Toys in the Attic Strikes Again

by Michael Boldin

Rachel Maddow doesn’t like me. I get that.

Without trying, though, I guess I’ve been getting under her skin. She obviously doesn’t like the fact that the Tenth Amendment Center’s efforts to promote nullification have been gaining some serious traction around the country. Just this week, Rach did a full 14 minute segment on the subject. And her presentation, as you might guess, wasn’t a cheer leading session either.

The segment, titled “Confederates in the Attic” was about how efforts today, primarily championed by the Tenth Amendment Center, to decentralize power and reject unconstitutional federal “laws,” are somehow directly-related to slave owners in the pre-civil war south.

No. That’s not a joke.

She says “a conservative group called the Tenth Amendment Center has been pushing a lot of the anti-health reform stuff…in the context of nullification. And they’re pushing for other kinds of nullification too.”

Ok, other than the absurdity of using the term “conservative” to define an anti-drug war, antiwar, anti-patriot act organization started in 2006 in opposition to GW Bush, she’s right on the money here.

The Center has been pushing anti-health reform stuff? Yup. We drafted the model bill, the Federal Health Care Nullification Act. Versions of our legislation – to either fully nullify or refuse compliance with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare), have been introduced in 11 states so far, and it’s making headway in a few too.

We’re pushing for other kinds of nullification too? Ab-so-freakin-lutely.

Two for two. Good job, Rachel!

But here’s where she goes off the reservation into heavy “War profiteer masters” spin mode. You see, Rachel’s job, like everyone at MSNBC, CNN, Fox and the rest of the mainstream media, is to keep convincing people that the only way to think is in a battle of democrat vs republican. Conservative vs liberal. One side is your friend, the other is your enemy. While left fears right and right fears left, her and her buddies keep getting more money and more power.

Sun Tzu would’ve been proud at this modern iteration of his strategy to divide and conquer.

Rachel continues – by telling her audience of the crazy stuff that the Tenth Amendment Center is pushing, and that states are actually working on. Here’s a few:

Food Freedom Act – nullifying the “Food safety and modernization act,”
Firearms Freedom Act – nullifying some federal gun laws and regulations
Intrastate Commerce Act – all products made or grown in state and sold in state are not under federal purview.
EPA Nullification – nullifying some or all EPA regulations

Without getting into the details of how she twisted each and every one of these efforts, it’s easiest to sum it up with this single statement of hers in rounding up the nullification movement:

“Your federal laws don’t apply here, Yankees!”

You don’t like a federal law and work to oppose it in your state? You must love the slave-ownin’ south. Wow, how insightful, Rachel!

So, is Rachel Maddow just a jerk, is she a liar, or is she ignorant? Hard to say, but let me share a little perspective.

I don’t fool myself into thinking that a majority of Rachel’s audience is going to be supportive of everything that we’re working to nullify – especially things like gun laws and the EPA. But, I do know in my own experience through interviews with places like Mother Jones, Raw Story, Huffington Post, and others, that there is some strong support on particular issues.

While Rachel was talking about what she wants you to believe is a racist, evil nullification movement being pushed by the TAC, she had this picture showing – a somewhat-modified version of our live Legislative Tracking page:

Did Rachel do her journalistic duty and report on the top-listed efforts of the Nullification movement, or did she pick and choose just a few in order to frame the discussion in a left vs right cat fight?

I wonder.

She talked about guns, food safety, the EPA and even Constitutional Tender Acts. But, why oh why did she skip over any and everything that would be of interest to her own audience?

The answer is pretty obvious to me.

So what did Rachel skip reporting on? Let’s see.

The number one thing listed on that page – unreadable on TV – is “state marijuana laws.”

You’d think if she were “reporting” on efforts that the TAC was pushing, she’d at least mention the first thing on our list. But, what could Rachel use to scare her mostly-liberal audience there? “These neo-confederates are trying to destroy the union by refusing to comply with the drug war! Beware!!”

Or, right below that red MSNBC graphic blob, you could see, click and learn about how 25 states, championed by the ACLU, passed laws to reject Bush’s 2005 Real ID act.

Would Rachel have then said, “The ACLU wants us to believe we can just pick and choose what laws to follow. That’s what Calhoun said in South Carolina – and it led directly to the civil war!”

Or, just below that, you could see how the Tenth Amendment Center is working to promote efforts to nullify TSA body scanners and violations of the 4th Amendment – as referenced by the Raw Story here.

“These conservatives want the terrorists to win, and they’re willing to let radical Islamo-fascists get on planes without being body-scanned. Do they really want another civil war?” Is that Maddow’s view on the TSA?

And, just one more – she also skipped over our Defend the Guard act, which is a first step effort towards ending unconstitutional wars from the bottom up. The bill was just introduced in Maine – with 2 republican and 4 democrat co-sponsors.

I wonder how Rachel would’ve dealt with that one. Maybe something like, “Barack Obama is trying to do his duty as commander in chief and keep this country safe. These confederate states don’t like our boys in uniform and are obviously part of the blame-America-first crowd. If the nullifers win, we just might be invaded by Libya!”

No. She’d never do any of that. I’d respect her more if she did, though.

Why? Because at least she’d be consistent in principle. Which, of course, she’s not. Partisan hack comes to mind, but I think that’s too soft a term.

To support nullification, you don’t have to be from the right or the left. You just have to decide that enough is enough, that you want to determine you own rules in your own area. Don’t expect that to be in the next segment, though. Zombies attack!

Next time, maybe she’ll call me before reporting on the TAC again. Maybe. But, I doubt it.

Enjoyed This Post?

We cannot succeed without your help, as we will never accept government grants or handouts. Please help us by investing in the Constitution and freedom today!

Enjoyed This Post?
46 comments
John
John

I find it interesting that some replies to accurate posts here are sometimes statements that twist the original meaning of the author's post. I think all need to read the Tenth Amendment and realize that it applies to a totally different way of thinking about federal government then we were taught. As stated, the federal government was meant to have limited and enumerated powers. Recently I saw a Utah U.S. House congressman on television eloquently making a similar point, and he stated that this issue is not about a Republican or Democrat issue, but it's about operating government as the Founding Fathers intended, with strict limitations on federal power. This would mean, for instance, that abortion (just one of many issues) would be legislated only at the state level, unless there was a national amendment to the Constitution. This is a pretty simply concept, isn't it? And I ask that the ad hominem arguments -- if one can't argue clearly against the argument for the reimplementation of the 10th Amendment, then one should not reply in all fairness. Finally, please also read http://www.usa-the-republic to understand why the 14th amendment was never properly ratified -- just another reason why the 10th Amendment needs to be restored completely. May the truth prevail and may God, the author of truth, be with us! For God and Country!

Quinno
Quinno

any laws made to restrict your beliefs and actions are laws not of common but of ucc and admirilty............. for what is common law? "through any action you may take, if you hurt or destroy anothers person or property you may at the behest of your peers, be tried by a group of you peers as to the act and to its severity". You see the law of God is paramount to the laws of man................ And in the declaration of independence lies the power through God to settle any problem...................... We dont need mans law to place gray areas on us only the profound justice through jesus Christ who will at the end decide all venues and judgements upon us.

@Crankshaft
@Crankshaft

It's funny she compares 10 AC supporters to confederates who supported slavery especially since the northerners actually used nullification to help end slavery with the underground railroad, but I would bet this irony would be beyond Miss Madow since you'd have to actually know history and care about more about the truth than pushing a political agenda to appreciate such things. http://captkarl.blogivists.com/2011/02/24/the-unt...

Karen Grube
Karen Grube

State marijuana laws???? You're joking, right? How stupid can you possibly be? Are you being run by George Soros or what? He gave over a million dollars to try to legalize pot in California! Why would you be getting in bed with this destructive, reprehensible enemy of this country? How DARE you! I didn't know much about your group before, but now I will encourage everyone I know to STAY AWAY from you! Focus on the important stuff, like stopping obamacare, and quit trying to promote people walking through their lives half stoned all the time. That's just completely disgusting.

Shannon Miler
Shannon Miler

Your no better allowing people to "walk through life" with no health care!!! ;-)

John
John

You are correct sir and your article is accurate. In my opinion, Rachel M. is either ignorant, miseducated, or doing what her Illuminati masters at MSNBC request. I find it interesting that there is an abundant amount of evidence that our country was founded to have a limited federal government (see the Federalist Papers and our Constitution for example). If we restore our country to a form of limited federal government, we will also solve our debt crisis because the states and the people themselves will assume a larger role in society rather than the federal government. God be with us.

E.H. Munro
E.H. Munro

Over at the far better ehmsnbc we named her our Lackwit of the Month. I firmly come done on the "She's not smart enough for mendacity" SIDE OF THE ARGUMENT.

richard
richard

RENNERSTUMP, Rachel M. belongs to the controlling conspiracy fed crowd, the originators of fiat money terrorism, see 1913 federal reserve conspiracy Act. They put their talking parrots on all media to sing their song of keynesianism. The Tenth Amendment people are U.S> Constitution supporters directly opposed to the totally corrupt Washington mental puppets. All patriots automatically RALLY round the Constitution and the 10th. This makes Maddow an opponent of all that the Constitution stands for. " All Powers not delegated reside in the States or the People". WWII Vet richardl.myemeralbiz.com

Camillia Olson
Camillia Olson

The others defenders of the rights of the people..( Magna Carta.. were about brave souls willing to step forth and confront abuse of power, and in a united appeal to recognize the rights of the people were being trampleled.. and not to allw such to continue... It takes a few brave men to bring forth petitions to nullify unrighteous usurpations, and encroachments , in defense of truth and liberty for the sake of order, and peace,: Protected rights of the people /property... from abuse of power, breach of trust, and conflict of interests, particularly in violation of the " law that governs" . Y/Our Constitution Usa , - Use it or lose it.... http://UnionStarFederationForFamilies.weebly.com www.S-HeritageInternationalConsultingInc.com

Buck Crosby
Buck Crosby

While we are a free and very tolerant country we need to get a little less tolerant concerning all the anti-American nutcases we have to listen too , as well as start barring their enablers who get them elected to public offices . We need a new policy concerning who can and cannot hold public office . Love of country and constitution should always be a requirement . This would automatically eliminate progressives and jihadists from getting into government .

John Ennis
John Ennis

Rachel Maddow is a progressive cow.. And, about as smart.

Meedeeateher
Meedeeateher

If Mad COW is harranging about "Nullification" we must be doing a pretty good job! But who could STAND to listen to anything that SHE had to say about ANYTHING??

Dee
Dee

Maddow is a blathering idiot that has imbibed in the kool-ade a little to much.
Does anyone actually listen to this COW?

Kevin Beck
Kevin Beck

Rachel Madcow is an irrelevant mass of scum that is just floating in the pond of Mess-NBC. I would have been surprised if she could actually understand what "Nullification" meant; unfortunately, she did not disappoint me.

Just as I am reading/writing through this, I am listening to Neal Boortz talk about the issue of Nullification on his radio show. He did mention the Tenth Amendment, but not the Center.

Anyway, I would be curious to know from Ms. Madcow: What was the purpose of the FDA and the Dept. of Agriculture in food safety before the stupid Food Modernization Act was passed last year? Didn't they have the right---oops, obligation---to check food already? Does this dweeb think that just by increasing the amount of federal useless idiots on the job, that we will be guaranteed safer food? What kind of wacky tobaccky has she been smoking?

Ronald B Cadby
Ronald B Cadby

Beware the arrogance of the "safety net" liberals. Notice how they attack the tenth amendment just like the no-guns anti-second amendment crowd.

Basically, these socialists have been completely ignoring the Constitution and their Oath of Allegiance except for their ill conceived interpretation of the meaning of the words "general welfare" and "justice for all".

Just now, I witnessed on CSPAN a Republican Representative having to "strike" the use of the term "socialist" by a point of order made by a Democrat. So, even the first amendment is at risk.

Beware and take care.

jdd
jdd

Where do they FIND these bloviators they stick on TV? Who does Maddow know that thinks her sexual identity confusion and other irrational mental ideations of the stuff of "opinion-makers"? Only a mindless dolt needs their opnion made anyway. Can we please just have some FACTS??....oh wait, sure we can! Turn off the idiot box and turn on the internet.

Braxton
Braxton

Rachel is one angry man, wait.............he is a she? He/She. however you want to classify IT is Drew Carey's lil brother, erm, sister? You have to be a frikken mindless, dope smoking, union punk to absorb this crap coming out of it's mouth and believe it. The next Katie Couric he/she is!

Patti
Patti

Buck up, fellow conservatives. Rachel Maddow and her ilk are the doom of MSNBC. There is a reason their ratings are so low. Matthews, Olbermann, Maddow, and the rest of the looneys, will bury it. =0)

Leslie Lechner
Leslie Lechner

Well, my thought is, she cant accept the truth, that the unconstitutional laws, for which were nullified, IS a Constitutional Right. How come she doesnt mention the fact that, based on a SAT. Image of the US, not includeing Hawaii, and Alaska States, there is 800+ Guilatines on American Soil, in FEMA Camps? And, why there is FEMA Coffins, strewn all over USA, for us, when Marial Law is declared, and on the FEMA Red List, were murdered first? How come she doesnt cover, that after Marial Law would be declared, (6 Weeks Later) those on FEMA's Blue List, would also be murdered, and since there is a large number of "Sheep People", who dont want to hear, or see the truth

Richard-Enrique
Richard-Enrique

I thought Rachel Maddow was made of wood and all she wanted was to be a real girl. I think she is in her lying phase. Watch her nose grow bigger and bigger. She is a block head that wants the country to be controlled from a single location. I want a county that the Federal Gov. leave us alone and we get to control our schools and highways and everything else at the county level. NOT in D.C. Let the Fed's protect the shores, from sea to shining sea. That's it..

Al Barrs
Al Barrs

It never fails to astound me, even after 72 years of life, that MOST people don't understand what the 10th Amendment, and for that matter the 9th Amendment, to the Constitution in the Bill of Rights asserts. If I can understand it anyone can.

Clearly any decisions, issues, differences, etc. (constitutional powers) then, now or in the future which are not enumerated, or listed, as POWERS of the President, Congress or Supreme Court and Federal inferior courts clearly lies with the States or People. All issues not delegated to the 3 branches of the Central Government are issues the People or States have the constitutional power to decide, not any nor all branches of the Central Government branches. Ultimately the U.S. Supreme court, by constitutional decree, which is law, should refuse to hear and refer those issues back to the States or people to decide. The U.S. Supreme court has let the people and our Constitution down... The U.S. Supreme court has allowed Congresses and Presidents to usurp the constitutional powers of the States and People...call it "state rights" if you must. They, state rights, are there and no misinterpretation will overshadow that. Why do we, the people, allow a Central Government that the people created in the first instance to attack and usurp the powers we, the people, retained in the Constitution and Bill of Rights?

M.L. Bushman
M.L. Bushman

Lee Dimin--I would much prefer anarchy over the softer, gentler tyranny we have now. Nowhere in the Constitution is it written that America is a democracy. Democracy equals mob rule. Our founders knew this, they wished to prevent this, which is why America is a Constitutional republic.

Perhaps, instead of listening to Rachel Maddow whine, or watch her gnash her teeth, you should get a copy of the Constitution and read it. It's only 17 pages long and fairly plainly written, unlike Obamacare, which is over 2000 pages of legal obfuscation, by design.

spoyzer
spoyzer

We know that the more we twist them in knots the more fallaciously they strike back. The left and the Maddows of the media know if they told the truth about the 10th Amendment Center , the Tea Party and the history of nullification, they would be gain us movements support. There objective of course is not to build us up, but to tear us down and they they will use any means of deception, falsehood and slander to do so.

Lee Dimin
Lee Dimin

"To support nullification, you don’t have to be from the right or the left. You just have to decide that enough is enough, that you want to determine you own rules in your own area, " a qjuote by Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenther, sounds mor4e like a call for anarchy thqan for democracy.

The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America provides, simply, "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."

It is respectfully suggested that Mr. Boldin, before criticizing Rachel Maddow again, carefully study the Constitution of the United States, and learn what he has to crow about.

Franklin Pierce
Franklin Pierce

What part of "not delegated" are you having trouble with?

Philosopherking
Philosopherking

I'm actually trying to understand your point (assuming you made one at all). You pointed out an amendment in the constitution that states powers that are not prohibited not given to the federal by the constitution to the states are reserved to the states. It says that right there. Shouldn't you advocate for the use of the democratic process to remove this amendment instead of simply choosing to ignore it if you do not like it? How does seem fair to accuse someone else of anarchy yet you yourself seem to suggest that it is OK to ignore the law?

Bob Greenslade
Bob Greenslade

Lee-I suggest you "carefully study the Constitution of the United States" before you ask someone else to do the same. If you will take few minutes to skim the document you will find that the word "democracy" is not in the text.

Gary Gold
Gary Gold

Correct, because The United States is a republic.

Lee Dimin
Lee Dimin

"To support nullification, you don’t have to be from the right or the left. You just have to decide that enough is enough, that you want to determine you own rules in your own area, " a qjuote by Michael Boldin, founder of the Tenther, sounds mor4e like a call for anarchy thqan for democracy. ____The Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America provides, simply, "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." ____It is respectfully suggested that Mr. Boldin, before criticizing Rachel Maddow again, carefully study the Constitution of the United States, and learn what he has to crow about.

David
David

Found out one reason why my sister is so misguided. She told me that she actually watches that loony left winger. And she thinks I am nuts.

@MJkatzTheWriter
@MJkatzTheWriter

Because I believe in hearing both sides of an arguement, I've watched Rachel various times on television during the past few years in the hope that she'd actually say something that was NOT twisted and turned around...but so far there's been no change in the way she reports issues.

But I do thank her for reporting things the way she does because many a time her statements have sent me to the computer to verify her words...only to find that she either lied or just didn't research that topic thoroughly, herself, and had given misleading information to the public.

So...she's either a Puppet that simply mouths the opinions of the Left without finding out if things are true/false for herself OR she's a "helpful idiot" as Hitler said.

Dave Koffer
Dave Koffer

Rachel Madcow disease IS a jerk, an ignoramous and a liar to boot, but what else would you from the fake, phony, evil, lying PMSLSDNBC channel!!!

Cal
Cal

Rachel Maddow? Really? You find her worthy of our attention such that you write an article and the 10th AC sends an email alert to me?

Just because she's on TV doesn't mean she warrants any attention whatsoever. She's just another brainwashed moron!

Bob Greenslade
Bob Greenslade

Make no mistake, this is a war. Madcow fired a cannon shell over the bow of the TAC and nullification. Do you fire back or stand down?

You must have some information on the enemies position before you can craft strategy and tactics to defeat them. For that reason alone I find the article worthy of my attention.

Sovereign Soul
Sovereign Soul

WHO listens to her oral diarrea? I've given up on all the traitors a Faux noose also... they even avoid the Natural Born Birth requirement -- which is IMO only a diversion in the first place. aka Obama IS allready unqualified due to his OWN statements in his AITObiography and verbally, that his (claimed to be) father was a British Subject and later a citizen of Kenya. Remember: arguing with fools is highly contageous -- soon it becomes impossible to tell which on IS the fool.

@TrentEmberson
@TrentEmberson

I've just got to say, "We're all racists" looks even better than I thought it would as web page header. That's the way to win this crowd, is to flat out sprint in the opposite direction of logic and reason as a joke. Whatever they say about us, we should magnify the text, reductio ad absurdum, and use as headers on our html. I'm serious, that's how Sun Tzu would win this battle.

sovereignhominin
sovereignhominin

I've actually thought about the efficacy of such a tactic as well. I mean it's like we're living in the theatre of the absurd, so we might as well use the absurdity to make a point by taking it in the direction these talking heads seem to be spinning things. It might prompt others to actually look up the facts of institutions like the Xth amendment center and come to find the truth.

Some Texan
Some Texan

I dunno, I can't get past "her" being some sort of angry she-male to actually vet her views on things. I also don't ask the opinions of winos regarding investments...

Bob Greenslade
Bob Greenslade

Keep it up Michael...and for your next trick....the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Philosopherking
Philosopherking

Yo Rach...there was no federal law or constitutional law that outlawed slavery so how can any state, much less a southern state, nullify it since it did not exist in the first place. In fact, the federal government passed a law that would have expanded slavery into the northern and newly acquired territories.

Austin H.
Austin H.

Let's not forget the Corwin Amendment:

"No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State."

On February 28, 1861, the House of Representatives approved the resolution by a vote of 133–65. On March 2, the United States Senate also adopted it, 24–12. Since proposed constitutional amendments require a two-thirds majority, 132 votes were required in the House and 24 in the Senate. As seven slave states had already decided to secede from the Union, those states chose not to vote on the Corwin Amendment.

Outgoing President James Buchanan endorsed the Corwin Amendment by taking the unusual step of signing it. Abraham Lincoln, in his first inaugural address, supported the Corwin Amendment: "[H]olding such a provision to now be implied Constitutional law, I have no objection to its being made express and irrevocable." Just weeks prior to the outbreak of the Civil War, Lincoln penned a letter to each governor asking for them to support the Corwin Amendment. However, Presidents play no formal role in the amendment process.

Austin H.
Austin H.

Journalistic integrity would require Ms. Maddow to have you, Dr. Tom Woods or Dr. Kevin Gutzman on to provide the other side of the story (or as I call it, the truth). I'm not holding my breath. She is not interested in the truth.

Douglass Bartley
Douglass Bartley

Mr. Boldin:
I've been trying to reach you about advertising my new book, The Kiss of Judice: The Constitution Betrayed.
Could you E-Mail me at douglassbartley@gmail.com. I would like also to send you a complementary copy. For more information on it, see http://douglassbartley.wordpress.com/2011/04/14/s.... Best wishes.

Guest
Guest

This is not the place to post your personal contact information. That is unless you don't mind receiving lots of spam in your inbox.

Philosopherking
Philosopherking

No offense but the least tacky way to get someone to advertise your book is to send them one for free and then see if they like it. If they like it they will probably recommend it.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] Rachel Maddow Does Not Like Tenth Amendment Center.. Written by: admin Toys in the Attic Strikes Again [...]

  2. [...] Maddow is a Partisan Hack Toys in the Attic Strikes Again – Tenth Amendment Center [...]

  3. [...] this review might not get a stamp of approval from Rachel Maddow, it is an interesting read.  Go read the whole thing, [...]

  4. [...] state sovereignty or — heaven forbid — nullification, and you will immediately find yourself branded as an extremist, a nut job, a radical and out of the mainstream. There’s even a supposedly nasty [...]

  5. [...] state sovereignty or heaven forbid – nullification – and you will immediately find yourself branded as an extremist, a nut job, a radical and out of the mainstream. They even created a supposedly [...]

  6. [...] You can read Michael Boldin’s response to the segment HERE. [...]

  7. [...] Bookstore in line. James Madison begged to differ, and so does the Tenth Amendment. (Yes, Rachel Maddow, you can add me to that dirty list of “Tenthers” you’re always crowing about. I’m going to [...]