• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

More heavy handedness

Tam

Well-known member
Sorry if this was posted before but I think it is important to point out since Oldtimer was worried if Palin would take Alaska's fair share.

I just heard the Stimulus money is just like the Bank Bailout. In the Bank Bailout, banks were forced to take the money even if they didn't want it. Wells Fargo for example was forced to take the money and then they were chastised by Obama for planning a Vegas trip.

It is supposedly written into the Stimulus package that States have to take the money like it or not. And when they take it they have to abide by Federal Government rules.

So I guess Palin can't refuse to take Alaska's fair share and she can't talk back to the Dems when she is forced to either. :wink:

No more pesty State governments running their our state Obama and the Dems will be dictating to all. :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Faster horses said:
I just heard that as well, Tam. The states will have to take the money then be dictated to by the government.

Wow.

Whats new- thats how Montana got their seat belt law- their speeding law- etc. etc. GW was trying to do the same with REAL-ID and mandatory ID...

Either you follow our rules- or you get cut out of the pot....And even tho Tam may not agree- I doubt there was a Governor/State Legislature that would turn down this money now-- not if they wanted to be re-elected next time.....
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Faster horses said:
I just heard that as well, Tam. The states will have to take the money then be dictated to by the government.

Wow.

Whats new- thats how Montana got their seat belt law- their speeding law- etc. etc. GW was trying to do the same with REAL-ID and mandatory ID...

Either you follow our rules- or you get cut out of the pot....And even tho Tam may not agree- I doubt there was a Governor/State Legislature that would turn down this money now-- not if they wanted to be re-elected next time.....

Maybe the States are going to have to take Lead from New Hampshire. :wink:
Legislators tell feds to back off
New speech, press, gun or ammunition limits 'altogether void'

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: February 05, 2009
By Bob Unruh
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

New Hampshire's state website promoting its attractions

Lawmakers in New Hampshire are telling the federal government to back off because plans for a federal handgun license, "hate crimes" laws to regulate Christians' speech about their own religious beliefs on homosexuality, President Obama's youth corps for mandatory public service and the so-called "Fairness Doctrine" to "balance" talk radio are none of them constitutional.

Such plans by the bureaucrats and administrators in Washington, D.C., are "altogether void" and if mandated, "shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States," the lawmakers are warning.

The terse alarm is contained in House Concurrent Resolution 6, which has been introduced for debate. It affirms states' rights "based on Jeffersonian principles."

It's not the first such move in the United States. WND reported last year when state representatives in Oklahoma, steamed over a perceived increase in federal usurping of states' rights, approved Joint House Resolution 1089 on a 92-3 vote to reassert the state's sovereignty under the 10th Amendment and serve "notice to the federal government to cease and desist certain mandates."

According to DailyPaul.com, a website assembled in support of U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, Missouri, Washington and Arizona also have moved in the direction of reasserting states' rights.

The Tenth Amendment states, "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people," and also is being cited in the New Hampshire plan.

It states that New Hampshire people "have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the United States of America…"

That means, the resolution states, any "Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of American or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government … and which serves to diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the United States of America by the government of the United States of America."
It lists as actions that the federal government would be prohibited from doing:


Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the States comprising the United States of America without the consent of the legislature of that State.


Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.


Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.


Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.


Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.


Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition.
New Hampshire Rep. Dan Itse, a sponsor of the resolution, said he wants New Hampshire to be among the states "standing up to the federal government, enforcing the Constitution."

He called the current status in the United States, with federal rules and regulations reaching into virtually every facet of a state citizen's life, "a usurpation by the federal judiciary of the people's right of self-government."

"What I see happening is a growing disregard for the rights of individuals and the rights of the states. At some point you have to draw the line," he told WND.

The resolution then, he said, is a warning.

"If you're in a marriage, and things are going rotten, it's not right just to all of a sudden hand the other party divorce papers. The right thing to do is say, 'there's a problem. Let's go to counseling.' This is in essence telling the general government if you continue down this road – you will have nullified the Constitution," he told WND.

He said New Hampshire lawmakers already have defied the federal government in approving a ban on the Real ID, a government program to stiffen identity procedures.

The New Hampshire resolution points out that New Hampshire was set up as "a free, sovereign and independent body-politic, or State" and when its residents ratified the U.S. Constitution they recommended: "That it be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be, by them Exercised."

In a direct attack on federal authority the resolution states: "Whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force."

It cites the specific powers given the federal government in the Constitution: to deal with treason, counterfeiting and piracy.

At American Thinker, commentator Larrey Anderson wrote that the plan is pending in the legislature's State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs Committee, and also is supported by Rep. Paul Ingbretson, Rep. Tim Comerford, and Sen. William Denley.

"Interestingly, the authors of the New Hampshire Resolution took most of the language from the document commonly known as 'Jefferson and Madison's Kentucky Resolutions of 1798,'" he wrote. "The New Hampshire Resolution boldly defends the state's (and it citizen's) rights preserved under the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution."

He noted a concurrent resolution lacks legal authority as a non-binding expression of the intentions of the legislature.

"Nevertheless, these four New Hampshire state legislators have shown much courage by introducing (or reintroducing) these precious principles that have been the bedrock of our republic," Anderson wrote. "Maybe HCR 6, the shot heard round little old New Hampshire, will inspire more Americans to realize the desperate need to free ourselves from an overreaching federal government. In which case, the shot heard round New Hampshire might become the next shot heard round the world."

Participants in the site's forum page said they were sending information on the resolution to lawmakers in Virginia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Michigan and other states. Several other participants said they wished their own lawmakers had such fortitude.

"At least one state gets it," said one forum participant. "We must free ourselves of that which I firmly believe wants to enslave us, our own government."
 

Mike

Well-known member
Several states are mulling sovereignty issues.

The Fed has the States by the balls. They hold most of the education money, highway money, and Medicaid money.

Maybe time has come to put the foot down on D.C.'s neck.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This is nothing new- especially for the Northeast....Maybe they could draft Sister Sarah for their leader as her and her hubby have been involved with the Alaskan secessionist movement...

Vermont has had a secession movement for the last four years, made up of what is now a think-tank called the Second Vermont Republic, a periodic newspaper called Vermont Commons, and various groups, most recently FreeVermont.Net, hoping to put the question of secession on the agenda of the state’s 230 town meetings by the year 2010. But only recently has it begun to get media notice, with articles in the Burlington Free Press, Los Angeles Times, and Philadelphia Enquirer, among others, and interviews on Vermont and New Hampshire public radio. Last year only 8 per cent of Vermonters favored secession, so an increase of 60 per cent suggests that the movement is on a roll.

http://middleburyinstitute.org/fromlittleacorns.html

New Hampshire Independence Platform
by Tracy Saboe
Last revised: June 30, 2006
It is not enough to merely demand independence. Independence has consequences for the citizens of this State. We are well aware of these consequences, and thus we are pleased to present our vision of what New Hampshire would look like sans the federal government.
http://www.republicofnh.org/platform.html

The Alaskan Independence Party's goal is the vote we were entitled to in 1958, one choice from among the following four alternatives:
1) Remain a Territory.
2) Become a separate and Independent Nation.
3) Accept Commonwealth status.

4) Become a State.
The call for this vote is in furtherance of the dream of the Alaskan Independence Party's founding father, Joe Vogler, which was for Alaskans to achieve independence under a minimal government, fully responsive to the people, promoting a peaceful and lawful means of resolving differences.
http://www.akip.org/
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
What was Sarah's position in the Alaskan secessionist movement?

She slept with it.......

The Alaska Independence Party basically wants a vote that includes the option of Alaska secession along with a return of all federal lands back to the state.

Sara Palin and the Alaska Independence Party

Was Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin ever a member of the AIP, an Alaskan separatist organization? Even though she delivered a video address to the controversial group's annual convention held in 2008, there is no documentation to support that Ms. Palin was ever a member of the Alaska Independent Party even though AIP chairperson Clark once claimed that she was, but then recanted. As mayor of Wasilla, Palin visited the 2000 convention when it was held in her town, and in 2006 during her gubernatorial campaign.

Husband Todd Palin, the so-called "First Dude", however, was a member in good standing of the Alaska Independent Party from 1995 to 2002, registering twice to vote as a member of the AIP. On their website, the Alaska Independence Party affirms that Todd Palin was a registered member, but "never participated in party activities."

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1060965/the_palins_and_the_alaska_secession.html?cat=75
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
What was Sarah's position in the Alaskan secessionist movement?

She slept with it.......

The Alaska Independence Party basically wants a vote that includes the option of Alaska secession along with a return of all federal lands back to the state.

Sara Palin and the Alaska Independence Party

Was Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin ever a member of the AIP, an Alaskan separatist organization? Even though she delivered a video address to the controversial group's annual convention held in 2008, there is no documentation to support that Ms. Palin was ever a member of the Alaska Independent Party even though AIP chairperson Clark once claimed that she was, but then recanted. As mayor of Wasilla, Palin visited the 2000 convention when it was held in her town, and in 2006 during her gubernatorial campaign.

Husband Todd Palin, the so-called "First Dude", however, was a member in good standing of the Alaska Independent Party from 1995 to 2002, registering twice to vote as a member of the AIP. On their website, the Alaska Independence Party affirms that Todd Palin was a registered member, but "never participated in party activities."

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1060965/the_palins_and_the_alaska_secession.html?cat=75

You said that she was involved in the movement. How was she involved in the movement?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Montana and Michigan have state sovereignty bills now as well!!!
Posted February 6th, 2009 by D4L

These two were posted late last night so I don't think anyone saw them. Montana's is based on firearms (of course) http://data.opi.mt.gov/bi...

From the Campaign for Liberty's Tony DeMott on Michigan.
http://www.dailypaul.com/...[/quote]
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
What was Sarah's position in the Alaskan secessionist movement?

She slept with it.......

The Alaska Independence Party basically wants a vote that includes the option of Alaska secession along with a return of all federal lands back to the state.

Sara Palin and the Alaska Independence Party

Was Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin ever a member of the AIP, an Alaskan separatist organization? Even though she delivered a video address to the controversial group's annual convention held in 2008, there is no documentation to support that Ms. Palin was ever a member of the Alaska Independent Party even though AIP chairperson Clark once claimed that she was, but then recanted. As mayor of Wasilla, Palin visited the 2000 convention when it was held in her town, and in 2006 during her gubernatorial campaign.

Husband Todd Palin, the so-called "First Dude", however, was a member in good standing of the Alaska Independent Party from 1995 to 2002, registering twice to vote as a member of the AIP. On their website, the Alaska Independence Party affirms that Todd Palin was a registered member, but "never participated in party activities."

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1060965/the_palins_and_the_alaska_secession.html?cat=75

You said that she was involved in the movement. How was she involved in the movement?

The First Dude belongs to /belonged to a secessionist party....

We just got thru a whole thread of how "good conservative/Republican women" should follow the beliefs of their husbands- and how no "good Republican/conservative man" would live with someone that didn't believe the same as him... :wink:
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
She slept with it.......

You said that she was involved in the movement. How was she involved in the movement?

The First Dude belongs to /belonged to a secessionist party....

We just got thru a whole thread of how "good conservative/Republican women" should follow the beliefs of their husbands- and how no "good Republican/conservative man" would live with someone that didn't believe the same as him... :wink:

You sleep with your wife !! Does that make you a nurse!!!
or her a qualified JUDGE
Opps you are not really qualified to be a judge only a justice pf the peace!

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
You said that she was involved in the movement. How was she involved in the movement?

The First Dude belongs to /belonged to a secessionist party....

We just got thru a whole thread of how "good conservative/Republican women" should follow the beliefs of their husbands- and how no "good Republican/conservative man" would live with someone that didn't believe the same as him... :wink:

Oh touche. Very clever.

Is "clever" a snyonym for "dodging the question"?

How was Sarah involved in the movement?
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Sandhusker said:
Oldtimer said:
She slept with it.......

You said that she was involved in the movement. How was she involved in the movement?

The First Dude belongs to /belonged to a secessionist party....

We just got thru a whole thread of how "good conservative/Republican women" should follow the beliefs of their husbands- and how no "good Republican/conservative man" would live with someone that didn't believe the same as him... :wink:

Sarah was never a member according to Wikipedia she has been a Republican for the last 27 years she joined in 82,
Also From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Since its founding, the AIP has radically changed with respect to the issue of secession. At present, it does not support secession, though, at its founding, it did.

Why didn't you check to see what the party believes now. According to Wikipedia there is only a fringe group within the AIP loyal to Vogler's (the founder) original vision that still support secession but not the whole party. Unless you have proof Todd is in that small fringe group you have nothing as usual. :wink:
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
OT knows that Sarah wasn't involved. He was just saying crap and I pegged him on it.

OT, if you have to make up crap to back your position, you need to reexamine your position.
 

Tam

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
OT knows that Sarah wasn't involved. He was just saying crap and I pegged him on it.

OT, if you have to make up crap to back your position, you need to reexamine your position.

He is so desperate to get something on Palin's he even thinks The Kos is a reliable source :lol: :lol:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
I do not blame Alaska for wanting its own independence, they have a high cost of living but sit on some of the most profitable land in the world.

But people like Pelosi 1,000's of miles away want to dictate what they can do with their own land!

How would ranchers on here like it if all of a sudden someone came in and told them they could no longer raise cattle, to go get a job at the local plant just because Nancy Pelosi said so!

If I was Alaska I would become Canadian and start drilling for oil! W

With Mrs Greg's approval of course! :wink: :lol:
 
Top