Navigation

Tag Archives | Republicans

Nullifying ObamaCare: An Alternative To The Supreme Court Ruling

By on November 29, 2012 in Big Government, Commentary, Government, Health Care, Law, Nullification 5

Recently, the Supreme Court ruled that Obamacare was constitutional.

The Administration takes this as a green light to implement ObamaCare to its fullest extent possible. Because the election went in President Obama’s favor, the Senate and House have lost any desire to overturn the law. Without the overturn, it looks like the law making Obamacare a reality is going to stand forever.

Or is it?

In order to make Obamacare work properly, as it currently stands, there are two mainstays of Obamacare that must be carried out on the state level. Each state must implement an insurance exchange and they must drastically expand Medicare according to the law. These two items of ObamaCare will cost the states untold millions of dollars to implement.

When federal law goes bad, it is up to the states to protect their citizens. The legal theory is called nullification. Nullification is the idea that any given state has the right to invalidate federal laws that they consider unconstitutional. Somewhere along the line the Supreme Court got it wrong in their reasoning. Accordingly, it is like saying that since the government has a stake in GM it can create a law that says we can only buy GM cars. If we buy any other type of car we have to pay an extra tax on it. Continue Reading →

Continue Reading 5

The GOP’s Pledge to America

By on September 29, 2010 in Big Government, Republocrats 5

The House Republicans’ release of its “Pledge to America” has been met with criticism from across the ideological spectrum. While excoriation from the left was inevitable, those who were hoping that the GOP would set out a detailed agenda for limiting government were also not satisfied.

The 48-page document contains more pictures of Republican members of Congress than it does evidence that the GOP is seriously prepared to cut spending. While the introductory commentary is designed to appeal to the tea party movement, the actual “plan” to return budgetary sanity to Washington is both timid and incomplete.

The following are some thoughts on the pledge’s “plan to stop out of control spending and reduce the size of government”: Continue Reading →

Continue Reading 5

Your Choice: Thomas Jefferson or the Status Quo

By on August 5, 2010 in Nullification, The Opposition 1

When I appeared before hundreds of members of the Iowa GOP late last June on the eve of the state party convention and received a standing ovation from throngs of party loyalists, I knew the business-as-usual crowd would be annoyed. I had just finished explaining that if we are serious about limiting government, as opposed to giving pretty speeches and wringing our hands, we will have to make use of all the mechanisms of defense Thomas Jefferson bequeathed to the states, and not just the ones that don’t offend Katie Couric or the New York Times.

Nathan Tucker has fired the inevitable shot back, in the form of a more or less predictable review of my book Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century. I urge you, dear reader, to download a free chapter of the book at NullificationFreeChapter.com, and see if it intrigues you. Mr. Tucker, I am sorry to report, is not intrigued.

Jefferson’s argument is stated simply enough. If the federal government is allowed to hold a monopoly on determining the extent of its own powers, we have no right to be surprised when it keeps discovering new ones. If the federal government has the exclusive right to judge the extent of its own powers, it will continue to grow – regardless of elections, the separation of powers, and other much-touted limits on government power. In his famous Report of 1800, James Madison reminded Virginians and Americans at large that the judicial branch was not infallible, and that some remedy must be found for those cases in which all three branches of the federal government exceed their constitutional limits.

I argue, along with Jefferson and his long and honorable pedigree, that the states created the federal government, which they obviously did, and that as a principal to the federal compact each state reserves the right – if I may quote Jefferson himself – to “judge for itself, as well of infractions [of the Constitution] as of the mode and measure of redress.” Otherwise, the federal government will expand without limit.

CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL ARTICLE

Continue Reading 1

Is winning a principle or the result of following your principles?

By on May 10, 2010 in Elections, Republocrats 1

The republican choir keeps getting louder on the subject of “winning” in November. The fear of third party candidates, independent candidates, and rival republican candidates are getting the inside pundits nervous. Well, they should be. But what they don’t understand is that people are looking for principled candidate’s period. They have seen what happens even when republicans win; many abandon their principles.

That is the reason we are in this mess. The people “in charge” of producing candidates, have become corrupted in the pursuit of winning. So what is winning? In the Republican Party’s eyes it is having one more republican than democrat in congress so they can control the committees, and therefore the agenda. Based on Obama’s lightning bolt efforts to ruin this country that is not all bad. But if the people in Arizona elect John McCain, the man currently pretending to share conservative and limited government values, will we get a candidate for limited government? No way, he is the typical republican candidate willing to “compromise” to get legislation passed and frustrating the rest of us who want principled constitutional government.

The two parties are spending lavishly on themselves while the expansion of government continues. Eighty percent of Americans don’t trust the federal government and I would suggest that number is not far from what people think about the two parties. So what do we do?

Do we continue to vote for the lesser of two evils or do we purge the evil? We need to change the foundation of the way we elect candidates and it starts with principles. We need to find principled candidates and help them win. The culture in political parties is corrupt and we know it. We watch people giving large sums of money for access, and we watch party insiders spending that money on getting more money from big donors that have one principle in mind; their own interest. The money is poisonous, the backroom deals are criminal, and we are focused on winning. We are helping to elect people that are willing to compromise our principles for the good of a party.

Again I ask; is winning a principle or is it the result of following our principles? We can follow our principles but as our founders stated in the Declaration of Independence “we must mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor”… Our founders knew what principle was worth but do we?

Continue Reading 1

Delusional Republicans

By on April 16, 2010 in Republocrats, The Opposition 3

A pretty good post from FireDogLake:

I hear it all the time on the news or in public from my Republican friends about taking back the house and senate from the “socialist” “liberal” Democrats which I guess is code word for “The Democrats are the new Al-Qaeda” or something like that.

Anyways, I hear Republicans in the house say they are going to take back congress so they could do the work of the people. But wait a minute, didn’t the Republicans have a majority between 1995 and 2007. And yet, they increased the deficit by passing the Bush Tax Cuts and other budget-busting bills as well as starting two undeclared wars against two nations that had nothing to do with 9/11 because none of the hijackers came from Afghanistan. Then they passed Medicare Part D the same way: through backroom deals and so-called bribes. How can I or anyone trust the GOP now after the fact that they destroyed the trust of even their own supporters?

The answer is, we don’t because they and the Democrats increased the deficit and continued to print money out of thin air. How can the Republicans say with a straight face that they will fix Washington if we only elect good candidates. Wrong GOP, unless you stand on principles the way Ron Paul does, you will lose and your party will be reduced to nothing and go the way of the Whig Party.

Click here to read the rest

Continue Reading 3

Resisting DC: Not Just for Republicans

By on April 11, 2010 in Big Government, Republocrats 1

A massive movement continues to build momentum as those unwilling to submit to unconstitutional Federal demands gather in huge numbers, but what kinds of people are these?  The establishment media would have us believe that the resistance is only a ‘Republican scheme’, but a new report by The Winston Group suggests that 40% of those in alignment with the TEA Parties also identify themselves as Democrats or Independents.  Liberty and limited government are not partisan issues it seems, good news for a blue state like California.  Feel free to share these numbers the next time someone passes off our resistance as a GOP plot.

-B

New polling data examines the demographics and political philosophy behind the Tea Party Movement

WASHINGTON DC (April 1, 2010) — Tea Party activists may be ardent supporters of economic conservatism but are similar to the overall electorate when it comes to economic priorities, according to the findings of a new report released by The Winston Group today on the political movement.

In one of the most extensive looks to date at just who Tea Party activists are, how they think, and the ideas that matter to them, the report found that 17% of the people polled considered themselves “part of the Tea Party movement” and more than four in ten Tea Party members said they were either Independents or Democrats.

In three national surveys, done for New Models from December 2009 through February 2010, 57% of Tea Party members called themselves Republicans, another 28% said they were Independents, and 13% were Democrats. Two-thirds of Tea Party members identify as conservatives but 26% say they are moderate and 8% described themselves as liberal.

for more data and the complete report click here

Continue Reading 1

How Republicans gave us Health Care “Reform”

By on March 27, 2010 in Big Government, Republocrats 3

I can think of many ways that Republicans directly contributed to what we’ve gotten today – but here’s two of the most prominent, in my opinion:

1. Medicare Part D: Many of the republicans today that are railing on the unconstitutionality of the health care law that’s been signed by Obama are the same people who had NO problem voting in favor of the largest expansion of federally-run health care since the 1960′s. George Bush championed the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) and went into effect on January 1, 2006.

2. The Patriot Act: Many of the republicans today that are railing on the unconstitutionality of the health care law that’s been signed by Obama are the same people who had NO problem voting in favor of a bill rammed through Congress – without even reading it. So, what’s the natural result? When Democrats came to power, they gave us an even longer bill, that many, if not most, have not even read or understood.

The moral of the story? Both parties are responsible for what we’re getting today. And…if you think violations of the Constitution and your liberty started in January 2009, you’ve been missing quite a bit.

Continue Reading 3

Fracture the Big Government Vote

By on December 28, 2009 in Elections, Republocrats 6

Republicrats-742810Who has grown the federal government more in the last 70 years, big government R or big government D? Who has regulated away more of your liberty, red big government or blue big government?

Who Cares!!!

The point is the two parties have learned to collude together to continually grow their power and diminish individual liberty. This is hard to admit because we feel like one party or the other used to be great and if we stick with it we can fix it. To me, this is similar to a battered spouse saying “other than getting drunk and beating me up once a week he/she is a great person.” I say it is time to end this abusive relationship and admit the two parties have failed liberty long ago.

Now that we are ready to restore constitutional liberty, the threatened centralized powers warn us if we, citizen legislators, run for legislative office it will fracture the red big government vote we will get too much of the blue big government.

Did you notice there is NO CHOICE FOR LIMITED GOVERNMENT OR CONSTITUTIONAL LIBERTY? Are we not supposed to notice or be afraid to say something? Should we listen to their lies one more time and hope this time it works out?

I say it is time to fracture the big government vote. They are not invincible. Big government is defeatable. We the people are the only ones who can fail liberty. Citizens are stepping forward now in states across the country. Find liberty minded candidates in your state. Support them and not your failed relationship with a big party.

Continue Reading 6