Vermont to secede from teh union?

[SlowwHand]

Just be prepared to pay out the ass for maple syrup.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Krill
[q=PLATO][whine] The South was wrong on the slavery issue, but it is right on the broader issue of States Rights! That is the issue we keep whining about. Is it to much for people to ask to be able to govern themselves?[/q]

You can be a Repug AND an anarchist?

Not a republican per se - but someone who votes republican and anarchist tendencies, sure. You wouldn't be a proper republican, but not many are nowadays

True conservatives - not the crud we have now - believe in states' rights, and devolving as much power to the most local government as possible. Sadly modern day republicans don't believe much of that stuff any more.

[Mrs. Tuberski]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
Just be prepared to pay out the ass for maple syrup.

Dont we do that any way.. F#ck dude Ms butterworth aint cheap man She is a ho

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
Like the Original act of Independence wasn't treason? I bet you celebrate the 4th of July.

If you win, it isn't treason.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
The South was wrong on the slavery issue, but it is right on the broader issue of States Rights! That is the issue we keep whining about. Is it to much for people to ask to be able to govern themselves?

States' rights and people governing themselves are two different things. In fact, one precludes the other.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


States' rights and people governing themselves are two different things. In fact, one precludes the other.

Main Entry: states' rights
Function: noun plural
1 : rights and powers not forbidden to the states nor vested in the federal government by the U.S. Constitution


It is very simple...and to paraphrase...The powers not given to the federal government are reserved to the states or the people. This concept has been totally overridden by the concept of federalism...which, of course, is where the federal government controls many of the aspects of how people live on a local level.

Reserving a right to a smaller political body to make a local decision is notprecluding people governing themselves...in fact, it is quite the opposite IMHO.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by snoopy369

True conservatives - not the crud we have now - believe in states' rights, and devolving as much power to the most local government as possible. Sadly modern day republicans don't believe much of that stuff any more.

Indeed! The Republican party has been usurped by neocons and federalist. A sad time indeed. I believe that most people in who vote republican do so simply because the alternative is so much worse, not because the party accurately reflects their beliefs anymore.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


If you win, it isn't treason.

QFT

To the victor goes the spoils.
(and also the ability to write the history)

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski

Dont we do that any way.. F#ck dude Ms butterworth aint cheap man She is a ho

You sure got that right!

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by PLATO
Main Entry: states' rights
Function: noun plural
1 : rights and powers not forbidden to the states nor vested in the federal government by the U.S. Constitution

Almost invariably, states' rights have only been invoked when the states did not wish to give their citizens rights that the Federal government had granted. I have only once seen a case in which states' rights was invoked to protect a right of the citizen against the Federal government, and that's medical marijuana.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by PLATO




[whine] The South was wrong on the slavery issue, but it is right on the broader issue of States Rights! That is the issue we keep whining about. Is it to much for people to ask to be able to govern themselves?

Everyone here is quick to point out the economic might of the north and the power of Washington, yet no one acknowledges the fact that the South simply wants to determine its own path. [/whine]

Not one Southerner rasied even the slightest protest over the Federal expedition sent to Utah to prevent the people of Utah from forming a seperate country where they could practice polygamy. Evidently there was a moral question as to whether those folks had the right to self-determination when that self-determination was going to be used to propagate an institution as heinous as one which permitted multiple women to consent with their own free will to enter into matrimony with one man.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
I have only once seen a case in which states' rights was invoked to protect a right of the citizen against the Federal government, and that's medical marijuana.

So you are against that, right?

[Mrs. Tuberski]

I am almost sure utah thinks it is its own country already