What If We Had A Redstate Rebellion? (Part 1)

No, I am not talking about secession. I’m talking about red states taking back their state’s rights as the constitution, the law of the land, provides. If there is one thing conservatives and libertarians  agree on, it is the constitution should be followed to the letter.

Okay, how do we get where we want to go? It is argued, and rightly so, that it took the usurpers over a hundred years to bring about this unconstitutional monstrosity in Washington and it will take many years to undo it. We have to live with that fact. But, do we seriously belive we will get by years of tryint to educate the brain-dead american voter? It’s not going to happen. Do we seriously believe that we can eventually fill the House, the Senate and the executive branch with conservatives and keep them in place fo many years and that they will undo the source of their own power? I’m sorry but I don’t see that happening either.

You have probably guessed that I am talking about nullification again and you would be right. Imagine if you would one or more of the reddest of the red-states with a governor and the majority of the state legislature that believed in the constitution and states rights. What if they stood up to the no longer constitutional federal government  and declared that their state would no longer abide by federal laws and mandates that they believed to be unconstitutional. It is their constitutional right and their obligation to do so. But, you say. the federal courts and the Supreme Court would come down on the side of the federal government. That’s true. And, I know that the Supreme Court has declared that they have the final word on what is or is not constitutional. That is, of course absurd and illogical. How can anyone belive that unelected judges have the ultimate say over our citizenry. Donning a black robe does not make a person honest and all wise. The vast majority of judges are just as political as the politicians that appoint them. The constitution gives limited and enumerated powers to the federal government and all powers not given to the federal government reside with the people of the individual states. Consider this. There are two reasons a federal law can be unconstitutional. If a federal law violates our guaranteed rights, as laid out in the Bill of Rights, it is unconstitutional. If a federal law, no matter how much we may like it, is not within the enumerated powers of the federal government, it is unconstitutional. The argument that nullification would lead to chaos I think is without merit. It only seems like it would be chaotic because we have become accustomed to living under the supreme power of the federal government. What is wrong with states deciding what if any safety nets they will provide for the poor? What is wrong with states deciding for themselves on such things education policies or environmental policies ( constitutionally they would have to protect life and property) or land use policies  and much more? People can vote with their feet if they like policies of one state over another.

So then, if a very red red-state wanted to take back its constitutional states rights, how might they go about it. It would seem to be a very complex process. Well, fortunately my favorite constitutional scholar, Plubius-Huldah, has developed a template that any state could use. She based her template was patterned after The Kentucky Resolutions of 1798, written by Thomas Jefferson in response to the alien and sedition acts passed by Congress. As she typically does, she backs up everything with references to tha appropriate Federalist Paper. These words in her last paragraph in Article 1. caught my attention immediately.

That the federal government is not a party to the Constitution, but is merely the creature of the Constitution;

How much clearer could she be? The federal government is NOT a party to the constitution. The federal government is but a CREATURE of the constitution. later she backs up the same claim about the Supreme Court. I urge you, dear readers, to bookmark this article and not just read it but in your own time study it and think about it.

At the end of her notes, which are also must reads, Plubius-Huldah has this to says:

So what should we do?  Revolution and bloodshed? No!  There is a better way, and our Framers show us:  On behalf of The People of their States, The State Legislatures must now resort to that original right of self-defense which pre-exists & pre-dates The Constitution; and must nullify those acts of the federal government which are outside the scope of the powers We delegated to it in Our Constitution.

The Model Resolutions  set forth the Authorities on which they are based, so that State Legislators may propose them in their State Legislatures with complete confidence that Our Framers “have their backs”. PH

This is a lawful rebellion I am calling for, my friends. Please stay tuned for Part 2 of What If We Had A Red-State Rebellion?

Well that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Advertisements

26 thoughts on “What If We Had A Redstate Rebellion? (Part 1)

  1. Nullification was tried before and was bitch-slapped by Jackson. Secession? Well we know how successful that was. Sadly I don’t really see any options. Federalism is a dead letter and the federal government will grow stronger and stronger. It’s inevitable.

    I wish I could be more optimistic but I can’t.

      1. Not knowing anything about this topic, i was about to say good idea, but looks like Infidel has poured cold reality over us.

        Can it ever be fixed, perhaps it is not in our nature to do so.

  2. You might want to consider in Part II what I consider to be one of the biggest obstacles. The Federal Government has gained substantial power over the states and their citizens by funding what many, at least at the beginning, considered to be desirable initiatives. It’s like the old story of a frog placed in tepid water. It feels good and he does not even try to jump out. Then, the water warms gradually and the frog eventually realizes it’s too hot for comfort. However, by then he can’t jump out and gets cooked.

    Colonel West, whom I greatly admire, recently supported passage of a frog in the water bill that would entice the states to adopt uniform regulations on teenage driving. Federal funding would be the principal enticement and that is a very difficult enticement to resist. Once federal funding has been provided, it becomes even more difficult to relinquish it.

    Many of the ideas in the bill strike me as good ones that the individual states should consider; not all states have the same needs. And, of greater importance, more regulations could easily be added at the whim of the Secretary of Transportation; the bill so provides. Then, a dissenting state that failed to comply would be deprived of some or all of the federal funding upon which it had come to rely. That sort of thing has happened so many times that we should expect it.

      1. Jim,

        I’m willing to let the next four years go to the America-hating Socialist “president” we currently have, specifically to give myself and True Conservatives four years to organize.

        That price is not too high, and I am hoping more True Conservatives will accept it and strengthen their spines instead of being willy-nillies.

      2. I’m not so worried about the spines of conservatives, One Guy, as I am about the millions of brain-dead voters. Four more years of Obama and another thirty or forty million more on food stamps and another one or two percent more who don’t pay income taxes and we may never be able to reclaim our country from the socialists.

      3. Never and Always are feminist words when used this side of Heaven. Only Jesus can use the words never and always and really mean them.

        Jim, if indeed there is no hope, then why bother blogging? If Obama wins, what shall you do? What will your family do? Will America devolve into some weird quasi post-apocalyptic world where Conservatives are hunted down and either slain or imprisoned?

        We’re better than that, Jim. The ignorant masses will always follow the shiny objects. They will breed themselves into obscurity, one can only hope. Besides, do you believe this is a war of flesh and bone or is there something Bigger going on?

        Jim, seriously, don’t go quitting on any of us. It’s only money, and it isn’t yours anyway. At least, the money I have isn’t mine; I’m merely stewarding it. You may have your own money, I couldn’t say.

        Don’t worry about the others who don’t know any better. They will be attended to, like lost sheep.

      4. The use of the word ‘never’ denotes quitting. I detest quitters, Jim, or men who need to buck up.

        That’s all.

        Either you’re going to accept the future or you’re going to shape it.

        I apologize for my curtness, but I don’t have the luxury of sparing feelings.

  3. I think it could be done, but many states would have to band together and do it all at once. They would have to simultaneously bring suit in a court of law over what specifically their grievance is. It would take awhile to play out, it would be messy, but the states would probably end up winning.

    BTW, I think this is what needs to happen. It needs to be fought out in the courts and in statehouses and congress.

  4. Jim, you know my position. The Constitution has been usurped since it was originally drafted. It is a compromise to the Articles of Confederation which put forth a Federal Government too weak for the Statists. Boy, did we ever swing the pendulum too far in the wrong direction.

    Clearly, the solution lies with the people themselves. There lies the problem as well. I haven’t seen the evidence supporting a consensus of Americans willing to break away from the dependency nation and that must happen at some point for any plan to succeed.

    I do like the spirit of your idea. Concentrating on our strengths and trying to light a fire makes good strategic sense.

  5. In a sense, the states are also on the government plantation. Any state that starts showing too much independence is told that their highway money, medicaid money, law enforcement money, and education money will go away. A state would have to make sure that they are as independent as possible in order to avoid an in internal collapse.

    1. Sadly Matt, this is the biggest impedement to nullification. The feds simply have too much of our money and will basically make it impossible for a state to survive unless it conforms to the will of the feds.

  6. The solution to the problem starts at the local level. Until we get our house in order on the local level how can we ever hope to change things on the national level? There are plenty of local city ordinances on the books that are just as oppressive as federal regulations. A change must occur from the bottom up. It must start with the school boards and grow to the city council, to the county, and finally to the state. Only then will we have a chance to push back and take back our country. That’s my two cents for what its worth.

  7. It’s a very good idea. Wishful thinking at the minute, but still. If things got bad enough, some red states might very well decide to ween themselves from the federal crackpipe, as it were.

  8. Well, the way things are going, the states and the people might not have any choice. The Fed is running out of other people’s money and pretty soon, all those people on the dole are going to find out the check isn’t coming in the mail this month or next or ever again.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s