Bump.
Posted on 07/15/2012 3:46:27 PM PDT by cap10mike
Could Texas once again become the Republic of Texas?
Without question, the Nov. 6 election will be a do-or-die, make-or-break, Rubicon-crossing event. If the presidential election goes one way, we get a “do-over.” We’ll be given the opportunity to take the first step on a long, arduous journey back to our political and economic roots. If it goes the other way, federalism and balance of power will continue to be edged out by an overreaching federal government and an imperial presidency. Socialism will have an unbreakable hold on the economy, and a centralized government, rather than a free market, will determine business’ winners and losers.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
If I owned hell and Texas I would live in hell and rent out Texas.
Is it hard to sit at a computer with a Federal boot stuck up you keester?
If I remember correctly, England said that it was illegal for the US to secede .... how did that work out for them .... even considering all the English court decisions, etc. I suspect there will be another civil war if the communist Food Stamp President is re-elected.
Bump.
The constitution is the supreme law of the United States.
In my opinion it is the greatest legal document humans have ever created.
It must be followed.
Raising a pig in city limits is illegal as well.
Guess who bootlegged a pig until it was 100 lbs.
You can quote or make all the laws you like. Unless you get the public to go along with it, you are urinating up a rope.
/johnny
August 9, 1960
Dear Dr. Scott:
Respecting your August 1 inquiry calling attention to my often expressed admiration for General Robert E. Lee, I would say, first, that we need to understand that at the time of the War Between the States the issue of Secession had remained unresolved for more than 70 years. Men of probity, character, public standing and unquestioned loyalty, both North and South, had disagreed over this issue as a matter of principle from the day our Constitution was adopted.
General Robert E. Lee was, in my estimation, one of the supremely gifted men produced by our Nation. He believed unswervingly in the Constitutional validity of his cause which until 1865 was still an arguable question in America; he was thoughtful yet demanding of his officers and men, forbearing with captured enemies but ingenious, unrelenting and personally courageous in battle, and never disheartened by a reverse or obstacle. Through all his many trials, he remained selfless almost to a fault and unfailing in his belief in God. Taken altogether, he was noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.
From deep conviction I simply say this: a nation of men of Lee's caliber would be unconquerable in spirit and soul. Indeed, to the degree that present-day American youth will strive to emulate his rare qualities, including his devotion to this land as revealed in his painstaking efforts to help heal the nation's wounds once the bitter struggle was over, we, in our own time of danger in a divided world, will be strengthened and our love of freedom sustained.
Such are the reasons that I proudly display the picture of this great American on my office wall.
Sincerely,
Dwight D. Eisenhower
ASH ALERT?
No. In fact, contained within the Constitution are instructions on how to change it.
Liberals, like you, have let courts change it without going through the process.
The Constitution can be abrogated and made null and void. The entire federal system can be abolished.
Personally, I think that needs to be done.
/johnny
When "Affirmative Action" withstood Constitutional muster I knew then it was a joke to think that it wasn't bastardized to the point of no return. How can reverse discrimination be Constitutional? Robert's just confirmed my view, again.
It is that kind of crazy time.
/johnny
This has been Michael Medved’s argument for the last few years. And, it makes sense.
But, sometimes, there’s just the appeal, of cold steel.
Yes. And pumpkin pie.
I don't know what you're smoking but no court can change the constitution.
The Supreme Court can only interpret the Constitution, or decide how the framers intended for the Articles and Amendments to be applied.
The actual document itself does not change.
Our interpretation of the constitution changes over time.
You are the liberal who want to abandon our constitution which has lasted 223 years.
Yikes! Why did you have to post the picture of that bi-polar closet queer?
So what you are saying is the we as citizens of individual states have to stay in the USA under threat of nuclear decimation. Even the USSR was less bellicose. Thuggery. You are a punk statist tool.
Sod off.
Once upon a time the Constitution was something to respect. Read in plain english, it still is.
As interpreted by the feral gooberment? Forgetaboutit.
Time to dissolve the FedGov, per the Declaration of Independence.
I would appreciate it if they go without a fight.
/johnny
Like I said, the Supreme Court can only change our INTERPRETATION of the constitution. The constitution itself never changes.
The Declaration of Independence has no legal power or authority today
The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the United States.
We killed a pig on Friday. Cooked and ate him on Saturday (big family reunion) and today I actually rested ALL day for the first time in weeks. It has done WONDERS for my constitution. Epiphany...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.