Great thread! Thanks!
I have to say, as much as I like some of the people involved in this, this is my worry.
If we don’t obey the constitution we have, why does replacing it help? And if the people replacing it are influenced by the people who don’t obey the constitution we have, who says the outcome is better?
It looks like a sleight of hand. Under color of improving it, we lose it and no going back.
The longer road requires us to obey the constitution we already have. Is the constitution taught in school? Are Federalist Papers taught in school? Does anyone graduating high school have the first clue what limited government is? Does anyone graduating high school understand the vital need to limit the power of majorities?
Then you have a populace and a voter pool that has no clue what it means and why we should obey it in the first place. We dare not depend on such people to write a new one. We have to bring the constitution back into the schools so that everyone who graduates and goes to the polls knows what it is and means.
“Federal,” state and local governments are “spending this country into the ground,” and state and local governments are spending most of it with the help of much federal funding. One socialist political party works more for federal interests, while the other political party continues shoveling more pork to state and local governments. They play good guy, bad guy to keep you voting and praising their political politics.
Well, I thought I understood nullification, but I don’t fully understand all it can be.
I can’t think of a way to use nullification to force the federal govt to stop spending money like a drunken sailor (no offense to drunken sailor’s past, present or future) and heaping debt on the next several generations to come.
I’ll presume individuals and states could do whatever was in their power to cut off the flow of tax revenue to the federal govt and try to starve it. Presuming a state legislature moved to do that, I would imagine the Fed would just seize accounts and/or failing that, they could always just start printing money like crazy (worse than they do now) to make up the difference or mitigate the impact. As for individuals, not too many folks can win a fight with the IRS, but “Going Galt” is an option.
So, is there a nullification option when it comes to reigning in federal spending?
Thank you for posting. I believe Mark Levin is very wrong in his aasumptions about how a CC would act. Matt Bracken’s take, in his novels, is closer to the truth, IMHO.
ping
I think that maybe 5% of the population understands these concepts.
That might not seem to be a formidable “army” until you consider the power so called minorities wield.
The enemy is unified. They understand that diversity empowers THEM.
Unless we organize, unify, and stop the criminals, we will just be spectators in the decline and fall.
If the States win this argument and actually further restrain the Federal Government I believe the Criminal Class in DC will have to be removed by physical force, tried, convicted under the RICO Act and and jailed. Those that can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they upheld their oath of office will be released to go home and look for a real job - every last one of them!