Yes, it's encouraging to have fearless judges stand against the black robed tyrants perverting the Constitution and overturning democracy. The homos will blow their lids (or each other) over this.
it's always fun to read the musings of brain dead wackjobs who don't understand our legal system or system of government.
federal decisions take precedence over the states.
this is why you can't have nice things.
Well is this not interesting? We now have a genius entering the discussion, who refers to the "federal decisions" as if a federal
System is still in existence. Please by all means explain the two systems that the framers' cobbled together in the Formation of YOUR CONstitutional system and how those two systems were to operate. This should be no problem for you to exponent us "brain dead wackjobs" who do not understand your CONstitutional system. Please expound on the explanation that I have requested.
the federal system IS in existence, loon.
You state that a system is in existence?
Then by all means explain the system. Can't? If you need assistance feel free to ask this "brain dead whack job" for help.
It is amusing that not one of you have been able to fill this simple request yet each post as if they have understanding of YOUR own government system as established by the Framers'.
If there is no federal system of governance, what are the congress, president, federal judiciary, FBI, military, and all the other myriad apparatus of what most of us see as the federal government doing? And are the members of these various institutions in on the scam that there is no federal government?
You really have no clue do you?
There were two systems that were cobbled together to form YOUR 1787/1789 CONstitution, one being the federal system brought over from the Articles of Confederation, the other being the addition of a national system.
In order to retain the confederacy of States under article I which states ....
"The stile of this confederacy shall be, the United States of America"
The federal system had to be retained, otherwise there would be no union of States if the union of States were transformed/ consolidated under a wholly national system of government. To accomplish the continuation of the union of States/confederacy of States, the State governments had to retain State government representatives within the central body/ the States in union, this was accomplished with the Senate, being one portion of the legislative branch of congress. Each State legislature appointed their two representatives to represent their State government in legislation maintaining the union of States/confederacy of States established by the Articles of Confederation; this was the federal system. The appointment of these representatives by each States legislature insured as James Madison stated in #62 insured that no legislation could ever be passed without first going through the people/ the national portion, and then the through the State governments/the federal portion thus maintaining the federal portion that made the union/confederacy of States to begin with, it also as James Madison stated maintained the AUTHORITY OF THE STATES. The national portion was as James Madison explained in #32 the House of Representatives which is divided not by States, but by simple districts without regard to State affiliation. These district representatives were elected by the people to represent NOT the State governments, but to represent the people of the whole in legislation. This established the addition of the national system. Now, as Madison stated no legislation could be passed without first going through the national portion (the people of the whole), and then trough the State governments (the federal portion).
Now,as a result of Lincoln's rebellion and war on the federal system,the 17th amendment removed the appointment of the Senators by each States legislature, hence removing the federal portion, and without this State governments representation in legislation, the State governments no longer have a say in legislation, they no longer have a means to protect their authority as James Madison stated, they no longer participate in the central government, hence without State government participation in a "United States, how can there actually exist a union of States/ a United States? What exists today is a wholly national system with no residuary aspect of federalism, hence NO FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
The two party duopoly control the political system, and ballot access, they fund the election of the Senators, these elected officials, therefore represent the political party of their affiliation rather than, in the case of the Senate, their State government. Originally the senators being appointed representatives of their State goverent, we're be holding to their State government, consulted with their State government, and could be recalled and replaced by their State government if they were not voting in the best interest of their State government.
Only one who accepts fiction, and holds no basic understanding of the foundation, which are the two systems that formed the very base of that system, would refer to any part of this current government as Federal.
