GOP candidates on states rights, SHOCKING!

[rightwinger]

. Your second assertion is also miserably weak. Prove it

Prove that we would not be the super power we are if we relied on a States Rights centered government?

You only have to look at what made the US a Super Power. Prior to WWII we had a military the size of Swedens our Industrial structure was focused on consumer goods

The Federal Government took charge of ALL manufacturing and directed it at the war effort. We became the most powerful military and economic engine in human history

None of it could have been achieved negotiating with 48 independent state governments with their own rules and ambitions

 

[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.



: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

States were picking up the banner before the EPA came along. In fact CA has a stricter state EPA than the fed.

To think that citizens needed the federal EPA to plead their cases is stupid.

The depart of education has long been using coercion to force attitudes and textbooks on to schools that don't want them. They simply figure out how to have other things like federal highway dollars withheld.

And states are not wayward if they elect legislators that chose to allow school prayer. If you don't want school prayer, you don't elect legislators or school board members to allow it.

Oh, the beauty of local government.

 

[Listening]

. Your second assertion is also miserably weak. Prove it

Prove that we would not be the super power we are if we relied on a States Rights centered government?

You only have to look at what made the US a Super Power. Prior to WWII we had a military the size of Swedens our Industrial structure was focused on consumer goods

The Federal Government took charge of ALL manufacturing and directed it at the war effort. We became the most powerful military and economic engine in human history

None of it could have been achieved negotiating with 48 independent state governments with their own rules and ambitions

The federal government has the power to wage war. So, in that respect we did become powerful.

Our economic power only existed because everyone else was picking up the pieces. Once they got back on track....we started (and continue) to slip.

 

[rightwinger]

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.



: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.



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

States were picking up the banner before the EPA came along. In fact CA has a stricter state EPA than the fed.

To think that citizens needed the federal EPA to plead their cases is stupid.

The depart of education has long been using coercion to force attitudes and textbooks on to schools that don't want them. They simply figure out how to have other things like federal highway dollars withheld.

And states are not wayward if they elect legislators that chose to allow school prayer. If you don't want school prayer, you don't elect legislators or school board members to allow it.

Oh, the beauty of local government.

California is an excellent example of a state requiring stricter standards than the EPA. It is the EPA holding their hands to the fire and enforcing minimum standards that keep our air and water safe. The environment belongs to us all, not individual states
The department of education does not require textbooks. That is a state and local decision
Prayer in school is a violation of our Constitution. No state has the authority to overrule it....and never should

 

[rightwinger]

. Your second assertion is also miserably weak. Prove it

Prove that we would not be the super power we are if we relied on a States Rights centered government?

You only have to look at what made the US a Super Power. Prior to WWII we had a military the size of Swedens our Industrial structure was focused on consumer goods

The Federal Government took charge of ALL manufacturing and directed it at the war effort. We became the most powerful military and economic engine in human history

None of it could have been achieved negotiating with 48 independent state governments with their own rules and ambitions

The federal government has the power to wage war. So, in that respect we did become powerful.

Our economic power only existed because everyone else was picking up the pieces. Once they got back on track....we started (and continue) to slip.

We gained that power in spite of the states. The Federal Government took total control. They took assets and materiel from one state and gave it to another where it was more needed. Critical war materials were rationed and apportioned where they were most needed.
A country ruled by 48 states never could have done that

 

[Listening]

Prove that we would not be the super power we are if we relied on a States Rights centered government?

You only have to look at what made the US a Super Power. Prior to WWII we had a military the size of Swedens our Industrial structure was focused on consumer goods

The Federal Government took charge of ALL manufacturing and directed it at the war effort. We became the most powerful military and economic engine in human history

None of it could have been achieved negotiating with 48 independent state governments with their own rules and ambitions

The federal government has the power to wage war. So, in that respect we did become powerful.

Our economic power only existed because everyone else was picking up the pieces. Once they got back on track....we started (and continue) to slip.

We gained that power in spite of the states. The Federal Government took total control. They took assets and materiel from one state and gave it to another where it was more needed. Critical war materials were rationed and apportioned where they were most needed.
A country ruled by 48 states never could have done that

The federal government has power to wage war. I don't recall the states balking at their efforts.

What has that got to do with that bastard Harry Blackmunn and Roe V. Wade ?

Abortion is not addressed in the USC. By default it stayed with the states.

The left loves Warren and Blackmunn. I think we should deport their ancestors.

 

[Listening]

California is an excellent example of a state requiring stricter standards than the EPA. It is the EPA holding their hands to the fire and enforcing minimum standards that keep our air and water safe. The environment belongs to us all, not individual states
The department of education does not require textbooks. That is a state and local decision
Prayer in school is a violation of our Constitution. No state has the authority to overrule it....and never should

The people of California voted for a stricter EPA. They don't need the federal government to tell them how to run their state. Teddy Kennedy got invovled in a water disptute between AZ and CA. If that wasn't funny.

The environment belongs to no one. You guys just don't get it.

Back in the early 1970's my school distict was the center of large fight between the federal government and the local school system. The bottom line was that if we didn't use a particular book, we could kiss other funding good bye. Screw that and screw you for forcing it on us.

States had state run religions until the 1830's and nobody challenged them. What happened. Jefferson's separation was a separation of the federal government. States had prayer in schools for a long long time and it was fine. It should go back to being that way.

 

[Listening]

Hhhhmmmm suspicious....

Under the U.S. Constitution, the federal government was assigned specific limited powers, and most government functions were left to the states. To ensure that people understood the limits on federal power, the Framers added the Tenth Amendment: “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.” Those delegated powers are “few and defined,” noted James Madison.

But the Tenth Amendment has disappeared. No one has seen it in recent decades. But I’ve found some statistics that make me very suspicious that the Canadians stole the Tenth. Look at the pie charts below. The top pie shows that 71 percent of total government spending in the United States is federal, while 29 percent is state/local. (See BEA tables 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 for 2010 data).

Back when we still had the Tenth, that ratio was the other way around—like how the bottom chart looks for Canada today. In Canada, federal spending accounts for just 38 percent of total government spending, while provincial/local spending accounts for 62 percent. (See Canada Yearbook for 2010/11 data.)

Did Canada Steal Our Tenth Amendment? | Cato @ Liberty

Wow !

 

[rightwinger]

California is an excellent example of a state requiring stricter standards than the EPA. It is the EPA holding their hands to the fire and enforcing minimum standards that keep our air and water safe. The environment belongs to us all, not individual states
The department of education does not require textbooks. That is a state and local decision
Prayer in school is a violation of our Constitution. No state has the authority to overrule it....and never should

The people of California voted for a stricter EPA. They don't need the federal government to tell them how to run their state. Teddy Kennedy got invovled in a water disptute between AZ and CA. If that wasn't funny.

The environment belongs to no one. You guys just don't get it.

Back in the early 1970's my school distict was the center of large fight between the federal government and the local school system. The bottom line was that if we didn't use a particular book, we could kiss other funding good bye. Screw that and screw you for forcing it on us.

States had state run religions until the 1830's and nobody challenged them. What happened. Jefferson's separation was a separation of the federal government. States had prayer in schools for a long long time and it was fine. It should go back to being that way.

Federal Standards are minimum standards and states are free to require stricter standards. Having lived in California in the 70s, I applaud their stricter standards. The environment belongs to EVERYONE

Education is a perfect example of why we shouldnt revert to a States rights government. Look at the disparity in education and performance between the states. Some states do not give a crap about education. We like to call them "Red States". Their children perform poorly compared to states with tougher educational standards, the ones we like to call "Blue States"

Guess which states are screaming for "States Rights"?

 

[DiamondDave]

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?

And who voted against civil rights legislation

That does not negate the fact that more and more conservatives are supporting as I stated above

 

[Listening]

Federal Standards are minimum standards and states are free to require stricter standards. Having lived in California in the 70s, I applaud their stricter standards. The environment belongs to EVERYONE

Education is a perfect example of why we shouldnt revert to a States rights government. Look at the disparity in education and performance between the states. Some states do not give a crap about education. We like to call them "Red States". Their children perform poorly compared to states with tougher educational standards, the ones we like to call "Blue States"

Guess which states are screaming for "States Rights"?

Don't make me laugh to hard.

First, the standards of the EPA are meaningless. I work in the petrochemical industry and know that there is a lot of meaningless regulation while important issues are often left to companies to decide for themselves. California has the most expensive gasoline in the country and the added value of CARB gas is questionable at best (in terms of the environment).

Keep your hands off of the education of my children. If one state wants to spend less on education that is their business. "Tougher educational standards" My kids attended a very good school district with "tough standards". A complete joke.

Your manufactured standards are meaningless. The education system in the country sucks but the main reason the education of kids is going downhill (and please don't show me how stupid you are by making any comparison using tests....kids today are great regurgitators. Give them an open ended problem and they go over like a drunk elephant), is because parents have been stupid enough to believe the babysitting service they call school will actually teach their kids something useful without them being to engaged.

There is always this pointing at certain advancements in education. All you need do is talk to educators who have been around a while. Most have told me that the education of today is nowhere as meaningful as the education of 20 years ago. Way to go GWB and Dead Ted.

 

[Listening]

A bump for the powers of the states that were granted under the original constitution.

To bad the 10th amendment keeps coming up.....to bad for democrats.

 

[Greenbeard]

To bad the 10th amendment keeps coming up.....to bad for democrats.

It seems to be splitting the Republican Party quite a bit more than it's splitting the Democrats at present.

It made for an awkward moment because her questioner, Tea Party darling and Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, clearly seemed to come down on the side of state authority, not federal authority (Bachmann gets on the hot seat near the 37:00 mark).

Ken Cuccinelli: Congresswoman, Congressional Republicans all but universally support tort reform but you're a strong believer in a limited federal government. Currently, there's a bill before Congress, Senate Bill 197, that would allow the federal government to dictate how state judges are to try medical malpractice cases and cap what awards can be given by juries under state law. Do you support that bill?

Bachmann: I support tort reform, absolutely, because frivolous lawsuits are out of control. There is an issue with the Tenth Amendment, I recognize that. Some states have implemented caps on the frivolous lawsuits and lawsuits that come forward. One state is California, another state is Tex--

Ken Cuccinelli: Let me zero you in, though. You support tort reform, so do I. But do you support federal tort reform that governs how states may conduct their medical malpractice trials?

Bachmann: I can, I can. I can come out in support of that. This is an issue that I think is a fundamental issue and it's something that I can support.

For a little perspective on Cuccinelli's personal opinion on such proposals, you need only look to an op-ed he wrote a month ago on that federal tort reform bill, vowing to "file suit against it just as fast as I filed suit when the federal health-care bill was signed into law in March 2010 (15 minutes later)":

The five senators in question obviously support tort reform, and they are willing to smother states to impose their policy preference. It is frustrating how “broadly” some senators interpret the powers of the federal government when they are pursuing a favored policy, and how “limited” those same powers are seen to be when it is the other guy’s proposal violating the Constitution.

Senate Bill 197 takes an approach that implies “Washington knows best” while trampling states’ authority and the 10th Amendment. The legislation is breathtakingly broad in its assumptions about federal power, particularly the same power to regulate commerce that lies at the heart of all the lawsuits (including Virginia’s) against the individual mandate of the 2010 federal health-care law. I have little doubt that the senators who brought us S. 197 oppose the use of the commerce clause to compel individuals to buy health insurance. Yet they have no qualms about dictating to state court judges how they are to conduct trials in state lawsuits. How does this sort of constitutional disconnect happen?

An example of one policy question the legislation would take from states is whether to cap medical malpractice awards. Virginia is among those states that utilize caps; others do not. But it is the right of the residents of each state to decide which system works best for them, rather than having a one-size-fits-all plan imposed unconstitutionally by the federal government.

Similar intraparty confrontations played out in the House of Representatives earlier this year when Republicans moving a federal tort reform bill through committee met opposition from Tea Party-sympathizing freshmen:

At a Judiciary Committee markup, Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas) accused Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) of proposing legislation that would violate the Constitution.

The panel was considering legislation sponsored by Gingrey, who does not sit on the committee and was not present, that would impose a $250,000 cap on non-economic medical malpractice damages. Poe, a former felony court judge and a member of the House Tea Party Caucus, said that violates the Constitution.

He also warned he'd vote against the measure if it imposes caps on states that don't want them.

"I got problems with that," Poe said. "I think it's a violation of the Tenth Amendment." [...]

[Lamar] Smith, who has made tort reform one of his top five priorities, defended the law, saying tort reform falls under the purview of the Constitution's Commerce Clause.

"If Alabama and New York want to be a haven for malpractice suits, it's great for Texas," said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas). "I'm reticent to allow Congress to impose our will on the states."

 

[rightwinger]

Federal Standards are minimum standards and states are free to require stricter standards. Having lived in California in the 70s, I applaud their stricter standards. The environment belongs to EVERYONE

Education is a perfect example of why we shouldnt revert to a States rights government. Look at the disparity in education and performance between the states. Some states do not give a crap about education. We like to call them "Red States". Their children perform poorly compared to states with tougher educational standards, the ones we like to call "Blue States"

Guess which states are screaming for "States Rights"?

Don't make me laugh to hard.

First, the standards of the EPA are meaningless. I work in the petrochemical industry and know that there is a lot of meaningless regulation while important issues are often left to companies to decide for themselves. California has the most expensive gasoline in the country and the added value of CARB gas is questionable at best (in terms of the environment).

Keep your hands off of the education of my children. If one state wants to spend less on education that is their business. "Tougher educational standards" My kids attended a very good school district with "tough standards". A complete joke.

Your manufactured standards are meaningless. The education system in the country sucks but the main reason the education of kids is going downhill (and please don't show me how stupid you are by making any comparison using tests....kids today are great regurgitators. Give them an open ended problem and they go over like a drunk elephant), is because parents have been stupid enough to believe the babysitting service they call school will actually teach their kids something useful without them being to engaged.

There is always this pointing at certain advancements in education. All you need do is talk to educators who have been around a while. Most have told me that the education of today is nowhere as meaningful as the education of 20 years ago. Way to go GWB and Dead Ted.

Education is a responsibility of State and Local Governments, By design, the Department of Education is responsible for very little. A glaring example of what happens when you give a critical responsibility to the states......they try to get by on the cheap

Worst states for education?
Mississippi
Alabama
Arizona
Louisiana

Best states for education?
Massachusetts
New York
New Jersey
New Hampshire

Guess which are Red States and Guess which are Blue States?
Now guess which states whine the most for Federal aid while whining about their "state rights"?

 

[Listening]

To bad the 10th amendment keeps coming up.....to bad for democrats.

It seems to be splitting the Republican Party quite a bit more than it's splitting the Democrats at present.

Splitting ?

I don't think that will happen and certainly does not seem to be evident in your posts. What is evident, and sad, is that they don't all understand it the same way.

But, at least they are talking about it !

In my book that is a plus.

 

[Listening]

Education is a responsibility of State and Local Governments, By design, the Department of Education is responsible for very little. A glaring example of what happens when you give a critical responsibility to the states......they try to get by on the cheap

Worst states for education?
Mississippi
Alabama
Arizona
Louisiana

Best states for education?
Massachusetts
New York
New Jersey
New Hampshire

Guess which are Red States and Guess which are Blue States?
Now guess which states whine the most for Federal aid while whining about their "state rights"?

That is right. So let's kill the department of education all together and let states make their own choices.

As to your statistics ? Please provide me with the link. I look at several and they don't always jive.

But it does not really matter. AZ is crushed by the problem with illegals. No wonder they want to take over their destiny.

The other three have always been low on the list.

There are lots of blue states with big problems (CA...again huge illegal problem). The northwest does well....always. After that it is a mixed bag.

If you want to argue at that level, that is O.K. with me.

But that is beauty of local government. Where I grew up, the school system I attended was waxing the three or four around it. We were simply a better system. We had more engaged parents, we had more local fundraisers...in short, we were controlling our own destiny.

The along comes Dead Ted and now we have the failed No Child Left Behind which is better termed, Le't Keep Them All Behind.

Great job.

State powers rock !

 

[Listening]

Federal Standards are minimum standards and states are free to require stricter standards. Having lived in California in the 70s, I applaud their stricter standards. The environment belongs to EVERYONE

Education is a perfect example of why we shouldnt revert to a States rights government. Look at the disparity in education and performance between the states. Some states do not give a crap about education. We like to call them "Red States". Their children perform poorly compared to states with tougher educational standards, the ones we like to call "Blue States"

Guess which states are screaming for "States Rights"?

Don't make me laugh to hard.

First, the standards of the EPA are meaningless. I work in the petrochemical industry and know that there is a lot of meaningless regulation while important issues are often left to companies to decide for themselves. California has the most expensive gasoline in the country and the added value of CARB gas is questionable at best (in terms of the environment).

Keep your hands off of the education of my children. If one state wants to spend less on education that is their business. "Tougher educational standards" My kids attended a very good school district with "tough standards". A complete joke.

Your manufactured standards are meaningless. The education system in the country sucks but the main reason the education of kids is going downhill (and please don't show me how stupid you are by making any comparison using tests....kids today are great regurgitators. Give them an open ended problem and they go over like a drunk elephant), is because parents have been stupid enough to believe the babysitting service they call school will actually teach their kids something useful without them being to engaged.

There is always this pointing at certain advancements in education. All you need do is talk to educators who have been around a while. Most have told me that the education of today is nowhere as meaningful as the education of 20 years ago. Way to go GWB and Dead Ted.

Education is a responsibility of State and Local Governments, By design, the Department of Education is responsible for very little. A glaring example of what happens when you give a critical responsibility to the states......they try to get by on the cheap

Worst states for education?
Mississippi
Alabama
Arizona
Louisiana

Best states for education?
Massachusetts
New York
New Jersey
New Hampshire

Guess which are Red States and Guess which are Blue States?
Now guess which states whine the most for Federal aid while whining about their "state rights"?

And let's not forget that three of the four states you list as being bad were bad long before they became red states. Louisiana has had a long history of failure in education. Even back when it was a southern democratic stronghold.

Maybe there is reason they went red.

 

[rightwinger]

Don't make me laugh to hard.

First, the standards of the EPA are meaningless. I work in the petrochemical industry and know that there is a lot of meaningless regulation while important issues are often left to companies to decide for themselves. California has the most expensive gasoline in the country and the added value of CARB gas is questionable at best (in terms of the environment).

Keep your hands off of the education of my children. If one state wants to spend less on education that is their business. "Tougher educational standards" My kids attended a very good school district with "tough standards". A complete joke.

Your manufactured standards are meaningless. The education system in the country sucks but the main reason the education of kids is going downhill (and please don't show me how stupid you are by making any comparison using tests....kids today are great regurgitators. Give them an open ended problem and they go over like a drunk elephant), is because parents have been stupid enough to believe the babysitting service they call school will actually teach their kids something useful without them being to engaged.

There is always this pointing at certain advancements in education. All you need do is talk to educators who have been around a while. Most have told me that the education of today is nowhere as meaningful as the education of 20 years ago. Way to go GWB and Dead Ted.

Education is a responsibility of State and Local Governments, By design, the Department of Education is responsible for very little. A glaring example of what happens when you give a critical responsibility to the states......they try to get by on the cheap

Worst states for education?
Mississippi
Alabama
Arizona
Louisiana

Best states for education?
Massachusetts
New York
New Jersey
New Hampshire

Guess which are Red States and Guess which are Blue States?
Now guess which states whine the most for Federal aid while whining about their "state rights"?

And let's not forget that three of the four states you list as being bad were bad long before they became red states. Louisiana has had a long history of failure in education. Even back when it was a southern democratic stronghold.

Maybe there is reason they went red.

Want to explain Texas?

 

[Listening]

Want to explain Texas?

A. You supplied no link to what list you are using. It is important because they use different criteria.

B. Texas is middle of the pack in many lists I see. California is near the bottom of the heap.

C. I noticed you just passed by my argument. Do you admit that MS, AL, and LA were all blue at one time and still sucked ?

 

[Listening]

A bump for those who believe that the 10th amendment isn't just there to take up space.