Did the Founding Fathers Give Unlimited Power to Government

Comments Off on Did the Founding Fathers Give Unlimited Power to Government

Here’s some amazing info about the founding fathers and our current president’s czars.

Advertisements

Montana Leans from Left to Stupid..

Comments Off on Montana Leans from Left to Stupid..

Nearly 5 years ago, we sat on my radio show and said that if this country were to change, a sleeping giant would have to wake. We the People would have to try to stop it first at the ballot box. The Tea Party was organized from simple meetings across this great country of ours and a fire of freedom was borne to carry that torch. Now, unfortunately, the left leaning social side of the country is fighting back with shouting and name-calling and making comparisons to the peaceful events that conservatives began with the tea party rally’s.  Look what is happening in Wisconsin, Ohio and Indiana. Taxpayers pay for the unionized state workers pensions and insurance.  When the newly elected governors attempt to do what they campaigned to do, they meet this resistance. Immediately the left jumps on it saying that this is not what the country wants. Even Bill O’Reilly, a union member, is doubting.

Well, fellow Patriots, we don’t need to back down. We don’t need to let them remove the vision of taking this country back.  Here is an article about Montana’s governor saying that the Tea Party’s objective is civil war. Don’t let things like this discourage you. Take them for what they are, carpet baggers who don’t want their money machines dismantled. Read carefully what the tea party backed candidates answer with. This government has always belonged to the People, not the congress who disgrace us every time they mutter that they’re working for the People. The lie like a cheap rug…they work for themselves..

This article is from Yahoo News and the AP…obviously who lean to the left. My comments in red:

Tea party vision for Mont. raising concerns

AP

AFP/Getty Images/File – A Tea Party activist prepares for a ‘Get Out The Vote’ rally in Philadelphia. A variety of Tea …
By MATT GOURAS, Associated Press Matt Gouras, Associated Press Thu Feb 24, 5:13 pm ET

HELENA, Mont. – With each bill, newly elected tea party lawmakers are offering Montanans a vision of the future.

Their state would be a place where officials can ignore U.S. laws, force FBI agents to get a sheriff’s OK before arresting anyone, ban abortions, limit sex education in schools and create armed citizen militias. (Notice they say ignore US laws. The only laws that SHOULD BE ignored are the unconstitutional things that these idiots put out. No member of the Tea Party that I know of has ever said ignore the law. They have said “repeal” the law. The 10th Amendment, and state statutes  allows a duly elected Sheriff to be the chief law enforcement officer of the county he is elected in. and yes to the rest, because they are unconstitutional or immoral.)

It’s the tea party world. But not everyone is buying their vision.

Some residents, Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer and even some Republican lawmakers say the bills are making Montana into a laughingstock. And, they say, the push to nullify federal laws could be dangerous. (After reading this story, you decide who is the laughing stock. Do you think that people in 1770 thought that nullifying British rule was not dangerous?)

“We are the United States of America,” said Schweitzer. “This talk of nullifying is pretty toxic talk. That led to the Civil War.” The governor should read his history on the cause of the civil war. One of the main quarrels was about taxes paid on goods brought into this country from foreign countries. This tax was called a tariff. Southerners felt these tariffs were unfair and aimed specifically at them because they imported a wider variety of goods than most Northern people. Southern exporters sometimes had to pay higher amounts for shipping their goods overseas because of the distance from southern ports and sometimes pay unequal tariffs imposed by a foreign country on some of their goods. An awkward economic structure allowed states and private transportation companies to do this, which also affected Southern banks that found themselves paying higher interest rates on loans made with banks in the North. The situation grew worse after several “panics”, including one in 1857 that affected more Northern banks than Southern. Southern financiers found themselves burdened with high payments just to save Northern banks that had suffered financial losses through poor investment.)

A tea party lawmaker said raising the specter of a civil war is plain old malarkey.

“Nullification is not about splitting this union apart,” freshman Rep. Derek Skees said. “Nullification is just one more way for us to tell the federal government: ‘That is not right.”

Some of their bills are moving through the legislature. Others appear doomed: an armed citizen militia, FBI agents under the thumb of the sheriff and a declaration that global warming is good for business.

Whatever their merits, the ideas are increasingly popping up in legislatures across the nation, as a wave of tea party-backed conservatives push their anti-spending, anti-federal government agenda.

Arizona, Missouri and Tennessee are discussing the creation of a joint compact, like a treaty, opposing the 2010 health care law. Idaho is considering a plan to nullify it, as is Montana.

In Montana, the GOP gained a supermajority in the Montana House in last year’s election, giving Republicans control of both legislative chambers. Half of the 68 House Republicans are freshman, many sympathetic to the new political movement.

Over the first 45 days of the new legislature, they have steadily pushed their proposals. Some have moved out of committee.

Examples include a bill making it illegal to enforce some federal gun laws in the state, and another aimed at establishing state authority over federal regulation of greenhouse gasses.

Schweitzer is watching, describing many of the proposals from the new majority as simply “kooky,” such as a plan to make it legal to hunt big game with a spear.

Hardly a day goes by, however, that the merits of “nullification” aren’t discussed.

Proponents draw on Thomas Jefferson’s late 18th-century argument that aimed to give states the ultimate say in constitutional matters and let them ban certain federal laws in their borders.

Supporters are not dissuaded by the legal scholars who say the notion runs afoul of the clause in the U.S. Constitution that declares federal law “the supreme law of the land.” (As agreed on by the varied states in the Constitutional convention. But as issued, states were not robbed of their power and sovereignty with the 10th Amendment. It never was intended that the Federal government would lord over the states, it absolutely intended to PREVENT it. Article 6 merely gives Federal Law the trump card when deciding constitutional issues, it does not abolish state law, nor does it allow Federal enforcement against state law within the state.  Rather than being a mere afterthought, Article 6 plays a major role in defining the relationship between the government of the nation and those of the states. The superiority of the national government has played a crucial role in the shaping and development of a cohesive nation of states, each striving to meet and implement similar goals and policies, but it never intended that the state was subservient, it only bound them all together under a common law. One thing that these “scholars of the constitution” need to remember, it was the STATES who created the Federal Government, not the other way around. It was NEVER the intention to just give up and recreate another monarchy.

Backers of nullification say they can get the federal government to back down off a law if enough states band together against it.

They point to the REAL ID act — a Bush-era plan to assert federal control over state identifications as a way to combat terrorism. The law has been put in limbo after 25 states adopted legislation opposing it.

The nullification debate reached a fever pitch this week when tea party conservatives mustered enough votes in the House to pass a 17-point declaration of sovereignty.

“States retain the right of protecting all freedoms of individual persons from federal incursion,” the measure in part reads. Now, it heads to the Senate, where ardent states’ rights conservatives have less influence and its fate is less certain.

House Minority Leader Jon Sesso stood in the House Chamber, exasperated. He peppered Republicans with questions: Who decides if the federal government is acting unconstitutionally?

“Who among us is making these determinations that our freedoms are being lost?” he asked, an incredulous expression on his face as he eyed the Republican side of the chamber.

Republican Rep. Cleve Loney rose. A man of few words, the tea party organizer replied: “I don’t intend us to secede from the union. But I will tell you it is up to us. We are the people to decide.” AMEN!

The political movement that caught Democrats by surprise at the ballot box also caught them flat-footed at the Legislature.

At first they rolled their eyes, but now they are quickly ramping up their opposition, even recycling a slogan once leveled by conservatives against liberals protesting the Vietnam War.

“I say to you: ‘This is America: Love it or leave it,'” shouted Rep. William McChesney, during the sovereignty declaration debate.

Some Republicans have turned against the more aggressive tea party ideas.

“You are scaring the you-know-what out of them with this kind of talk,” veteran Republican lawmaker Walt McNutt said. “This needs to stop and stop now. Stop scaring our constituents and stop letting us look like a bunch of buffoons.” And fair warning to the RINOS and Republicrats…your day is coming as well if you do not respect the will of the people. Think of who swept into power here. The Republicans were less thought of than the democrats in the polls.

Democrats are resigned to losing many of the votes and in some cases have urged Republicans to trot the ideas out for floor debates for the public to see. And surprised residents are taking notice, especially of the nullification push.

“It would be hard for anyone to top what is going on here in terms of the insanity of it all,” said Lawrence Pettit, a retired university president and author living in Helena. “One could be amused by it, except it is too dangerous.”

Schweitzer, meanwhile, is getting ready for the bills that may arrive on his desk. On Wednesday, he got a new cattle brand from the state livestock agency that reads “VETO.” A branding iron is being made. I guess the people are going to pay for this folly of stupidity too.

“Ain’t nobody in the history of Montana has had so many danged ornery critters that needed branding,” he said.

Here’s what the Federal Government Does When It Doesn’t Get It’s Way

Comments Off on Here’s what the Federal Government Does When It Doesn’t Get It’s Way

Here’s proof the government knows it’s violating the 2nd amendment, but still wants to get it’s way. They do this every time they know they don’t have the Constitutional right to do whatever it is they want to do. They cut off your federal funds if you don’t comply……..of course complying is voluntary, but if you don’t voluntarily comply with the Federal Government’s unconstitutional acts, you lose Federal money your getting. This just shows the Federal Government knows it’s violating the Constitution, but knows how to force you and the States to comply anyway. Years ago they also did this with the voluntary 55 MPH speed limit, but if you didn’t lower the speed limit, guess what? You lost your road fund money. This proves ‘nullification’ is Constitutional and the Federal Government knows it.

States that balk at nation’s gun laws could lose federal funds: Schumer

States refusing to fully cooperate with the nation’s gun-control regulations could be stripped of their federal funds, Sen. Chuck Schumer warned Wednesday. (of course Schumer is a Democrat and they don’t control the House, but this gives you an idea how the Federal Government works when they’re doing something unconstitutional)

Millions of people – including drug abusers, criminals and the mentally ill – have been inadvertently left off national background check registry, including Tucson shooter Jared Lee Loughner and Virginia Tech gunman Seung Hoi-Cho.

States that fail to report to the database are currently docked 3% of their Justice Department funding – and a new bill would boost that penalty to 90%, Schumer said.

The Energy Solution by the Founding Fathers: the 10th Amendment

3 Comments

Here’s the answer to the Energy Crisis the Founding Fathers gave us. They were so intelligent and they knew the history of what governments would eventually do to it’s States and citizens, because as the scripture says.

The Tenth Amendment Energy Solution

The Middle East is burning and gas prices are exploding.   The price of oil shot above $100 a barrel and futures have gone about $110 a barrel.

What is Obama and his regime doing about this?

Nothing!

This should not be a shock to anyone.  Obama is a socialist who hates America.  He wants to see America in economic collapse.  Only if the economy is wrecked and America’s power destroyed can he and his socialist cronies replace the greatest economic system in the world with a failed system.

But, the good news is there is still time to stop him.

And the solution to some of our problems is found in the Tenth Amendment.

America is dependant on foreign energy sources only by the design of liberals who have for forty years or more, been trying to weaken this country.  Real Americans can say no to this and we can start now.

Texas can be our test case.  Obama and his regime have shut down drilling in the Gulf of Mexico for several reasons, not the least of which is it will drive up unemployment in the largest red state, Texas.

Texas should fight back by announcing it is going to drill as much oil as it wants within the confines of the territory of the State of Texas. Texas also has refineries, so that the oil produced in Texas can be refined in Texas.

There is no argument that the Constitution gives the Federal Government the right to regulate interstate commerce.  The Federal Government has no right to regulate intrastate commerce.  Texas can produce all the oil it wants and process it in Texas.  Now the down side for the rest of America is, that processed gas can only be sold in Texas, without triggering the Interstate Commerce Clause of the Constitution.

If Texas did this, first, unemployment in Texas would immediately drop.  Gas prices across the country, but especially in Texas would drop dramatically.   This would be a huge boost to the state economy that could spill over to neighboring states.

If the second largest state becomes energy independent, it diminishes the demand for oil in the rest of the country and the fact that Texas is producing oil is going to create downward pressure on the price of oil.

This can apply to other areas too.  Tennessee has a decent supply of coal and has coal fired power plants.  Obama wants to kill these. Tennessee should mine its own coal, fire its own plants, sell the power within the state and watch the left scream as we use the Constitution to defeat them.

As children, we were taught to respect the President.  He represents America.  Now we have a scenario that was previously unimaginable. We have an un-American President.  For the first time in our history, we have a President who not only does not believe this is the greatest country in the world but wants to see this country brought down.  We cannot stand by and idly let this happen.

In the next few months, we are going to see the highest gas prices we have ever seen.  The damage this is going to do to the economy will be incredible.  Our only hope until the 2012 elections is if States will step up to the plate and tell the Federal Government not only where to go but also how to get there.

Tea Party Nation

CWA union thug strikes young female FreedomWorks activist

Comments Off on CWA union thug strikes young female FreedomWorks activist

As you read this article and watch this video, ask your self, if this was a Tea Party protest and a tea party person grabbed the camera like this union thug did, wouldn’t the police be there to arrest them…………sure they would.

CWA union thug strikes young female FreedomWorks activist

By Michelle Malkin  •  February 23, 2011 05:30 PM

This is Tabitha Hale, a young conservative activist/original Tea Party organizer/blogger who works for Washington, D.C.-based FreedomWorks. I know her from her great grass-roots work with Smart Girl Politics when the Tea Party movement was just emerging.

Today, Big Labor groups took their Grievance March to the offices of FreedomWorks.

Among the groups protesting: the Communications Workers of America. They’re one of the heavyweight labor biggies that have received a coveted Obamacare Waiver for Favors. CWA facts here.

This is one of the CWA t-shirt-wearing goons who showed up at the protest at FreedomWorks today:

And this is what the CWA t-shirt-wearing goon did to Tabitha Hale. Watch:

<object style=”height: 390px; width: 640px”><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/zm_Fl3AszuU?version=3″><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”><param name=”allowScriptAccess” value=”always”></object>

Thankfully, Hale tells me she wasn’t hurt. But there is no doubt from this video that the CWA t-shirt-wearing goon should be prosecuted for assault.

They said it: “Get a little bloody.” It’s the union way.

Civility police, where are you now?

Michelle Malkin

Tennessee Senate Passes Health Care Freedom Act

Comments Off on Tennessee Senate Passes Health Care Freedom Act

Now…..that’s much more like it Tennessee legislators!!

Tennessee Senate Passes Health Care Freedom Act

On Wednesday, the Tennessee Senate passed SB0079, the Tennessee Health Care Freedom Act sponsored by Sen. Mae BeaversThe bill passed with 21 Ayes, 10 Nays, and one Present Not Voting. The Tennessee Health Care Freedom Act is essentially the same bill that passed in the Senate but failed in the House during the 2010 legislative session, with a few minor revisions.

Later in the afternoon, the House companion bill, HB0115 sponsored by Rep. Terri Lynn Weaver, was recommended for passage by the General Subcommittee of the House Commerce Committee. It will be forwarded to the full House Commerce Committee.  Contact information for the House Commerce Committee members is listed below. Please begin contacting them now to express your support.

The Tennessee Health Care Freedom Act seeks to return the choice of health care and health insurance to individual Tennesseans instead of leaving decisions in the hands of the federal government.  While SB0079 does not nullify the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in its entirety, it prohibits Tennesseans from being penalized if they choose not to participate in a federal or federally-approved health care plan. The bill states:

“The power to require or regulate a person’s choice in the mode of securing health care services, or to impose a penalty related thereto, is not found in the Constitution of the United States of America, and is therefore a power reserved to the people pursuant to the Ninth Amendment, and to the several states pursuant to the Tenth Amendment. This state hereby exercises its sovereign power to declare the public policy of this state regarding the right of all persons residing in this state in choosing the mode of securing health care services.”

SB0079 goes on to declare the public policy of the state of Tennessee to be one where Tennesseans are free to choose any method of securing health care services or to refuse to do so without threat of penalty.  This is a crucial step forward in the fight to protect Tennesseans from the unconstitutional mandates imposed by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed by Congress last year.

The passage of the bill in the Senate is a victory, but we still need to keep up the fight to ensure that it passes through the House and is signed by the Governor.  Please begin today to contact the legislators below to express your support for HB0115.

House Commerce Committee

Rep. Steve McManus, Chair: Republican, District 96
107 WMB, (615) 741-1920, rep.steve.mcmanus@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Jon C. Lundberg, Vice-Chair: Republican, District 1
205 WMB, (615) 741-7623, rep.jon.lundberg@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Pat Marsh, Secretary: Republican, District 62
110 WMB, (615) 741-6824, rep.pat.marsh@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Charles Curtiss: Democrat, District 43
34 LP, (615) 741-1963, rep.charles.curtiss@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Linda Elam: Republican, District 57
215 WMB, (615) 741-7462, rep.linda.elam@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. JoAnne Favors: Democrat, District 29
25 LP, (615) 741-2702, rep.joanne.favors@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Brenda Gilmore: Democrat, District 54
22 LP, (615) 741-1997, rep.brenda.gilmore@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. G. A. Hardaway, Sr.: Democrat, District 92
109 WMB, (615) 741-5625, rep.ga.hardaway@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Bill W. Harmon: Democrat, District 37
24 LP, (615) 741-6849, rep.bill.harmon@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Ryan A. Haynes: Republican, District 14
203 WMB, (615) 741-2264, rep.ryan.haynes@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Curtis Johnson: Republican, District 68
212 WMB, (615) 741-4341, rep.curtis.johnson@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Phillip Johnson: Republican, District 78
104 WMB, (615) 741-7477, rep.phillip.johnson@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Jimmy Matlock: Republican, District 21
219 WMB, (615) 741-3736, rep.jimmy.matlock@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Don Miller: Republican, District 10
37 LP, (615) 741-6877, rep.don.miller@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Richard Montgomery: Republican, District 12
201 WMB, (615) 741-5981, rep.richard.montgomery@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Joe Pitts: Democrat, District 67
34 LP, (615) 741-2043, rep.joe.pitts@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Mark Pody: Republican, District 46
202 WMB, (615) 741-7086, rep.mark.pody@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Dennis Powers: Republican, District 36
G-4 WMB, (615) 741-3335, rep.dennis.powers@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. John D. Ragan: Republican, District 33
32 LP, (615) 741-4400, rep.john.ragan@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Dennis E. Roach: Republican, District 35
217 WMB, (615) 741-2534, rep.dennis.roach@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Charles Michael Sargent, Jr.: Republican, District 61
206 WMB, (615) 741-6808, rep.charles.sargent@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Cameron Sexton: Republican, District 25
17 LP, (615) 741-2343, rep.cameron.sexton@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. David A. Shepard: Democrat, District 69
34 LP, (615) 741-3513, rep.david.shepard@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Janis Baird Sontany: Democrat, District 53
32 LP, (615) 741-6861, rep.janis.sontany@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Art Swann: Republican, District 8
214 WMB, (615) 741-5481, rep.art.swann@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Curry Todd: Republican, District 95
209 WMB, (615) 741-1866, rep.curry.todd@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Joe Towns, Jr.: Democrat, District 84
36 LP, (615) 741-2189, rep.joe.towns@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Kent Williams: Independent, District 4
19 LP, (615) 741-7450, rep.kent.williams@capitol.tn.gov

Rep. Tim Wirgau: Republican, District 75
17 LP, (615) 741-6804, rep.tim.wirgau@capitol.tn.gov

Tennessee Tenth Amendment Center

President Obama Ignores the Constitution: Again

Comments Off on President Obama Ignores the Constitution: Again

Who does this president think he is? I’m losing count at the times he has ignored the Constitution or law. He ignored Judge Vinson with the declaring of Obamacare unconstitutional, the judge that said the moratorium on deep sea drilling was unconstitutional and something elese I can’t remember. Folks we’re in trouble when the commander in chief ignores the Constitution, he’s acting like a dictator that doesn’t have to obey the Constitution.

Obama declares Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional

Obama declares Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional

Reuters

The president orders the Department of Justice to stop defending Defense of Marriage Act in court

According to National Journal, President Obama has declared the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. The administration made the announcement a few minutes ago and will alert Congress later today:

“The President believes that DOMA is unconstitutional. They are no longer going to be defending the cases in the 1st and 2nd circuits,” a person briefed on the decision said.

Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed the report in a statement to the press:

After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the President has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny. The President has also concluded (not a court or judge as the Constitution calls for) that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination.

Read full coverage at National Journal

Older Entries