Americas Founding Fathers clearly understood that the states are the ultimate guardians of the peoples liberties. James Madison (and even Alexander Hamilton) spoke to this eloquently in the Federalist Papers.
In Federalist #46, Madison said, Were it admitted, however, that the Federal government may fell an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the [states] would still have the advantage in the means of DEFEATING SUCH ENCROACHMENTS (emphasis added). By defeating such encroachments, Madison included opposition, refusal to cooperate, frowns of the [State] executive, obstructions, and plans of resistance.
Did you see that? Americas third President and Father of the Constitution said that it was the duty of the states to obstruct, oppose, resist, and otherwise refuse to cooperate with any federal policy or mandate that runs counter to the principles of liberty. And, remember, this is from the man who authored the so-called supremacy clause of the US Constitution!
In Federalist #45, Madison said, Thus, each of the principal branches of the federal government will owe its existence more or less to the favor of the State governments, and must consequently feel a dependence, which is much more likely to beget a disposition too obsequious than too overbearing towards them. On the other side, the component parts of the State governments will in no instance be indebted for their appointment to the direct agency of the federal government, and very little, if at all, to the local influence of its members.
Did you get that? In the mind of Americas founders, the federal government would be dependent upon the State governments, not the other way around! But what do we hear today? Even these so-called conservative politicos and talking heads say just the opposite. They keep insisting that the states are dependent upon, and subservient to, the federal government.
Even the colonists biggest proponent of central government, Alexander Hamilton, had it right on the power of the states to resist federal encroachment. In Federalist #26, Hamilton said, Independent of the national legislature itself the State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the voice, but, if necessary, the arm of their discontent.
Wow! Did you catch that? Hamilton said that the states held the right and duty to resist federal encroachment with their voice and with their arm.
Does any of this sound like Americas Founding Fathers expected the states to be lap dogs for federal usurpation of power? They fully recognized that it would take the individual states standing against any potential federal overreach to protect and secure the rights and liberties of the American people.
Article
Comment: Sure would be nice if the drooling elected would pay attention to the Constitution. The Criminals in DC are out of control.
In Federalist #46, Madison said, Were it admitted, however, that the Federal government may fell an equal disposition with the State governments to extend its power beyond the due limits, the [states] would still have the advantage in the means of DEFEATING SUCH ENCROACHMENTS (emphasis added). By defeating such encroachments, Madison included opposition, refusal to cooperate, frowns of the [State] executive, obstructions, and plans of resistance.
Did you see that? Americas third President and Father of the Constitution said that it was the duty of the states to obstruct, oppose, resist, and otherwise refuse to cooperate with any federal policy or mandate that runs counter to the principles of liberty. And, remember, this is from the man who authored the so-called supremacy clause of the US Constitution!
In Federalist #45, Madison said, Thus, each of the principal branches of the federal government will owe its existence more or less to the favor of the State governments, and must consequently feel a dependence, which is much more likely to beget a disposition too obsequious than too overbearing towards them. On the other side, the component parts of the State governments will in no instance be indebted for their appointment to the direct agency of the federal government, and very little, if at all, to the local influence of its members.
Did you get that? In the mind of Americas founders, the federal government would be dependent upon the State governments, not the other way around! But what do we hear today? Even these so-called conservative politicos and talking heads say just the opposite. They keep insisting that the states are dependent upon, and subservient to, the federal government.
Even the colonists biggest proponent of central government, Alexander Hamilton, had it right on the power of the states to resist federal encroachment. In Federalist #26, Hamilton said, Independent of the national legislature itself the State legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people, and not only to be the voice, but, if necessary, the arm of their discontent.
Wow! Did you catch that? Hamilton said that the states held the right and duty to resist federal encroachment with their voice and with their arm.
Does any of this sound like Americas Founding Fathers expected the states to be lap dogs for federal usurpation of power? They fully recognized that it would take the individual states standing against any potential federal overreach to protect and secure the rights and liberties of the American people.
Article
Comment: Sure would be nice if the drooling elected would pay attention to the Constitution. The Criminals in DC are out of control.
