Comments on: Obama’s Fake Federalism

By: towergem

towergem — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 03:53:14 +0000

agreen most of your points

By: Texas Slim

Texas Slim — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 17:11:08 +0000

So, the only thing you actually documented was that stimulus funds came with federal strings. But those funds were optional. Where is the violation of state sovereignty

By: MichaelBoldin

MichaelBoldin — Sun, 29 Nov 2009 06:30:50 +0000

I agree with the end result – but don't expect the party (or parties) in power to "relinquish power back to the states." They never will – and they'll just continue doing what they've been doing all along…..taking more and more power each and every year.

It's going to take people and states taking that power back – whether the party in power wants us to or not.

By: Jason

Jason — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 02:26:53 +0000

I actually think the only way for this to happen is for the party in power (whichever that might be) to relinquish power back to the states as designed. There doesn't have to be agreement or compromise, there has to be a relinquishing of rights back to the people. Kind of like when President (and could have been King) George Washington stepped down. Just one of many examples, but I'm praying that one day we'll have a president that understands and respects this instead of power hungry parties that attempt to ram things down the other parties throat instead of allowing them to live in their own state their own way.

By: Obama’s Fake Federalism | The Ruthless Truth blog

Obama’s Fake Federalism | The Ruthless Truth blog — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 04:27:49 +0000

[...] http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/11/20/obamas-fake-federalism/ Easy AdSense by Unreal Bookmark It Hide Sites [...]

By: Bryce Shonka

Bryce Shonka — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 19:00:18 +0000

Double-plus good article and 1984 reference! This inconsistency in policy illustrates thne contempt that the feds have for our system of government.

By: Michael Boldin

Michael Boldin — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 05:31:20 +0000

In comparison to the centralizers we have today, they were ALL federalists! (Real ones,that is)

By: Mark

Mark — Sat, 21 Nov 2009 00:06:45 +0000

Hi,
I agree with every thing you said in the post… thank you!

I have one question…historically, weren't people with our point of view (10th Amendment), considered anti-federalists? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalism

By: MichaelBoldin

MichaelBoldin — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 23:18:46 +0000

Agreed, Monorprise! Like your comment on the blog, the idea of saying – "we'll support you on medical marijuana – support us on gun rights" or other issues….seems to work quite well. It's getting the normal opposing parties to work together to further their goals on a state level.

By: Monorprise

Monorprise — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 22:19:19 +0000

This is why the conservative states need a bargaining chip to force the liberals States to compromises with them in exchange for what they want.