State's Rights...
- Thread starter OllieVee
- Start date
Not those who live in states that deal with DC bullschit they don't like...such as abortion and other social issues.
People suffer when dems think feds issue rights
Yes they do. The Fed is the institution that looks out for rights. States have a long history of stepping on them. Rights belong to the people, not states. The Fed protects that.
Au contraire. The centralization of power just paves the way for the next dictator.
Remember Paul Begala: "Stroke of the pen. Law of the Land. Kinda cool." He loved the fact that Clinton was dishing out all these EO's. It has snowballed downhill with every POTUS, leaving Americans longing for his predecessor. Only now, we have to listen to all the resident twits on the board cry about it for the next 4 years after cheering for it the past 8. I shutter to think what Trump's successor will be like.
That isn't our history. Our history is dictators arising from the state sandboxes while the Feds side with the people to champion individual rights. Tyranny lives in the statehouses.
I wish. Many think the state's should be able to limit individual rights. The pattern in our nation is the states try to restrict the people and the federal government steps in to protect us. It happens over and over where only the fed respects the people. I get the theoretical value of states, but in practice they are dens of tyranny. It's rarely the case that the state is fighting for expanding individual rights.
Last edited:
Like the loss of the 4th, 5th and 10th amendments? the 2nd has been chipped away at for decades. Hillary had called for a gatekeeper for the internet.
Do you know who else shared your view...Hitler. No hyperbole either. In Mein Kampf, he expressed both his support for Lincoln’s war and his unwavering opposition to the cause of states’ rights and political decentralization (which, as a dictator seeking absolute power, he naturally sought to overturn in Germany).
In Germany, Hitler promised that the Nazis "would totally eliminate states’ rights altogether: Since for us the state as such is only a form, but the essential is its content, the nation, the people, it is clear that everything else must be subordinated to its sovereign interests. In particular we cannot grant to any individual state within the nation and the state representing it state sovereignty and sovereignty in point of political power." Thus the "mischief of individual federated states…must cease and will some day cease…. National Socialism as a matter of principle must lay claim to the right to force its principles on the whole German nation without consideration of previous federated state boundaries."
This is where you go off the deep end. Each state is a lab in incubation. If one over reaches, people are free to travel to another state. If a dictator consolidates power, where do you run?
Care to elaborate? Is this your way of saying, "You got me. Game, set and match".
When Hitler consolidated his power, how did the protection of individual rights work out for the Jews? I'm a little fuzzy on this part. Please share.
Sure, if you ignore the fact that individual states: ended slavery, expanded suffrage to blacks and women, allowed gay marriage, created universal healthcare and state funded college education, free public education, abortion rights, etc. all before the federal government did. 8 states had a bill of rights before our national one was ever written, and it wasn't until 1868 that the BoR was broadly applied to state laws.
I'm sure we will also see you cheerleading the state lawsuits against trumps executive orders regarding immigration as well.
So states like California will have the right to tell the Feds to enforce their immigration laws themselves?
Said Hitler. "And so today this state, for the sake of its own existence, is obliged to curtail the sovereign rights of the individual provinces more and more, not only out of general material considerations, but from ideal considerations as well" (p. 572). Thus, a rule "basic for us National Socialists is derived: A powerful national Reich . . ." (emphasis in original, p. 572).
I don't give 2 shakes about California boy...since it is a blue state it is on my no travel list.
And how did all this get expanded nationally? In the end the Feds have to assert their primacy and make states respect the people. Every one of your examples required states to give up rights to the people. States don't have rights, only people do. States and their protectors forget that all too often.
As Aldous Huxley recognized in his foreword to Brave New World: “A really efficient totalitarian state would be one in which the all-powerful executive of political bosses and their army of managers control a population of slaves who do not have to coerced, because they love their servitude. To make them love it is the task assigned, in present-day totalitarian states, to ministries of propaganda, newspaper editors and schoolteachers.”
This is how the seeds of authoritarianism are planted and watered and cultivated into aggressive, invasive growths that can quickly dominate an environment.
Remember, tyrants don’t always come to power in a show of force. Often, they sweet-talk their way to absolute power, buoyed along by a wave of populist demand for someone to save the country from economic, military and political crises.
As historian Jim Powell writes for Forbes:
Hitler didn’t take over a small government with an effective separation of enumerated, delegated and limited powers. He took over a large welfare state… He dealt with unemployment by introducing forced labor for both men and women. Government control of the economy made it virtually impossible for anyone to seriously threaten his regime. Hitler added secret police, death camps and another war machine. The German educational system, which had inspired so many American progressives, played a major role in all this… the government gained complete control of schools and universities, and their top priority was teaching obedience. The professorial elite promoted collectivism. The highest calling was working for the government.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2017/01/65183.html
I looked it up. You are wrong. Look at all the rights you have lost ....since power was consolidated in to the hands of a few Elites.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/12/happy-bill-rights-day-none.html
Again, progressives are more aligned with the Nazi party than most think. Believing that the feds have the people's interests in mind is a true fallacy that is promulgated by the media and the Dems in D.C.
To be fair, Hitler was praising Lincoln in Mein Kampf for his role in destroying state's rights. The D's are not alone in this.
Similar threads
