Comments on: NH Sovereignty Resolution Makes Mainstream Media

By: Democrat = Socialist

Democrat = Socialist — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:47:18 +0000

What!? 21 States Claiming Sovereignty?…

You mean everyone isn’t on board the hopechange express?
I believe the intent of these bills is to let the federalÂ government know that the statesâ€™ sovereignty will not be overwrittenâ€¦ say in case certain gun ban laws get passedâ€¦ or other …

By: Yvan Ung

Yvan Ung — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 20:21:01 +0000

I was told that some of these 20 states, including and especially New Hampshire (or other states bordering Quebec) would watch carefully what's happening in Quebec. If Quebec secedes, some of these states will put their plans of sovereignty in motion.

By: Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:35:36 +0000

Yvan – I’m not familiar with any of this. Care to give a little more detail on what you’re referring to?

By: Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin — Tue, 03 Mar 2009 15:51:57 +0000

Tony – thanks for the head’s up on this. A lot of great things going on in the Free State!

By: Tony Dolz

Tony Dolz — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:35:46 +0000

New Hampshire House voting on New Hampshire Resolution on Wednesday, March 4th. Call and email. See http://www.NewHampshireResolution.com

By: GC

GC — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 18:32:05 +0000

Donor/Recipient States – 1982 to 2005

By: John

John — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:53:43 +0000

On that note, I forgot to mention – the fed govt uses a considerable amount of this money they take from us to bribe other countries into compliance. They liberally pay UN bills – then threaten to end funding when they dont get their way ….

Are these foreign nations also somehow obligated to remain loyal to the US government, for taking these bribes? It didnt work out when we bribed bin laden, or the taliban … whatever. It is what it is now, and NH nor any other state is selling out their constitutional powers to the feds by taking some of the tax money back.

By: John

John — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:49:41 +0000

The fed TAKES more from the states via taxation of the citizens of the states than they would EVER imagine giving to a state. How else would they stay in business? Their only real income IS taxes.

It simple economics here, any mobster would agree. The fed takes from all the people of the states, then sets policy and gives a certain small amount of this taken money to the state government, IF the state complies with federal policies, such as drinking age …

By: Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:39:36 +0000

By the way, I do believe that New Hampshire is a net contributor to the federal government. Soooo saying "maybe you should not take the Federal Funding and split from the union" is actually a mistake, because NH has more taken from them than they get in return. A verification or a source on this would be great if anyone has it. I heard it while listening to New Hampshire based radio show, FreeTalkLive

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 18 Feb 2009 01:33:40 +0000

Rudedogg, there is only one party in this country: the banker’s party. It has been that way here for well over a hundred years. What kind of a map does a person have to have to understand there is no difference between the parties? If there were a difference, we’d have a helluva lot more than two parties. This stimulus is just a continuance of the Bush stimulus. Which is just a continuance of the breaking of the people. To hell with them.