Thursday, February 19, 2009
Striking a Blow For State's Rights
If you get a chance today, read this commentary from Examiner.com. It highlights the recent move by New Hampshire State Representative Daniel Itse to reassert states' rights in the face of the growing federal juggernaut.
Mr. Itse bases his bill on Jeffersonian principles, calling for New Hampshire to secede from the Union if federal usurpation reaches a certain level. He used the language of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, written in 1798 in response to the "Alien and Sedition Acts." Here's an excerpt from Itse's bill . . .
“That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not delegated to the government of United States of America by the Constitution for the United States of America 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. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are not limited to:
“I. 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.
“II. 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.
“III. 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.
“IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any corporation or foreign government.
“V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.
“VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition…” -- House Concurrent Resolution 6.
This could get interesting. Couple this bill with moves by the legislatures of 20 other states to reassert states' rights, and it's not hard to see where this could be going in the long run. Who knows if it will work or not.
One possibility to keep in mind. It is within the realm of speculation that the powers that be might want to provoke as much social unrest and agitation as possible. That desire would be in keeping with the principles of Marxists and other revolutionaries who see social chaos as desirable in achieving their overall goals for society. These types take advantage of crises to push through all sorts of draconian policies they might not be able to achieve in a time of calm. And in general, the bulk of the population is too blind to see it or acknowledge that it's even happening.
How about this for a scenario. Imagine getting the bulk of U.S. troops overseas in Afghanistan or some other place, and all of a sudden riots and unrest break out here. Imagine the Administration calling in troops from the United Nations to keep order on American streets. American troops would likely be very reticent to open fire on their fellow citizens. However, foreign "peacekeepers" might not have such scruples, as they would have no loyalty to this country. Crazy, isn't it?
Maybe. But maybe not.