"States rights movement and the Ron Paul reality are seeds that have been planted"
NewsWithViews.com | 5, 2009
By Geoff Metcalf
"The fabric of American empire ought to rest on the solid basis of the consent of the people. The streams of national power ought to flow from that pure, original fountain of all legitimate authority." --Alexander Hamilton
Apparently several U.S. States have taken the first steps to claim sovereignty under the United States Constitution 10th Amendment. You may not have seen or heard about this from the Main Stream Media, but the ripple is as real as a sunrise.
Arizona, New Hampshire, Missouri, and Washington state are in various stages of legislatively declaring their sovereignty. Several states are giving notice the Federal Government should actually abide by the terms enumerated in the U.S. Constitution. They probably won’t succeed any more than Ron Paul did, but both the states rights movement and the Ron Paul reality are seeds that have been planted…and require attention and nurturing.(full article at link)
I think the Framers would recognize
what we have today--the exact thing they (the Framers) knew from history--empire building, false money, taxation, large centralized and powerful government, etc.
I, too, would stay away from quoting Hamilton. He got it wrong--way wrong. He was not a true "American"; the ideas he harbored reflected the "old world" style of thinking and were anything but revolutionary.
Alexander Hamilton
Was a Bad Guy. I would never quote him. Glad Burr killed him.
Sheldon Waxman
sheldonw72@gmail.com
www.thelawyer.info
www.independentcontractor.info
Sheldon Waxman
sheldonw72@gmail.com
www.independentcontractor.info
www.thelawyer.info
Reclamation of Sovereignty
Can we call this something other than "States' Rights"?
How about "Reclamation of Sovereignty" or "Assertion of Sovereign State Authority" or anything else?
There are at least a couple major problems calling this anything similar to "States' Rights":
1) As others have pointed out, states do not have 'rights', only powers granted by consent of the governed, which may be revoked in due process. Rights cannot be revoked.
2) The idea of "States' Rights" was killed and buried many years ago, and rightfully so. Through its history, most noted champions of "States' Rights" stained it with the bigoted legacy of slavery and racism. It is a good thing this is dead and buried. What needs to happen now--this Reassertion of State Authority--is very different, and should be named appropriately. Please do not dig up "States' Rights" and all the crap that would necessarily come with it.
Excellant
Article and post.
So many great comments, thanks all.
peace be with you, as we enter the changes that are coming our way.
In liberty,
"A cadre of hard core believers is the key to success. The total numbers and percentages are less important. Our job now is to plan for the next phase. As was the case in the campaign, this continued effort will logically continue to be a grass roots effort and not a top down rigidly controlled central operation. Most important will be the continued emphasis on the message. That message, simply put, is the message of human liberty." Ron Paul
Warily happy
.
I don't know if the resolutions will fly, but I am happy that there are some people with backbones in the various states.
In our current situation, the Federal government is going to collapse under its own weight anyway, so it's almost moot. I give our republic two more years of existence; then God knows what will happen.
Yes
and to prove the point even further it is being talked about in many places as to the importance of the situation.
Find out if you have a local militia - http://www.uaff.us/
Real Patriots for 9/11 truth -- http://patriotsquestion911.com/
Question
I have for a long time heard Ron Paul say "Only individuals have rights".
Is Ron Paul against "States Rights"? I'm not for more power to the state (like statism) wether it is the federal government, or my home state, but I would like to see those powers robbed from the states by the federal government, returned to the states and the people themselves.
Does anyone else see the possible conflict in opinions? I'm curious what you folks think. I think the Constitution recognizes both individuals and states, but would like to get your take. Thx.
Kel
Good Question Kell
You bring up a good question. What Ron Paul means is that only people have rights concerning "Life, Liberty and Property" the 3 most basic components of existence as a human that need to be protected. This idea can be found in Frederic Bastiat's book, "The Law" http://bastiat.org/en/the_law.html . The reason that only individuals have rights is because only they posess these 3 basic components that they have a right to protect.
You may say that a company owns a piece of property, but the company itself is owned by an owner, stockholders, etc. who are all people.
Protecting life is a right of an individual. The individual can bestow the right to protect life to the government.
Liberty is something only intrisic to humans/individuals, animals live by instinct and their lives can be taken by other animals without consequence in the animal world.
I hope I made some sense...read The Law. It's about 39 pages printed out, but it has transcendent ideas.
Yours in Health and Freedom
Yours in Health and Freedom
Back when people were
Back when people were actually free,the hierarchy of government was....
People - The state - The federal government
The people granted the state "rights" or "powers".
While the states united each granted "powers" to the federal government.
Today the whole thing is backwards.The federal government can and i have no doubt would blackmail if not outright use force against a state and it's people.As we all know from history,they have.
------------------------------------------
The government throws the people bones while keeping the treasures of this country.
"A government of reason is better than one of force." --Thomas Jefferson to Richard Rush, 1820
You nailed it!!
Ron Paul believes in a Jeffersonian Republic. The hierarchy in such a governance begins with the citizens receiving their rights at birth by a higher authority. They then in turn delegate certain powers to the state to govern within that state for the prosperity of its citizens. From there the state, representing its people, delegate limited power to the Federal whom is charged as their [the states] agent to uphold the Constitutional compact.
Thus the states do not usurp the rights of its citizens but only have those which are delegated to it. Each individual states has an established state constitution which can be abolished or rewritten as the citizens of that state deem necessary.
May those seeds
achieve full bloom...
Berwick, Columbia County, Pennsylvania
Ron Paul 2012 - The People's Choice
rEVOLution SuperPAC: http://www.revolutionpac.com/
WTP Federal Lawsuit to BAN ALL ELECTRONIC VOTING
http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/UPDATE/Update2011-07-26...
may they be in good soil...
we have a bit more tilling to do.
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
I do not trust a single
I do not trust a single thing that Alexander Hamilton said was EVER in the best interest of the American people.
Did you know that he was a Temple Bar Attorney? He was a member of the Middle Temple, one of the four Inns of Court which make up the Temple Bar, and thereby had sworn allegiance to the King of England...
He also said "It is well known that the Monarchy in England is the best form of government in the world, and I hope the the united states could mimic it at least." (I paraphrased, I do not have the exact quote in front of me) This is what he meant by "Federalist". He also wanted the President to serve FOR LIFE.
Alexander Hamilton was a Big Government maniac. Loyal to the Crown and Bankers to his well-deserved death.
I don't disagree on that point!!
He was definitely the closest publicly known founder to be a snake in the grass! I do however think that the quotes he made before ratification (in order to sway those who were worried or opposed) can be wielded against what he was actually seeking. Never trust him! I also take issue with others such as John Jay but that's just more rattling on. :-p
i would think...
that since they both were elected into such high offices, that their peers had to have approved of them to some degree. whether or not Jefferson and Hamilton had their big differences...Hamilton would not have been President and Jay would not have been Justice, if they were traitors to the crown.
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
I don't contest that Hamilton had approval among some.
There were after all, more than one Federalist. You could probably even say that the opposing views were a cultural difference- one being based more in the north, the other in the south. However much of what Hamilton wrote in the Federalist was song and dance that became a different tune once the Constitution was finally ratified. It doesn't make his contribution to the Federalist not a valuable piece of work. Like for instance -
Hamilton once said "an entire consolidation of the States into one national sovereignty would imply an entire subordination of the parts; and whatever powers might remain in them would be altogether dependent on the general will. But as the plan of the convention [the Constitutional Convention of 1787] aims only at a partial union or consolidation, the State governments would clearly retain all right of sovereignty which they before had and which were not, by that act exclusively delegated to the United States."
Consider that there have been many a bad presidents, as well as justices that have slipped in through the cracks. The vigilant eye of the people is not always so vigilant. Hopefully in present times we can rectify that!
nice to see this article on the front page
hug for the moderator*)
(Better) to be confused in the search for truth than fully confident and sound asleep in a dream of lies. ~ Michael Nystrom
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
Legalize, I agree and thank Mr. Nystrom-
1st time I've had a post on the front page.
: )
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.
your hard work for Liberty paid off
I had a post placed on the front page yesterday and I am still smiling about it...good vibes*)
(Better) to be confused in the search for truth than fully confident and sound asleep in a dream of lies. ~ Michael Nystrom
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
bump for the Constitution!
bump for the Constitution!
bump for Liberty*)
^^)
(Better) to be confused in the search for truth than fully confident and sound asleep in a dream of lies. ~ Michael Nystrom
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
great articles deserve bumps
for Liberty*)
(Better) to be confused in the search for truth than fully confident and sound asleep in a dream of lies. ~ Michael Nystrom
http://www.votenader.org/blog/2008/09/10/statement-to-ron-pa...
http://www.flickr.com/photos/57925480@N00/2660779139
Website:
http://www.libertypoet.com/
Twitter:
http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
"How can we justify to the unemployed and underemployed in the United States the incredible cost of maintaining a global empire?" - Dr. Ron Paul
good article of Ron Paul
bump
2Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.