Comments on: Santorum and Obama: Two Peas in a Pod?

By: Santorum and Obama: Two Peas in a Pod? | TaJnB | TheAverageJoeNewsBlogg

Sun, 23 Oct 2011 00:56:34 +0000

[...] BoyackTenth Amendment Center August 12, [...]

By: pierzstyx

pierzstyx — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 00:13:33 +0000

The states only have a right to do as they please as long as they do not violate the Constitution of the US. When they agreed to bind themselves together by it they agreed to follow the laws contained therein and be held accountable to those laws. The Federal gov't can stop any state from doing something that violates the Bill of Rights, such as say making a minority religion illegal. For example if Mississippi passed a state law making Mormonism illegal within the state boundaries punishable by fine and hail time, that would be a clear violation of the First Amendment and the Federal government would be obligated to step in and use the court system to strike down such a heinous law. (And if you think I am blowing sunshine out my arse this exact thing happened to Mormons in the 1830s in Missouri. They were even legally hunted "to extermination" within the state. The law remained on Missouri law books until the 1970s.) The states have no more right to be tyrants than the federal government. And the federal government is there meant to be a balance against the tyranny of the states just as the states are a balance against the tyranny of the federal. The Tenth Amendment is meant for this exact purpose, to give the Federal government all necessary and proper power to enforce the Constitution within the national boundaries.

By: The feds my protector? Non sequitur – Tenth Amendment Center

The feds my protector? Non sequitur – Tenth Amendment Center — Fri, 19 Aug 2011 16:22:06 +0000

[...] In the first place, Santorum completely ignores the federalist system our founders created. The federal government was never intended to enforce a moral enterprise. That role was left to the states and the people. Thatâ€™s why we donâ€™t generally have federal laws against murder. Utah Tenth Amendment Center state chapter coordinator Connor Boyack does a fantastic job of pointing this out in an article you can read here. [...]

By: Austin H.

Austin H. — Thu, 18 Aug 2011 22:00:28 +0000

Len…spot on. Bastiat explains this notion in the Law.

By: jim Smith

jim Smith — Mon, 15 Aug 2011 02:47:09 +0000

Who says the supreme court is right? I think the supreme court has over-stepped its' boundaries and should be reigned in. We tend to accept anything the court says with out question. It can be violating the constitution just like many of our elected officials are doing. I don't know how to correct such a situation but I think it can be done.

By: Len

Len — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 17:18:47 +0000

scottb, it's this simple, were the US constitution in effect we would never have been in the Middle East in the first place. There is simply no authority under it to go beyond common defense.

And no we didn't get the culprit. Bin Laden died years ago. Why do you think there's no body? Why is seal team 6 dying all of a sudden? If you don't start from the premise that all governments manipulate, conspire and lie, you're just too naive to understand politics.

By: Len

Len — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 17:13:09 +0000

Austin H., you are correct about the Virginia Plan, but then along came Lincoln and the 39th Congress to throw out the US constitution and impose government by dictate.. The Northeastern business interests and moralists won out, since then the US constitution has no longer been in effect.

By: Austin H.

Austin H. — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 12:14:30 +0000

James Wilson at the Pennsylvania Convention: "I say, under this Constitution, the legislature may be restrained, and kept within its prescribed bounds, by the interposition of the judicial department. This I hope, sir, to explain clearly and satisfactorily. I had occasion, on a former day, to state that the power of the Constitution was paramount to the power of the legislature acting under that Constitution; for it is possible that the legislature, when acting in that capacity, may transgress the bounds assigned to it, and an act may pass, in the usual mode, notwithstanding that transgression; but when it comes to be discussed before the judges,–when they consider its principles, and find it to be incompatible with the superior power of the Constitution,–it is their duty to pronounce it void; and judges independent, and not obliged to look to every session for a continuance of their salaries, will behave with intrepidity, and refuse to the act the sanction of judicial authority. In the same manner, the President of the United States could shield himself, and refuse to carry into effect an act that violates the Constitution."

John Marshall, who also became a Chief Justice at the Virginia Convention: "With respect to its cognizance in all cases arising under the Constitution and the laws of the United States, he [Mr. Mason]says, that the laws of the United States being paramount to the laws of particular States, there is no case but what this will extend to. Has the Government of the United States power to make laws on every subject?–Does he understand it so?–Can they make laws affecting the mode of transferring property, or contracts, or claims between citizens of the same State? Can they go beyond the delegated powers? If they were to make a law not warranted by any of the powers enumerated, it would be considered by the Judges as an infringement of the Constitution which they are to guard:–They would not consider such a law as coming under their jurisdiction.–They would declare it void."

By: Submitted by SwamySez: Santorum and Obama: Two Peas in a Pod? – SwamySez

Submitted by SwamySez: Santorum and Obama: Two Peas in a Pod? – SwamySez — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 11:52:46 +0000

[...] Further: http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/08/12/santorum-and-obama-two-peas-in-a-pod/ Advertise with SwamySez Posted in Recent Post SHARE THIS Twitter Facebook Delicious [...]

By: CDriver

CDriver — Sun, 14 Aug 2011 11:45:30 +0000

My thoughts exactly. The U.S. Constitution is a pact between the Federal government and the States. A State Constitution is a pact between the People and their respective State. Any powers not granted to the Federal and State governments are retained by the People. Politicians for the sake of power have turned our system backwards.