supposedly being planned by the mythical North American
Union — a new, European Union–style alignment with Mexico
and Canada, to which the U.S. secretly intends to abrogate its
sovereignty.
The North American Union, a favorite conspiracy of Corsi and the Ron
Paul crew (though denounced by Paul himself), comes up a lot in this
crowd — second only, perhaps, to ubiquitous warnings about
impending gun-control measures. Itse, in fact, says in an interview
that his “overriding concern” when he began drafting his resolution
last year was “the U.S. ceding our sovereignty to a North American
Union.”
Regardless of how many “state sovereignty” resolutions are
introduced or even passed, they will have no actual effect on anything
— and secession is less realistic than even the North American
Union.
But there’s talk of such nonetheless — and no matter how often
its proponents insist that the Tenth Amendment Movement is nonpartisan
or has nothing to do with the Democrats taking control of Washington,
that is exactly what is driving it.
While the federal-state balance has indeed moved far to the federal
side, constitutional experts say that this is old news. It is certainly
no truer today than when George W. Bush and a Republican Congress were
in power — and there were no such resolutions introduced
then.
In fact, since the last round of state-sovereignty resolutions, the
Supreme Court has actually begun to set some limits on federal reach,
says Bloom, with three decisions issued between 1995 and 2000.
Those rulings are apparently unknown to the authors and supporters
of the sovereignty resolutions. Because most of their new resolutions
are simply copied from the 1994 versions, none of them cite any of
these rulings (although many cite a 1992 decision), nor are they
discussed on supporting websites or other materials. The people
claiming to suddenly be so concerned about the federal-state balance do
not even seem to know where that balance currently stands.
This article appears in Apr 15-21, 2009.
It’s hard to believe that there are some clueless buffoons around who keep denying there’s a traitorous move afoot to create a ‘new world order.’ Do you clowns not pay attention to little things like the G-20?
Baja Rat: The problem, Baja, is that the extreme right in our country has been promoting hysteria about “traitors” and a supposed “New World Order” for more than 7 decades. The G-20 is a group of world leaders that meet and discuss common problems. Do you propose that they never communicate with each other? Nothing which G-20 “decides” is binding on any nation. It is as ineffectual as a UN Security Council “resolution” or “statement”.
ernie1241: “do you propose that they never communicate”: this is a straw man argument and beside the point: The g20 is basically going to forfeit nations economies to the elitist controlled IMF.
Our “leaders” are selling us out. Your argument, like so many, is rooted in the fact that you simply cannot handle the truth of the NWO conspiracy; it shakes up your world too much so that it’s easier to deny it and accuse conspiracy theorists of being “hysterical”. There is overwhelming evidence for this conspiracy on the internet.
I must admit, after reading the article I feel as though my opinions are being interpreted as misguided. I got the opinion of the article that Mr. Bernstein is a socialist, someone who believes the government is best to decide what is best for the individual. I don’t believe that, I think that I am the best decision maker of my life. Right now, our government is taking away the incentive for success in our country. Why would we want to go farther if we get nothing out of it. My gripe is not left or right thing. It is a right and wrong thing. Right now, I think that our country is going the wrong way. Republicans and Democrats are equally to blame. I see the Repubs and Dems as the reason I lost my job over a year ago, and have not had any offers since then. I was an insurance professional, that made about 20% of my yearly wage on bonuses. With the AIG tax on people making $1 per year with tens of thousands of dollars in bonuses to make up the difference, I wonder if I will ever be able to do what I have come to love again, and do it in such a way to support my wife and kids. Yeah, I would have been at a tea party. I would have been against the repubs and dems. People who see the world as left and right don’t see the whole picture. I hope that they will before it becomes too late.
I just don’t understand why it can’t be a right and wrong thing. Why can’t we get away from blaming the other person for our problems and try to do something to improve ourselves. I do not want the government to bail me out when I fail. I want the government to get out of my way so I can TRY to succeed. And keep me from failing, I get stronger and wiser from my failures so I can succeed more.
This article is not very accurate because groups like the Ohio Freedom Alliance, JBS and Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty protested just as hard against Bush Bank Bailouts as much as Obama bailouts. They all supported state sovereignty long before Obama was ever in office. It’s not about politics, it is about principles. I also hope this attempt to tie people who love freedom to racist hate groups will be for the lie that it is.
David, you don’t get it, at all! You are equally part of the problem as a Hannity or Lame-baugh. You are puffed up with pride that your party is in power and can crush the rights of who you think are your opponents, your fellow Americans. Had McCain won the election you would be squealing about the constitution and civil liberties just like you are accusing the right of doing.
STOP IT!!! Everyone needs to realize why Benjamin Franklin said “Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch.” Democracy has also been described as tyranny of the majority. Right now you are love with being the tyrant. This is the same rebuke I give the conservative whiners who said diddly squat for 8 years while they trampled on civil liberty issues of concern to the left and spent into oblivion.
Stop the hypocrisy and get some principles. These smear jobs you enjoy now will only come back you once the reich wing gets back in power. America should a place where the majority sticks up for the rights of the minority.
The whole story was nothing but an opinion piece with no real truth other than the fact that many states do intend to look at legislation that would protect the rights of the people. There is no right or left in this country. It’s all one party, and we are paying for it. And no matter if it was Bush’s “bail-out” or the Obama “stimulus” our great-great grandchildren will still be paying for it long after we have left this time space dimension.
The root of the problem is the federal reserve. Which is neither federal, nor holds any reserves. It is a private bank that (get this) lends our governemnt money (at an interest rate) by authorizing the treasury to print dollars to pump into the economy. Not only could the treasury do this without charging interest, but there is no gold that moves around at all. It is all just numbers in a computer with nothing backing it other than the ass-umption that people will continue to borrow money, and that’s it.
And for every dollar released into the economy, each dollar you hold in your pocket becomes worth even less and less. It is called inflation. It is a TAX.
As far as the New World Order goes…they have been mentioning it here and there on the tube. The mainstream media mass mind manipulation machine if you will. And it is not called the North American Union my friend. Oh no. Bush did sign the United States into what is known as the Freedom And Prosperity Partnership…treasonably I would add.
Because he did so without the consent of congress, or We The People. I am a proud member of the Campaign For Liberty, the Ohio Freedom Alliance, the John Birch Society, and several other organizations. We are NOT right wing, left wing, or crazed militia types. But we do respect and defend the constitution and what it stands for. FREEDOM.
And we will not accept any one world government or socialist fascist agenda. Count on that. I would prefer the government to stay the heck out of my life, and I could do without all of the restrictions and regulations…thank you very much.
Do away with the federal reserve, and we could all stop paying so much in taxes. Because contrary to popular belief, your income taxes go nowhere other than to service the (wait-for-it) interest on the national debt. Now doesn’t that just piss you off a little bit?
Fact is. America has a lot of awakening to do.
But from where I’m standing. It looks like it is happening. And the new world order gang is starting to get a little bit scared. because I think they realize that we are not going to just go away this time. Make a stand, or stick your head back in the sand. ~See-Ya!
How about reading the Constitution,Federalists Papers, and Anti-Federalist Papers before writing this article. This is a movement supported by people across political persuasion. Our country was designed this way to ensure peoples rights because the more remote government gets the harder it is to properly represent the people. Therefore it gives states more power in order to ensure the people always have a safe haven from tyranny. I for damn sure would move to the first state to succeed from the union. You can keep you socialist states and see how long they hold up under big government.
END THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK!! Inflation is a hidden tax socialist governments place on their people in order to spend money without publicly raising taxes. Governments do it this way in order to bribe the people into electing them. The Federal Reserve is a private bank that profits from the issuance of money. The Constitution clearly states the issuance of coin can only be done by Congress and should be tied to silver and gold. Give me liberty or give me death.
The fact that you, Mr. Bernstein, have cited that groups such as the Ohio Freedom Alliance and Campaign for Liberty have “close ties with militia groups” without any sort of background evidence to support that claim proves not only your ignorance but that of every other person in the media making that very claim. In fact to associate them with right-wing ultra conservative groups/ideas/individuals is absolutely incorrect. Before you write another piece criticizing them you should probably research the difference between Libertarians and Republicans as well as the platforms for which these groups advocate. Right&Wrong is absolutely correct – those who fail to see that this is more than an argument between right and left politics fail to see the issue at stake entirely. As Thomas Edison once said, the strength of the Constitution lies in the will of the people to defend it.
The commentary is riddled with inaccuracy’s, I won’t go into pointing them all out, but I will encourage people to do their own research on the claims made within.
That aside I am sure that their are some radical right wing neocons that are jumping on the Ron Paul bandwagon for the sole purpose of denouncing democrats and or liberalism, if that is you then you need to go elsewhere, that is not what the freedom movement is all about, if you want a start on understanding what it is about, I encourage you to watch this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbRr-wCH6Rc
It doesn’t take much research to figure out the NWO thing. Hell, even main stream media, Obama, and Kissenger (may have spelled incorrectly) are saying New World Order and Globalization is what we need. The states aren’t just claiming sovereignty because they are Republican conservatives. This isn’t about Democrat, Republican, conservative, or liberal. It’s about people, the government, the FED, and the World Bank. Oh, and whoever said that the UN has no influence over the way things are run has blinders on. Remember when Obama went to the World bank to discuss the economy and then Girtner was interviewed. The main stream media didn’t follow it and nothing has been said since. He said, “One thing is for sure, we’re going to need a one world currency”. As for fuckyou and some others, they are speaking the truth. Wake up people. This stuff is right in our faces and we can’t even see it. I’ve been researching the stuff pretty in depth for the past 3 years and it’s not pretty. The days of thinking our government has the people’s best interests at heart are GONE!!! It’s the special interests and the global elite or banksters if you will. Main stream media is not telling the whole story and the ones who are, are spinning it in such a way as to create even more fear than we already have. The revolution needs to be a revolution in consciousness.
Oh, and by the way. One more thing. Did anyone see the report released by Homeland Security?! Oh, it’s a gem, NOT! It’s absolute crap what these guys are getting away with. I encourage everyone to read this if they can find it. I heard some blurbs and some comments and if it’s even close to what I heard it’s not a good thing. We have to get away from labeling each other and buying into this main stream media dichotomies. Polarities, dualities, divisions, are all separation techniques. Divide and conquer. Independent thinking is not a desirable thing to the ones who are running the show! I am neither democrat, republican, liberal, or conservative. I am a hybrid or independent if you will. I’m not locking myself in a box for anyone. When a very large portion of the wealth in the world is confined to a very small percentage of the population; something is indeed very wrong. This ain’t the American dream people. In fact, it’s just a dream for most of us. It ain’t just owning a car and a house and having some stocks. It’s just keeping you pacified so you won’t say too much. Two party system is dangerous and it gives you the illusion of choice.
Why wasn’t anyone complaining 4 years ago when all our tax money was being diverted overseas to maintain all the warfronts we have been so familiar with? Suddenly, these people are waking up to the fact that the war effort comes at a price and we are paying for it in the pocketbooks!
Apologies: I misspelled Gartner folks. It just riles me to see how even someone at SCENE (Say it ain’t so) spins and twists something like state sovereignty. It ain’t just the Republican conservatives folks. Although, I applaud Ron Paul for taking a stand. Oh, and the FED needs to be audited big time. Tell your congressmen to vote for yes for HR1207.
As a lifelong democrat & Campaign for Liberty member, I deplore Mr. Bernstein’s polarizing polemic. Thomas Jefferson must be rolling in his grave.
Mr. DAVID S. BERNSTEIN
It is clear from your articles partisan attack that some of your facts are incorrect. One example Congressman Ron Paul has stated on many occasions there is a long term plan for a North American Union.
Mr.BERNSTEIN Quote “The North American Union, a favorite conspiracy of Corsi and the Ron Paul crew (though denounced by Paul himself)”
I challenge you & your constituents to do your research before you pre-maturely attack a documented a Fact!
References:
http://www.house.gov/paul
http://www.house.gov/paul/press/press2006/…
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst0…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=prtR-h8oKqU
Mr.DAVID S. BERNSTEIN
Sir no offence but, Have you ever read the US. Constitution, Bill of Rights or Declaration of Independence? Or are these founding documents just ornimates to hang on the office wall and admire as your Image of the freedom?
Or may I offer these for your viewing pleasure?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WINDtlPXmmE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tcx9BJRadfw
And..Can you believe that this was NOT televised.
I was there. We had 15,000+ people in the Target Center in Minneapolis right across the river from the sorry GOP convention where there were more protesters than there were attendees for their sad event that produced the candidate that lost the presidential race. Juan McCain.
Do you think it was all a setup? Of course it was.
The mainstream media mass mind manipulation machine works very well on the unsuspecting public.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdRA04iIFtI
You can view the whole rally on YouTube.
“Happy Trails”
Tumbleweed
The tea-parties are an example of the more extremist people in our society. Because let’s face it, most of us may have strong feelings, but most of the time we let others speak for us.
By the late sixties most Americans were against the war in Vietnam. The anti-war protesters were seen as kooks and radicals… small groups, mostly students. Even at the height of the anti-war movement only a small percentage of people got out and protested. However, these people represented a much larger silent-majority of Americans.
ever since Obama was elected, Republicans talk day and night about “traitors.” They call everyone a traitor, from the poor plumber that wants to have fair union elections to the President himself. Everyone is an idiot, a moron, “uneducated,” and a “crazed socialist.” Yet, the weird world these “patriots” inhabit includes: torture, lies, foreign wars, xenophobia, removal of habeus corpus “for a while,” secret prisons, corrupt energy officials, misguided and inneffective responses to crises, the list goes on and on and on…..
ever since Obama was elected, Republicans talk day and night about “traitors.” They call everyone a traitor, from the poor plumber that wants to have fair union elections to the President himself. Everyone is an idiot, a moron, “uneducated,” and a “crazed socialist.” Yet, the weird world these “patriots” inhabit includes: torture, lies, foreign wars, xenophobia, removal of habeus corpus “for a while,” secret prisons, corrupt energy officials, misguided and inneffective responses to crises, the list goes on and on and on…..
So…militias are part of the vast, right-wing conspiracy? And that’s bad, correct? Because everyone knows that militias…well…are bad. Because they’re made up of crazy, right-wing lunatics. And militias do bad things like…well, we’re not sure. But we’re sure they’re bad.
I hate to break it to Mr. Bernstein, but if he’s a citizen of the state of Ohio, he is, in fact, a member of the Ohio unorganized militia (assuming he’s not handicapped). He might have known that had he read the Ohio Constitution or the Ohio Revised Code.
But research–and reading the contracts the country’s and states’ founders made between the government and the People–don’t appear to be Mr. Bernstein’s strengths. (He does, however, have a lock on paranoia, false accusation, political prejudice, bigotry and statism. Good on you, Mr. Bernstein. Stick with what you know, and you’ll go far in life.)
Unlike totalitarian-leaning statists like Mr. Bernstein, members of groups like the Ohio Freedom Alliance and Campaign for Liberty actually do believe that personal freedom is important for everyone–even those with whom we disagree. Unlike Mr. Bertstein, we don’t want to force everyone to life, eat, work, worship, talk, or think like we do. Because, speaking generally about constitutionalists and libertarians, we think liberty is moral and totalitarianism is immoral.
And on a practical level, the more undemocratic power is concentrated in a ruling regime, the higher the risk of “democide,” or mass murder by government. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democide. 20th-century examples include the worker’s paradises of North Korea, Stalinist Russia, Hitler’s Nazi empire, Cambodia, Mao’s China, Rwanda, and Saddam’s Iraq. A leading researcher in the field estimates that governments killed over 262 million of their own people in the 20th century alone (see http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM)
In short, personal freedom good; totalitarianism bad.
Mr. Bernstein, here’s the part of the Ohio Revised Code you’ve probably never read:
http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/5923.01
5923.01 State militia membership – limitation of troops.
(A) The Ohio organized militia consist of all citizens of the state who are not permanently handicapped, as handicapped is defined in section 4112.01 of the Revised Code, who are more than seventeen years, and not more than sixty-seven years, of age unless exempted as provided in section 5923.02 of the Revised Code, and who are members of one of the following:
(1) The Ohio national guard;
(2) The Ohio naval militia;
(3) The Ohio military reserve.
(B) The Ohio national guard, including both the Ohio air national guard and the Ohio army national guard, the Ohio naval militia, and the Ohio military reserve are known collectively as the Ohio organized militia.
(C) The Ohio naval militia and the Ohio military reserve are known collectively as the state defense forces.
(D) The unorganized militia consists of those citizens of the state as described in division (A) of this section who are not members of the Ohio organized militia.
(E) No troops shall be maintained in time of peace other than as authorized and prescribed under the “Act of August 10, 1956,” 70A Stat. 596, 32 U.S.C.A. 101 to 716. This limitation does not affect the right of the state to the use of its organized militia within its borders in time of peace as prescribed by the laws of this state. This section does not prevent the organization and maintenance of police.
Effective Date: 09-18-1997
‘The claims of these resolutions are indefensible on constitutional grounds. “They rest on completely untenable interpretations of the Constitution’s text, structure and history, and they proceed as though the Civil War had been won by the Confederacy,” e-mails Laurence Tribe of Harvard Law School.’
The Supreme Court (life-tenured, unelected government lawyers) is the final arbiter of the meaning of the Constitution only because they claimed that power themselves via court decisions. That legal monopoly is not part of the Constitution, nor was it anywhere near what the Founders envisioned or what the ratifying states thought they were getting with the document. Most would assume a lawyer from Harvard would know that.
It is very well-known that states originally had the rights of nullification and secession. The drafters of both the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence were very clear on that–read the Kentucky and Virginia Resolves by Jefferson and Madison, respectively. Massachusetts threatened to secede many times throughout the years and according to the Founders (except Hamilton) it was their right to do so. Of course, they never did, but they must have that right if they are to have sovereignty. If you voluntarily join an affiliation, then that affiliation tells you that you must follow its rules that conflict with your own goals, and that you can never leave, you would be justifiably distraught. One word for that is totalitarianism. Another is tyranny. Moreover, if the rights of secession and nullification were not thought secure, the Constitution would not have been ratified by the constituent states.
The Civil War did end those states’ rights and also gave the Supreme Court the power they craved for several decades. But merely because that is the status quo, it is laughably absurd, almost incredible to pretend that is how it has always been. Or that such a configuration came from the font and wisdom of our Founders rather than despite their grave warnings to the contrary. This situation came about through military conquest. It was a vicious and bloody coup, and it was not for the benefit of “The People.”
I do not even have a comment I had never seen right wing racist so scared before… tell me what are you scared of? yourself, you can’t go on forever, I have never seen people trying to make something out something, that is not there,get a life or leave dumb asses. You guys alway try to make up shit,look alot of people have been scared all their lives living with your abuses time for you to taste the apple.