board77

The Last Homely Site on the Web
It is currently Fri 19 Jul , 2019 9:47 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu 26 Feb , 2009 6:38 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
This resolution is currently working its way throught the NH Legislature. I'm glad to see the States start asserting themselves. I hope this passes and other States follow suit.

Link to resolution: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html

Quote:
That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government of the United States of America shall require ratification of three quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking to form such a government; and

That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to the President of the United States, each member of the United States Congress, and the presiding officers of each State’s legislature.


Looks like Arizona is thinking along the same lines.

The state of Washington too - pdf warning

According to THIS SOURCE the number is now up to eight.

Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Hawaii.[/QUOTE]

Up to 20 states have had legislators look into this.

Plus THIS is a very interesting way in which Montana is standing up to the U.S. government - firearms and accessories stamped "Made in Montana" and kept in Montana, therefore not subject to federal firearms regulation.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri 27 Feb , 2009 5:20 am 
Triathlete
User avatar

Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Posts: 2638
Location: beachcombing
It's just a resolution. How could it possibly be enforceable?

_________________
Well, I'm back.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Mar , 2009 10:21 pm 
Daydream Believer

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 5778
Location: Pac Northwest
Does New Mexico revert back to being under the Spanish Crown? Does the Spanish Crown get all it's lost land back? That would be a good chunk of land.

Or if the states who declare themselves not under the US constitution become fair game? Cause if thats the case I'm gonna take over a few places myself, declare myself surpreme ruler and tax the hell out of the surfs,...er I mean citizens.

This actually works out well for those of us who have some claim to any of the royal famlies of europe. The states will no doubt at some point go to war with each other...destroy each other, then at some point the people will beg for leadership of some sort, and perhaps I can convince them to just revert back to European royals....and I get my families land back... :horse: I'd even give William a few bucks for the kitty.

_________________
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Mar , 2009 10:54 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Tue 22 Jul , 2008 6:39 pm
Posts: 65
You're missing the point, Ara-anna. NH and the other states want the Constitution enforced- specifically the Ninth and Tenth amendments, which tightly restrict what the Federal government can tell the stets to do. These amendments were gutted by FDR's tame supreme Court, but times have changed, and it's long past time for a return to Federalism and the doctrine of enumerated powers.

_________________
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
--Margaret Thatcher


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon 02 Mar , 2009 11:31 pm 
Daydream Believer

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 11:15 pm
Posts: 5778
Location: Pac Northwest
No, I want to be Queen of my own lands. I have trained evil minions, minion. Ok its one, but it's a start.

_________________
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in

Five seconds away from the Tetons and Yellowstone


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 03 Mar , 2009 12:57 am 
Triathlete
User avatar

Joined: Wed 26 Jan , 2005 2:08 am
Posts: 2638
Location: beachcombing
Actually, you are going to have to give it back to us Indians. :rage:

Soli, are they saying ALL powers? As in let's scrap the federal government entirely, and then build it back up one item at a time by ratification? Or just everything after the 10th amendment? Or will they have some sort of Charterette in place, then make the shift?

_________________
Well, I'm back.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 2:48 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
First Montana does a "made in Montana and kept on Montana" plan for firearms.

Now Texas.

This will inevitably result in a case in federal courts. On that day it will be interesting to re-hear the "interstate commerce clause" as applied to commerce that only takes place inside one state.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 4:32 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
In the past, MariaHobbit and I have mentioned the work of William Strauss and Neil Howe and their generational theory of history. They wrote a book titled THE FOURTH TURNING. In it they describe the events of the Civil War (1861-1865) and how the various generational alignments and historical alignments doevetailed to produce that period in US history. The Civil War period was a Fourth Turning - a period of crisis, a decisive era of secular upheaval when the values regime propels the replacement of an old civic order with a new one. Many people think we have now entered a Fourth Turning right now.

The Great Depression and WW2 was another such Fourth Turning.

These efforts by states to reclaim power are merely symptoms of the struggle of the Old Order to avoid death and burial in the graveyard of history. The are largely efforts by conservatives to fight social policy that they simply do not agree with but they see being embraced by a hostile national majority who no longer agree with them. They are also last gasp efforts by conservatives to fight the majority of Americans who have moved beyond such matters and are ready for change.

This is normal and to be expected. A Crisis spurs both extremes to take advantage of it and use it to further their own goals and objectives. In both previous Crisises that I mentioned, the conservatives lost and lost bigtime.

Of course, conservative state governments will attempt to fight progressive changes. That is part and parcel of this Crisis period. But they will lose and America will change again just as it did from the other Crisis periods.

_________________

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 4:53 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
Yes, we are in a fourth turning, when Generation X has to deal with the problems created by the Boomers as we sacrifice ourselves to take care of our kids instead of sacrifice the kids to take care of themselves the way the Boomers are doing. The bills in Texas and Montana are a new state versus federal issue instead of a digging up of the old state versus federal issue. The old order in this case is centralized authority and the worship of government as a secular god.

And, as you noted, old orders tend to die in crisis times.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:12 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
To blame this on "the Boomers" is to oversimplify the generational theory of history to the point where it means nothing. Were the Republican Congressmen who wrote and pushed the repeal of Glass-Steagal members of the baby boom generation? NO. Was Ronald Reagan and those around him who pushed the initial efforts towards decreased regulation baby boomers? NO. Were all the people in the W. Bush White House over the last eight years baby boomers? NO. Was Dick Cheney a baby boomer? NO. Was Alan Greenspan a baby boomer? NO.

If we want to point the finger of blame, lets be accurate and narrow it to the libertarian/republican/conservative alliance which led us to this point today. This is hardly about what year anyone was born in. Its about their idealogy which led them to act irresponsibly and nearly destroy much of what is good about this land.

We have not yet even begun to see the nationalization of liberal government. That is yet to come.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:18 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
If you want to blame the libertarian/republican/conservative alliance, you should first establish the existance of the libertarian/republican/conservative alliance. Blaming it is much like blaming the tooth fairy - blame cannot be assigned to that which does not exist.

But if you want to blame the tooth fairy, go ahead.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
We have been through that exercise more times than I care to recall. Proof of any pudding is in the tasting - and right now we all have a very bitter taste in our collective mouth because of it.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:22 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
So you don't like the tooth fairy. That is not my problem, nor is it the problem of your non-existant libertarian/republican/conservative alliance, nor is it the problem of the real world in which your libertarian/republican/conservative alliance does not exist. Your dreams and fantasies are not having any impact on what is going on outside your head.

You think the current economic woes are the fault of the tooth fairy but they are actually the final result of Keynesianism (an ideology shared by Bush AND Obama) in action. Go ahead and take the credit where it is due. This recession/depression is your finest hour.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
I wish this were only a bad fairy tale. Here is your proof..... for at least the sixth time. And each time I print it, you run away and play ostrich. And when Lidless used much of it in his analysis we saw the sequel - OSTRICH II. But again,

A serious report that should be read by anyone looking for causes of this mess

The Executive Summary minces no words in their main finding:


Quote:
Quote:
"This Report has one overriding message: financial deregulation led directly to the financial meltdown."
http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/40531" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank



Quote:
Quote:
"Sold Out: How Wall Street and Washington Betrayed America," a report released by Essential Information and the Consumer Education Foundation details a dozen crucial deregulatory moves over the last decade -- each a direct response to heavy lobbying from Wall Street and the broader financial sector, as the report details. Combined, these deregulatory moves helped pave the way for the current financial meltdown.

Here are 12 deregulatory steps to financial meltdown:

1. The repeal of Glass-Steagall
The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 formally repealed the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933 and related rules, which prohibited banks from offering investment, commercial banking, and insurance services. In 1998, Citibank and Travelers Group merged on the expectation that Glass-Steagall would be repealed. Then they set out, successfully, to make it so. The subsequent result was the infusion of the investment bank speculative culture into the world of commercial banking. The 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagall helped create the conditions in which banks invested monies from checking and savings accounts into creative financial instruments such as mortgage-backed securities and credit default swaps, investment gambles that led many of the banks to ruin and rocked the financial markets in 2008.

2. Off-the-books accounting for banks
Holding assets off the balance sheet generally allows companies to avoid disclosing “toxic” or money-losing assets to investors in order to make the company appear more valuable than it is. Accounting rules -- lobbied for by big banks -- permitted the accounting fictions that continue to obscure banks' actual condition.

3. CFTC blocked from regulating derivatives
Financial derivatives are unregulated. By all accounts this has been a disaster, as Warren Buffett's warning that they represent "weapons of mass financial destruction" has proven prescient -- they have amplified the financial crisis far beyond the unavoidable troubles connected to the popping of the housing bubble. During the Clinton administration, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sought to exert regulatory control over financial derivatives, but the agency was quashed by opposition from Robert Rubin and Fed Chair Alan Greenspan.

4. Formal financial derivative deregulation: the Commodities Futures Modernization Act
The deregulation -- or non-regulation -- of financial derivatives was sealed in 2000, with the Commodities Futures Modernization Act. Its passage orchestrated by the industry-friendly Senator Phil Gramm, the Act prohibits the CFTC from regulating financial derivatives.

5. SEC removes capital limits on investment banks and the voluntary regulation regime

In 1975, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) promulgated a rule requiring investment banks to maintain a debt to-net capital ratio of less than 15 to 1. In simpler terms, this limited the amount of borrowed money the investment banks could use. In 2004, however, the SEC succumbed to a push from the big investment banks -- led by Goldman Sachs, and its then-chair, Henry Paulson -- and authorized investment banks to develop net capital requirements based on their own risk assessment models. With this new freedom, investment banks pushed ratios to as high as 40 to 1. This super-leverage not only made the investment banks more vulnerable when the housing bubble popped, it enabled the banks to create a more tangled mess of derivative investments -- so that their individual failures, or the potential of failure, became systemic crises.

6. Basel II weakening of capital reserve requirements for banks
Rules adopted by global bank regulators -- known as Basel II, and heavily influenced by the banks themselves -- would let commercial banks rely on their own internal risk-assessment models (exactly the same approach as the SEC took for investment banks). Luckily, technical challenges and intra-industry disputes about Basel II have delayed implementation -- hopefully permanently -- of the regulatory scheme.

7. No predatory lending enforcement
Even in a deregulated environment, the banking regulators retained authority to crack down on predatory lending abuses. Such enforcement activity would have protected homeowners, and lessened though not prevented the current financial crisis. But the regulators sat on their hands. The Federal Reserve took three formal actions against subprime lenders from 2002 to 2007. The Office of Comptroller of the Currency, which has authority over almost 1,800 banks, took three consumer-protection enforcement actions from 2004 to 2006.

8. Federal preemption of state enforcement against predatory lending
When the states sought to fill the vacuum created by federal non-enforcement of consumer protection laws against predatory lenders, the Feds -- responding to commercial bank petitions -- jumped to attention to stop them. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision each prohibited states from enforcing consumer protection rules against nationally chartered banks.

9. Blocking the courthouse doors: Assignee Liability Escape
Under the doctrine of “assignee liability,” anyone profiting from predatory lending practices should be held financially accountable, including Wall Street investors who bought bundles of mortgages (even if the investors had no role in abuses committed by mortgage originators). With some limited exceptions, however, assignee liability does not apply to mortgage loans, however. Representative Bob Ney -- a great friend of financial interests, and who subsequently went to prison in connection with the Abramoff scandal -- worked hard, and successfully, to ensure this effective immunity was maintained.

10. Fannie and Freddie enter subprimeAt the peak of the housing boom, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were dominant purchasers in the subprime secondary market. The Government-Sponsored Enterprises were followers, not leaders, but they did end up taking on substantial subprime assets -- at least $57 billion. The purchase of subprime assets was a break from prior practice, justified by theories of expanded access to homeownership for low-income families and rationalized by mathematical models allegedly able to identify and assess risk to newer levels of precision. In fact, the motivation was the for-profit nature of the institutions and their particular executive incentive schemes. Massive lobbying -- including especially but not only of Democratic friends of the institutions -- enabled them to divert from their traditional exclusive focus on prime loans.

Fannie and Freddie are not responsible for the financial crisis. They are responsible for their own demise, and the resultant massive taxpayer liability.

11. Merger mania
The effective abandonment of antitrust and related regulatory principles over the last two decades has enabled a remarkable concentration in the banking sector, even in advance of recent moves to combine firms as a means to preserve the functioning of the financial system. The megabanks achieved too-big-to-fail status. While this should have meant they be treated as public utilities requiring heightened regulation and risk control, other deregulatory maneuvers (including repeal of Glass-Steagall) enabled them to combine size, explicit and implicit federal guarantees, and reckless high-risk investments.

12. Credit rating agency failure
With Wall Street packaging mortgage loans into pools of securitized assets and then slicing them into tranches, the resultant financial instruments were attractive to many buyers because they promised high returns. But pension funds and other investors could only enter the game if the securities were highly rated.

The credit rating agencies enabled these investors to enter the game, by attaching high ratings to securities that actually were high risk -- as subsequent events have revealed. The credit rating agencies have a bias to offering favorable ratings to new instruments because of their complex relationships with issuers, and their desire to maintain and obtain other business dealings with issuers.

This institutional failure and conflict of interest might and should have been forestalled by the SEC, but the Credit Rating Agencies Reform Act of 2006 gave the SEC insufficient oversight authority. In fact, the SEC must give an approval rating to credit ratings agencies if they are adhering to their own standards -- even if the SEC knows those standards to be flawed.


Here is an additional link. It has other links which will take you to the full report.

http://wallstreetwatch.org/soldoutreport.htm" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank" target="_blank

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:35 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
sauronsfinger wrote:
I wish this were only a bad fairy tale. Here is your proof


You do not have proof of a libertarian/republican/conservative alliance.

sauronsfinger wrote:
"This Report has one overriding message: financial deregulation led directly to the financial meltdown."

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/node/40531


First, that is not proof of a libertarian/republican/conservative alliance, although it does attempt to prove that deregulation was at fault.

Second, it fails to prove that deregulation was at fault.

Third, the only reason you think they are right is because they affirm your religion.

Fourth, they have a distinct bias in what causes the look for - and what causes they refuse to look for.


While you have previous asserted that the primary cause of the real estate bubble wasn't the loose credit policies of the Fed but is instead the repeal of Glass-Steagall, it wasn't. Glass-Steagall's repeal was merely an exacerbating factor.

The list has one thing very right - Fannie and Freddy entering the subprime market. Federally chartered corporations that wouldn't exist in a free market. Federally created corporations that are the antithesis of what libertarians advocate in a free market.

Why doesn't your list include any of the policies of Alan Greenspan? I'd recommend you ask yourself that but doing so might cause you religious doubt and I know you won't do it anyway.

According to your second link, the blame is "bipartisan". They use that word. But I suppose you merely glossed over that. But if you didn't, does that mean this is the fault of a libertarian/republican/conservative/democrat/liberal alliance?

I must give you credit that you actually tried to support an argument for once instead of going immediately to insults the way you usually do, but your attempt wasn't successful.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 5:43 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
There was once a man named Smith who resided in the fabled town of Imaginary Town USA. Mr. Smith advocated that all speed limits within his town be gotten rid of as they were a restriction upon his liberty to operate his car as he saw fit and to drive it at speeds it was designed for.

"My car is designed to drive at over 100 miles per hour" Smith was fond of saying. "And in thirty years of driving I have not gotten as much as a single ticket?"

Smith was something of a political eunuch and had no real governmental power so he utilized a campaign of writing letters to his local paper, posting on internet chat rooms popular in town, calling in repeatedly to local talk shows, lobbying the politicians with real power and generally making it his cause celebre in life. Smith was not successful in getting the city council to adopt his suggestion. However, they did read his proposal and his information and took a huge step in his direction by raising speed limits to 90 mph on most streets and even raised the residential speed limit to 60 mph. Over the next three months the accident rate in that town increased by 450% and the death rate from accidents rose over 625%.

The citizens were outraged and the council then repealed the changes and went back to the old speed limits.

Smith was then included in a lawsuit claiming that he played a role in these deaths. What was his defense?

"I never advocated raising the speed limits and was not in power to do so regardless. It ain't my fault."

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue 05 May , 2009 11:57 pm 
Insolent Pup
User avatar

Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Posts: 5381
Location: Many Places
How does a resolution that realigns the powers of the federal to the state work? I can understand trying to assert your 10th amendment rights, but this is almost like modern day secession, but without calling it so.

I find it funny that so many states are doing this now during the Obama administration, but when things of this nature were spoken of during the Bush years all we heard about from the powers that be was how those people were un-American.

_________________
The 11/3 Project


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed 06 May , 2009 1:40 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 15 Aug , 2005 3:48 am
Posts: 3348
Location: Planet Earth
TheEllipticalDisillusion wrote:
I find it funny that so many states are doing this now during the Obama administration, but when things of this nature were spoken of during the Bush years all we heard about from the powers that be was how those people were un-American.


I know this is supposed to be lost down the memory hole, but there were Democrats who developed an interest in federalism and separation of powers under Bush the Lesser. Some even pondered the merits of thinking about secession. And, during that time period, Republicans were solidly against it.

_________________
It is a myth that coercion is necessary in order to force people to get along together, but it is a persistent myth because it feeds a desire many people have. That desire is to be able to justify hurting people who have done nothing other than offend them in some way.

Last edited by Cenedril_Gildinaur on Tue Feb 30, 2026 13:61 am; edited 426 times in total


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed 06 May , 2009 3:00 am 
Insolent Pup
User avatar

Joined: Wed 09 Mar , 2005 8:31 pm
Posts: 5381
Location: Many Places
Oh, that is interesting to know. Thanks CG. Ugh, I can't stand Jonah Goldberg. But one different point that the article doesn't mention... no states were discussing a resolution to override the Constitution. Liberals may have been whining along with some Democrats, but not states. Vastly different.

_________________
The 11/3 Project


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed 06 May , 2009 11:33 am 
User avatar

Joined: Mon 28 Feb , 2005 9:28 pm
Posts: 4336
Location: The real world
If anyone wants to go back and read that article CG linked to to provide evidence that Democrats were doing much the same thing as todays secessionist Republican talkers they will see it is not quite the case as TED has pointed out. The Democrat mentioned is a staffer who worked in the Senate. And his main complaint was the disparity is federal spending from donor states to vampire states - an issue I have mentioned many times myself and is a sore spot among many on the left. I would call that being equated to current secessionist talk wildly inaccurate and much ado about nothing.

That is hardly anything that even begins to approach the level of Republican governors and other Republican elected officials who are engaged in the current silly talk. If that 'evidence' is the best those on the Right can come up with, case dismissed and closed.

_________________
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs. - John Rogers


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group