bush_cheney2004 Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 And if you read the propaganda from rightwing spin machines, you would never know that they take more from the federal government than what they put back in taxes! ... Whereas there is absolutely no doubt about "left wing" spin machines and benefits from the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 If the administration wants to restrict the benefits of the stimulus package to states who support the plan, then the corollary is that there should be a meaningful opt-out for states who do not wish to support the plan. If there is no way to feasibly provide an opt-out, then the fair thing would be to consider reasonable objections, and proceed in the manner most consistent with the goals of the plan while respecting the constitution's division of state and federal jurisdiction and any other rules that might be tempting to break along the way (cough*NAFTA*cough). -k Yah right Michigan wants to opt of the stimulus what planet do you live on? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Yah right Michigan wants to opt of the stimulus what planet do you live on? Who said they did, cup-cake? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Who said they did, cup-cake? -k You did when you said "These state lawmakers are not attempting to secede from the United States. They are alleging that elements of the stimulus plan are an intrusion of federal government into areas of state jurisdiction and are taking action to assert their authority (ie, sovereignty) over areas given to states under the US Constitution." That might be true of 3 or 4 on the list but not all 8. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huston Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 I highly doubt that the fringe represent the voice of America. Well if you want to use the word America. That is why it is only 8 states. While in Canada, it is only one province. Almost 50% from one province. Yep, fringe alright, when compared to the rest of the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 (edited) Almost 50% from one province. No it isn't. The results of the last referendum can't be applied 14 years later....especially with the way the question was framed. Polls put the sovereignty issue at about 1/3 in Quebec. That also doesn't necessarily mean that all of those people want to leave. Edited February 15, 2009 by Smallc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huston Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 No it isn't. The results of the last referendum can't be applied 14 years later....especially with the way the question was framed. Polls put the sovereignty issue at about 1/3 in Quebec. That also doesn't necessarily mean that all of those people want to leave. Time gives you a problem. It existed at one point. I never gave a date for that number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 It existed at one point. We don't actually no that. The question was never clearly framed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huston Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 We don't actually no that. We actually do. 50.58% "No" to 49.42% "Yes".in 1995. The question was never clearly framed. Of course it was. Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995? http://207.61.100.164/cantext/modpolit/1995pqbq.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 Of course it was. The Government of Canada disagreed. That's part of the reason that the Clarity Act was put into place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M.Dancer Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 We actually do. 50.58% "No" to 49.42% "Yes".in 1995.Of course it was. Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995? http://207.61.100.164/cantext/modpolit/1995pqbq.html That was far from clear, but clearly a request for a blank cheque. What would have been the formal offer? Did anyone try to define the partneship? All thise Qs and moe were left vague and undefined on purpose, the answer was and is, sovereigny is what youy would like it to be, vote Qui. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg Bach Posted February 15, 2009 Report Share Posted February 15, 2009 An extensive search of the net reveals 8 states are declaring sovereingty with speculation that more states are going to follow suit, not too be confused with seceding, and not to be covered by main-stream media. Curious of what peoples opinion of this... America is a collection of states or nations that all have sovereingty. The very name . The Unitied Nations Of the Americas clearly states that this empire is a collection of states...to voice independence is not a bad thing in regards to the whole. A bit of careful private micro management would be a good thing. Those that oppose such a move towards re-stating a mini-declaration of independence are probably more concerned about dominational power than the welfare of the state. It's a good thing to stand up and say - yes we are in union but we are free...This is like a wife or husband standing up and stating - we are together and unified but we love each other enough to grant total freedom. Sounds sophisticated and evolved to me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kittengirl Posted February 24, 2009 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Oklahoma House Votes 83 to 13 to Restore Sovereignty Under the 10th Amendment Over All Powers Not Granted to the Federal Government Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melanie_ Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Do you agree that Québec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Québec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?http://207.61.100.164/cantext/modpolit/1995pqbq.html This sounds like something Leafless would write! Well, not the words, just the style of writing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted February 24, 2009 Report Share Posted February 24, 2009 Eleven States Declare Sovereignty Over Obama’s Action State governors -- looking down the gun barrel of long-term spending forced on them by the Obama “stimulus” plan -- are saying they will refuse to take the money. This is a Constitutional confrontation between the federal government and the states unlike any in our time. In the first five weeks of his presidency, Barack Obama has acted so rashly that at least 11 states have decided that his brand of “hope” equates to an intolerable expansion of the federal government’s authority over the states. These states -- "Washington, New Hampshire, Arizona, Montana, Michigan, Missouri, Oklahoma, California...Georgia," South Carolina, and Texas -- "have all introduced bills and resolutions" reminding Obama that the 10th Amendment protects the rights of the states, which are the rights of the people, by limting the power of the federal government. Link You'd think a former constitutional professor would have a full grasp of the 10th Amendment, but apparently not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kittengirl Posted March 4, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 The reason it hasn't been covered much is that it isn't yet news. These are bills before the state houses that haven't been passed and are unlikely to pass.http://www.intellectualconservative.com/20...ulture-watch-5/ http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE...mp;pageId=88218 more news on this front, oklahoma and south carolina have passed resolution through the house, off to the senate they go http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/0...ty-resolutions/ is it considered news yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack Weber Posted March 4, 2009 Report Share Posted March 4, 2009 (edited) I highly doubt that the fringe represent the voice of America. I hope you're right,but just for fun,keep an eye on this sight... www.trackforum.com Once in a while,check in on the current events page.It's an auto racing site,but for loony right wing nutjobs it's pretty good! Edited March 4, 2009 by Jack Weber Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.