http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/ Concordia res Parvae Crescunt Wed, 23 May 2012 21:26:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-316920 The Lehigh Valley Independent’s Tenther Coverage | Tenth Amendment Center Blog Tue, 27 Apr 2010 21:56:32 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-316920 [...] it may seem like an academic distinction, it certainly is not.  The Founders debated this issue in depth and wanted to make sure that the federal government wasn’t hamstrung, and unable to deal with [...] [...] it may seem like an academic distinction, it certainly is not.  The Founders debated this issue in depth and wanted to make sure that the federal government wasn’t hamstrung, and unable to deal with [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-316436 The Lehigh Valley Independent’s Tenther Coverage | Pennsylvania Tenth Amendment Center Sat, 24 Apr 2010 05:02:02 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-316436 [...] it may seem like an academic distinction, it certainly is not.  The Founders debated this issue in depth and wanted to make sure that the federal government wasn’t hamstrung, and unable to deal with [...] [...] it may seem like an academic distinction, it certainly is not.  The Founders debated this issue in depth and wanted to make sure that the federal government wasn’t hamstrung, and unable to deal with [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-311767 Tenth Amendment 101: Essential Reading | Utah Tenth Amendment Center Sun, 28 Mar 2010 19:57:22 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-311767 [...] The Original Meaning of an Omission [...] [...] The Original Meaning of an Omission [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-306639 10th Amendment 101: Essential Reading for Tenthers | California Tenth Amendment Center Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:56:58 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-306639 [...] The Original Meaning of an Omission [...] [...] The Original Meaning of an Omission [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-291312 MichaelBoldin Thu, 05 Nov 2009 21:15:41 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-291312 Great comment, Wendy - looking forward to seeing more feedback from you around here in the near future! Great comment, Wendy – looking forward to seeing more feedback from you around here in the near future!

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-291062 Wendy Weinbaum Wed, 04 Nov 2009 03:10:10 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-291062 Gun Control is the last refuge of the coward. As a Jewess in the US, may I remind everyone that America wasn't won with a registered gun? And that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk? That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!! -Wendy Weinbaum Gun Control is the last refuge of the coward. As a Jewess in the US, may I remind everyone that America wasn't won with a registered gun? And that criminals are stopped by FIREARMS, not by talk? That is why all REAL Americans put our 2nd Amendment FIRST!! -Wendy Weinbaum

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-290981 The Welfare State Corrupts Absolutely | Tenth Amendment Center Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:15:18 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-290981 [...] don’t how any theory of political obligation rooted in popular sovereignty that could regard this bill as morally binding when it becomes “law.” The process mocks the [...] [...] don’t how any theory of political obligation rooted in popular sovereignty that could regard this bill as morally binding when it becomes “law.” The process mocks the [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-285688 Misunderstanding Necessary and Proper | Tenth Amendment Center Blog Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:24:21 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-285688 [...] it may seem like an academic distinction, it certainly is not.  The Founders debated this issue in depth and wanted to make sure that the federal government wasn’t hamstrung, and unable to deal with [...] [...] it may seem like an academic distinction, it certainly is not.  The Founders debated this issue in depth and wanted to make sure that the federal government wasn’t hamstrung, and unable to deal with [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-282018 Shuster: Tenth Amendment is a Bunch of Baloney | Tenth Amendment Center Blog Fri, 11 Sep 2009 23:02:27 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-282018 [...] The Original Meaning of an Omission [...] [...] The Original Meaning of an Omission [...]

]]> http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/27/the-original-meaning-of-an-omission/comment-page-1/#comment-272815 Jeff Tue, 04 Aug 2009 01:58:52 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/?p=2550#comment-272815 I agree with the premises that the 10th amendment is intended to limit federal powers to the enumerated powers. However, the civil war gave "states' rights" a bad name that lasts until the present. The justification of slavery under the heading of states' rights is an association deep in the American psyche. Then add to this corruption of business and government at the state and local levels and the rise of populism and progressivism, and we had a formula for steady growth of federal power. The states' right doctrine is constitutionally correct, and limits federal government. I think the pendulum should swing back in that direction in light of egregious invasions against our liberties; yet, what arguments can I advance against the expansion of federal power occasioned by these movements? Thanks. I agree with the premises that the 10th amendment is intended to limit federal powers to the enumerated powers. However, the civil war gave “states’ rights” a bad name that lasts until the present. The justification of slavery under the heading of states’ rights is an association deep in the American psyche. Then add to this corruption of business and government at the state and local levels and the rise of populism and progressivism, and we had a formula for steady growth of federal power. The states’ right doctrine is constitutionally correct, and limits federal government. I think the pendulum should swing back in that direction in light of egregious invasions against our liberties; yet, what arguments can I advance against the expansion of federal power occasioned by these movements?
Thanks.

]]>