GOP candidates on states rights, SHOCKING!

[Listening]

WOW! Only 2 current GOP candidates back state rights!!!!!!!!! What U say on this one???

If true it’s a refreshing and pleasant surprise a significant majority of GOP candidates understand Constitutional case law, however inadvertent. If not true it doesn’t matter.

As early as the First Quarter of the 19th Century the Court held that Federal law preempts state law, and that states had no ‘right’ to ignore Federal legislation:

BS

There is nothing related to Constituional law in this argument.

What is true is that history shows the SCOTUS to be quit willing to ignore the constitution and play god.

What is also true is the republicans have been more than willing to let it go on.

I have been hoping Cheny would take Ginsburg duck hunting for years.

 

[Listening]

In United States v. Darby Lumber Co., 312 U.S. 100 (1941), the Court reaffirmed the long understood and settled doctrine that the 10th Amendment did not authorize states to reject or otherwise ignore Federal legislation the states might consider ‘offensive’:

From the beginning and for many years, the [10thA]mendment has been construed as not depriving the national government of authority to resort to all means for the exercise of a granted power which are appropriate and plainly adapted to the permitted end.

United States v. Darby

They myth of ‘states’ rights’ was finally and permanently put to rest in Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1 (1958).

It would be stupid to think that states rights don't exist and the argument here isn't about states rights.

A simple reading of Federalist 44/45/46 shows the intent.

Again, the problem is that Republicans have let it go.

What was Roe V. Wade ?

 

[Dr.Drock]

B.....b....b...b....but but but the Republicans and Democrats are total opposites!

 

[DiamondDave]

The GOP only likes some states rights...for others, they want Constitutional Amendments.

Let's see....

The U.S. Constitution defines a specific set of powers for the federal government.

If you want to add powers to the federal government....you amend the constitution.

Thanks for proving my point...when it's stuff they like, the Republicans are all about state's rights...when it's stuff they don't...like marriage equality or marijuana, they want to amend the Constitution or sick the Feds.

Funny... I see more and more conservatives wanting to get the Fed out of the marriage business.. and some indeed on the states side for marijuana laws... but don't let that stop your rant

 

[Listening]

The GOP only likes some states rights...for others, they want Constitutional Amendments.

Let's see....

The U.S. Constitution defines a specific set of powers for the federal government.

If you want to add powers to the federal government....you amend the constitution.

Thanks for proving my point...when it's stuff they like, the Republicans are all about state's rights...when it's stuff they don't...like marriage equality or marijuana, they want to amend the Constitution or sick the Feds.

There is no POINT to your post.

It is a claim which seems redundant.

If you want to change the USC, then you amend the constitution. If you can't do that...you don't amend it and it (supposedly) keeps the feds out of the game.

Now, along comes Roe. Abortion had been a state issue for 200 years. All of sudden, Earl Warren and Harry Blackmun decide it should be a federal issue. And so with no change to the constitution (and abortion is not granted any accord to the federal government), the federal government takes over.

That is how liberals do it. They don't amend the constitution. They put corrupt judges in place and rule from the bench.

 

[Listening]

Let's bump this puppy.

I love the 10th.

 

[oreo]

WOW! Only 2 current GOP candidates back state rights!!!!!!!!! What U say on this one???


Leading GOP Candidates Don't Want to Return Power to the States - Yahoo! News

In this advertisement Newt Gingrich talks about returning power back to the states.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9TVrLTObmg&feature=player_embedded]Rebuilding the America We Love - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Listening]

Funny... I see more and more conservatives wanting to get the Fed out of the marriage business.. and some indeed on the states side for marijuana laws... but don't let that stop your rant

DD,

It isn't a rant. It is truly a lamentation.

I wish that what you were pointing at was an indication that the federal level GOP was truly more interested in moving towards decentralized power.

But there are far to many examples of things going in the wrong direction. Believe me, I wish it were not true.

I recently e-mailed my state senator and asked why there is nothing in our current state platform about resolutions stating a desire to make the 10th more prominent in our discussions.

 

[dblack]

In this advertisement Newt Gingrich talks about returning power back to the states.

He sure does talk about a lot of stuff.

 

[Listening]

A bump for states rights !

We should dig up Earl Warren, shoot his corpse and burn it.

Then let whatever wants to eat whats left have at it.

Roe vs. Wade should never have been heard by the SCOTUS.

It was always a state issue.

 

[rightwinger]

Why would anyone in their right mind want to return power to the states?

That hasn't worked in 150 years

 

[Listening]

Why would anyone in their right mind want to return power to the states?

That hasn't worked in 150 years

Given that our federal government ain't working so well, I'll pick up the challenge on this one.

First, you need to show what you are talking about. This was before the civil war when slavery was still legal.

Second, what is it that you think the federal government can do so well ?

Third, what was the most recent failure that you point to when it comes to states powers (now, if you want to be original you'll leave out the dixiecrats and the Jim Crow laws. One, they will never formally come back. Two, they still exist in some form....just not in writing. You will never eliminate bigotry until you educate people.)

 

[rightwinger]

Why would anyone in their right mind want to return power to the states?

That hasn't worked in 150 years

Given that our federal government ain't working so well, I'll pick up the challenge on this one.

First, you need to show what you are talking about. This was before the civil war when slavery was still legal.

Second, what is it that you think the federal government can do so well ?

Third, what was the most recent failure that you point to when it comes to states powers (now, if you want to be original you'll leave out the dixiecrats and the Jim Crow laws. One, they will never formally come back. Two, they still exist in some form....just not in writing. You will never eliminate bigotry until you educate people.)

The Jim Crow Laws are an excellent example of why extending unlimited power to the states is a bad idea. If you want a more recent example, look at Arizona and Alabama

The federal government is working well. Since moving to a federally centered government, the United States has emerged as the most powerful nation in history. That would not have happened with 50 independent states calling the shots.

 

[DiamondDave]

You want more powers laid out for the fed... it's simple... 2/3 of the house, 2/3 of the senate, and ratification by 3/4 of the states...

But quite frankly, without the powers being specifically laid out in the constitution that the fed is giving to itself, our federal government has become a complete and utter failure and a goddamn laughingstock... it is a leviathan with nothing to stop Mordor on the Potomac from just grabbing whatever power it wants, simply because the likes of you do not insist on adherence to the constitution

 

[rightwinger]

Let's see....

The U.S. Constitution defines a specific set of powers for the federal government.

If you want to add powers to the federal government....you amend the constitution.

Thanks for proving my point...when it's stuff they like, the Republicans are all about state's rights...when it's stuff they don't...like marriage equality or marijuana, they want to amend the Constitution or sick the Feds.

Funny... I see more and more conservatives wanting to get the Fed out of the marriage business.. and some indeed on the states side for marijuana laws... but don't let that stop your rant

Who passed the Defense of Marriage Act?

 

[Avorysuds]

WOW! Only 2 current GOP candidates back state rights!!!!!!!!! What U say on this one???


Leading GOP Candidates Don't Want to Return Power to the States - Yahoo! News

In this advertisement Newt Gingrich talks about returning power back to the states.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9TVrLTObmg&feature=player_embedded]Rebuilding the America We Love - YouTube[/ame]

And then he talks about cap and trade, supports Obama’s HC mandate, the patriot act, expanding the patriot act, the Department of education and the list goes on…

Newt is about as anti states rights as you get, but you already knew that.

 

[Listening]

The Jim Crow Laws are an excellent example of why extending unlimited power to the states is a bad idea. If you want a more recent example, look at Arizona and Alabama

I asked you to be original. Jim Shmo. That is over. Arizona and Alabama are simply exercising their rights and unless you live there why don't you put a cork in it ? It is their perogative.

The federal government is working well.

:rotf:

You can't be serious.

Oh, let's not let President Obama's approval rating and congress's approval rating (do they even have one any more ?) get in the way of this discussion.

It is a disaster.

Since moving to a federally centered government, the United States has emerged as the most powerful nation in history. That would not have happened with 50 independent states calling the shots.

These are two assertions that are just articles of faith by the left.

There is nothing powerful about the federal government running an EPA or a department education (that is failing miserably). There is nothing powerful about taking away a states ability to determine the legality of abortion. There is nothing powerful about taking away a states right to determine if prayers can be said in public schools.

In short, your statement is crap.

Your second assertion is also miserably weak. Prove it.

 

[Listening]

You want more powers laid out for the fed... it's simple... 2/3 of the house, 2/3 of the senate, and ratification by 3/4 of the states...

But quite frankly, without the powers being specifically laid out in the constitution that the fed is giving to itself, our federal government has become a complete and utter failure and a goddamn laughingstock... it is a leviathan with nothing to stop Mordor on the Potomac from just grabbing whatever power it wants, simply because the likes of you do not insist on adherence to the constitution

Amen.

But, why bother with the constitution when you can wipe your ass with it (President Obama style) and let the SCOTUS run the country.

Why do you think Kennedy (who I am glad is gone) and Schumer (who I wish was gone) railed so hard at Roberts and Alito about "preserving" the gains of the last 40 years. The Constitution can live and breath as long as it breaths the way you want it to. If it thinks to look the other way, Teddy and Chucky wet their oversized pants.

 

[Cecilie1200]

WOW! Only 2 current GOP candidates back state rights!!!!!!!!! What U say on this one???


Leading GOP Candidates Don't Want to Return Power to the States - Yahoo! News

What an utter pile of opinionated, made-up horseshit. Who is this asshole writer, and why the fuck am I supposed to be interested in his "explanation" of what happened, like I'm too stupid to read a simple reporting of what was said and draw my own conclusions?

 

[rightwinger]

The Jim Crow Laws are an excellent example of why extending unlimited power to the states is a bad idea. If you want a more recent example, look at Arizona and Alabama

I asked you to be original. Jim Shmo. That is over. Arizona and Alabama are simply exercising their rights and unless you live there why don't you put a cork in it ? It is their perogative.

The federal government is working well.

:rotf:

You can't be serious.

Oh, let's not let President Obama's approval rating and congress's approval rating (do they even have one any more ?) get in the way of this discussion.

It is a disaster.

Since moving to a federally centered government, the United States has emerged as the most powerful nation in history. That would not have happened with 50 independent states calling the shots.

These are two assertions that are just articles of faith by the left.

There is nothing powerful about the federal government running an EPA or a department education (that is failing miserably). There is nothing powerful about taking away a states ability to determine the legality of abortion. There is nothing powerful about taking away a states right to determine if prayers can be said in public schools.

Like short, your statement is crap.

Your second assertion is also miserably weak. Prove it.

All are wonderful examples of why we need a strong centralized government. The EPA is a success story for centralized government standards. Anyone who lived before the EPA could tell you what our air and water was like

Schools are also a wonderful example. The much maligned Department of Education has one of the smallest budgets in government. Our education system is run at the state and local level. Always has been.....that is where your blame lies. Abolishing school prayer is another example where the federal government steps in and prevents wayward states from violating it's citizens civil rights