Flash Editorials April 21, 2012

April 21, 2012

By Russell D. Longcore

The Nation I: Twelve Secret Service agents and ten military personnel went to Colombia on an advance security detail before the President attended a meeting in Cartagena last week. They stuck to the old adage…”wheels up, rings off.” When they got there, they rounded up at least 20 hookers and did what men do with hookers. The next morning, one of the agents tried to stiff (yes, I know) his paramour and she called the cops. I don’t know what the big furor is. Men of too much power and too little morals regularly step out of line. And military personnel? Please! Ever been to the area just outside a military base? More titty bars, porn shops and massage parlors per square mile than anywhere else. I’m just thinking that they were good consumers trying to get a volume discount. It’s laughable that anyone in America cares about this while this President is taking American into the gulag as fast as he can. Perspective, folks…perspective.

The Nation II: This week, the Virginia Legislature overwhelmingly passed a bill that nullifies the National Defense Authorization Act. The governor has promised to sign the bill. You remember where Virginia is? Sharing a common border with Washington DC? This is a small glimmer of hope that the states haven’t completely caved in to DC’s plans for America. But signing a bill don’t mean shit. Let’s see what Virginia law enforcement does when some Federal goon tries to enforce the NDAA on a Virginia citizen. I hope the Virginia law allows for clapping a Fed in irons and throwing him in jail…if he didn’t get shot first.

The Nation III: George Zimmerman had a good week. One judge recused herself from his case, and in Friday’s hearing, another judge granted him bail at $150,000…of which he only has to post 10% to be free from the Greybar Hotel. In a newsclip, I saw Zim’s lawyer questioning one of the detectives in the case. He asked him if the police had any evidence who started the fight that ended in Martin’s death. “No,” the cop replied. The attorney was trying to make the case that a charge of Second Degree Murder was a politically motivated charge, not based in facts. Zim’s lawyer won. Naturally, the family of Martin was not happy.

International I: India successfully launched a missile on Thursday that can carry a nuclear warhead up to 5,000 kilometers. Why isn’t Washington having a hissy fit? Iran doesn’t have anywhere close to this technology. And India is buying oil from Iran with gold and rupees. Answer: because India has a billion people and isn’t cowed by DC. Answer 2: India also has lots of gold and is one of the BRIC nations. India doesn’t need America, except to pay for Tech Support and Customer Service.

International II: In Bahrain, the government and protesters are having constant violent clashes, and much blood is being spilled on both sides. The Formula One Grand Prix event is supposed to be held there Sunday, but race officials are talking about canceling the event. That’ll show em. Nothing worse than a spinout when a tire runs through a puddle of blood.

Business: I saw a video Friday by Gerald Celente, founder of the Trends Research Institute. He was talking about how the rich and powerful can steal billions in fraudulent scams and go scot free, yet if you or I steal a pack of gum from the 7-11 we will be face down on the pavement with a cop’s knee on our neck. And he’s right. When banks and investment houses can play fast and loose with your money, you don’t really own it. Here is Celente’s money quote: “If you don’t have your money, it’s not yours.” The only money you can count on is the money that you physically hold and can touch. Celente has liquidated all his paper investments and is 100% in gold and silver. In fact, Celente had made a purchase of gold on a future delivery contract through MF Global, and when that company went bankrupt, there went his gold purchase. He said he’s recovered about 60% of his money, but the rest is gone. And this video by Celente only backs up what I have been telling you now for months…How much of your savings and investments should you keep in stocks, bonds and mutual funds? Only that amount you are willing to completely lose. Liquidate ALL paper assets right now and get into precious metals that you can hold and touch.

That brings me to tonight’s commercial message. Quick Question: Do you know how much invested money it takes for you to earn $1,000 month in income without touching the principal? The math is easy. $1,000 a month is $12,000 a year, right? But what kind of return on investment can you expect these days? Could you get a 3% return? Maybe. But let’s use that number. You would have to have $400,000 in some investment that earned 3% a year to get yourself $1,000 a month. Next question: How many of you could live on $1,000 a month? Don’t you need $3,000…$4,000…$8,000 or more to live? And we haven’t factored in the inflation rate, which is about 3% and is going higher. Do you have $1.2 million, or $1.6 million…or $3.2 million in investments? No young families I know have that kind of money. Only a few six-figure income earners that I know have it either. And in an economic depression…which we are in NOW…putting that kind of money away is next to impossible. But there’s a business in America right now that throws off monthly income just like an annuity. It’s my energy business. Think about your utility bills. You pay your energy bills every month, and every month, your energy provider earns a little profit on your payment. Now multiply that times thousands. Folks, there is a huge amount of money in the energy business, and you could get paid just like the big monopolies. Imagine owning a business that throws off income every month on a life-essential service that every adult that lives indoors pays every month. To learn more about this unique business, and see if this business is right for you, go to: MasterpieceEnergy.com. Look to the left and click on “The Ignite Business Plan” to learn about a truly recession-proof business.

Economy I: The number of actual new unemployment claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 367,550 in the week ending April 14, a decrease of 22,916 from the previous week. Yet, the Labor Department reported 386,000 new jobless claims last week. I know that many of you just skip over this because this heading is always the same, showing how breathtakingly stupid the Labor Department is. But think a little deeper, friends. Labor is only one Federal department or bureaucracy. You’ve seen how the GSA acts when no one’s looking. And the Secret Service imbroglio is merely the tip of the iceberg. ALL OF THE bureaucracies are wildly wasteful, and they know that Americans won’t do ANYTHING about it.

Sports: OOPS! At a team event, the parent of one of the University of Alabama’s football players was holding the $30,000 Waterford crystal football-shaped trophy when he caught his shoe on a rug. He dropped the trophy which shattered on the floor. Team officials are looking for a way to replace the trophy. Excuse me? This is easy. The parent likely has homeowner’s insurance, which provides liability insurance. File a claim with his insurer, and call Waterford. They still remember how to make the trophy…they make one each year. Done.

Entertainment: So sorry to hear of the passing of two enormous talents in music. Levon Helm, the founder of The Band, died Thursday after a long battle with cancer. A gentle man, superb musician and a gentleman, he was still performing until recently. And Dick Clark died this week from a heart attack. Clark founded “American Bandstand,” the teen music show that started all other rock music shows. I remember in the early 60s that “Bandstand” came on ABC at noon on Saturdays. Everybody I knew tried to be home for the show on Saturdays. You might not know that Clark also created and produced the American Music Awards show that has been fantastically successful for decades. Both men made enormous contributions to American music.

Dump DC: Six Letters That Can Change History.

Copyright 2012: Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Flash Editorials April 7, 2012

April 7, 2012

By Russell D. Longcore

The Nation I: This week, President Barry got caught talking in front of a microphone without a teleprompter telling him what to say. For those of you living under a rock, the Supremes are going to rule on whether or not Obamacare is Constitutional. Barry called them an “unelected group” (true and intentional), and that overturning the law would be an “unprecedented, extraordinary step” and that they should not overturn the law which was enacted by a “democratically elected Congress.” God, where do I start? Let me start here…Barry’s right. Not that overturning law would be unprecedented…it’s not. But judicial oversight was INVENTED by the Supreme Court in Marbury v. Madison in 1803. The doctrine of judicial review cannot be found anywhere in Article III of the Constitution. The state legislatures and state courts are where liberty should be protected and where Federal tyranny should be nullified. But poking the bear with a stick is never a good idea, and Mr. President may be sorry that he did not stay with prepared remarks. These nine robed bears remember full well when he invited them to sit in the front row at the 2009 State of the Union Address, and then scolded them in front of the world for a decision he did not like on campaign finance. Curious, though. Back then, superPACs were evil. This year, he’s planning on having some of his own. May the bears eat his law and shit it back at him.

The Nation II: What practical lessons can we all learn from the Trayvon Martin/George Zimmerman fiasco? First, don’t ever join or become the neighborhood watch guy. Mind your own business and be the watch guy for your own family or just you and a close neighbor. Do you have any idea how much personal liability you open yourself up to by patrolling your neighborhood with a firearm? I am sure most neighborhood watch groups do not buy a liability insurance policy for their acts. Second, you must know the law in your own state for the use of deadly force. I’m not saying Zimmerman violated Florida law. I’m just saying that the deadly force doctrine is complicated and changes very quickly in a physical confrontation. For example, if you’re being threatened by an assailant and you draw your firearm, OK. But unless that assailant makes a move on you, you cannot shoot him lawfully. As soon as the threat is diminished, such as you move away or he moves away, the deadly force justification goes away. If you must shoot, put two in his torso and one in his head. Dead guys don’t testify. Make sure your story is the only one you have to deal with. Third, don’t talk to cops. I’m not saying you should not cooperate, but everything you do and say will be used against you in court. And fourth, if you can leave the scene before police arrive, I recommend it. Even if you are the shooter. Get away from the scene and call an attorney immediately. “Lawyer up,” as the saying goes. So shoot, scoot and lawyer up.

The Nation III: The General Services Administration (GSA) had a big conference in Las Vegas recently, for which they spent over $800,000. They spend money on clowns, a mind reader and a standup comic. They spent $75,000 on a team-building event in which they built a bicycle. They sent attendees home with commemorative coins and a yearbook for the event. This is the government agency that is the landlord for all the federal buildings and is supposed to hold down costs. When this came to light this week, GSA Administrator Martha Johnson got the axe. I’m amazed at the amount of outrage this has generated. People, listen up. The Congress spends $2.2 trillion a year, and you get your panties in a wad over eight hundred K? Get some perspective. The GSA party in Vegas is not what is stealing your liberty and taxing you to death. Sure, it’s an example of how out of touch Washington is. But America should be storming the Capitol. Congress and the White House don’t fear the people, and until they do, not much in Washington is going to change.

International I: Hugo Chavez, President of Venezuela, has been in Cuba undergoing cancer treatments since late March. I understand he got a few minutes with Pope Bennie last week. Let’s hope the Pope brought his little vial of healing oil with him to Havana. Chavez is 57 and does not want to die just yet. He wants to dick with Washington a little more before his candle goes out.

International II: Malawian President Bingu wa Mutharika, age 78, died this week of a heart attack. He was a reformer and pretty popular in Malawi. They export a lot of tobacco in Malawi, although the tobacco goes into cigarettes, not cigars. Which brings me to a point. Are you aware of all the toxic chemicals that go into making paper? Bunches of nasty stuff. If you’ve ever lived near a paper mill, you will never forget the stench of the mill. But people around the world think it’s OK to grind up some tobacco, wrap it in paper, light it on fire and breathe in the smoke. What a lousy way to get your nicotine fix!! If you’re going to smoke tobacco, why not at least look for a stick with a tobacco wrapper instead of paper? Smoke cigars. Smoke pipes. But cigarette smoking is kind of stupid if you ask me. White men learned tobacco smoking from the American Indians. I’ll bet they didn’t die of lung cancer. I could be wrong, though.

Business: Remember back about a month ago, when the Obama Justice Department struck a deal with the mega-banks to limit the amount of money they were liable for because of the “robo-signing” of mortgages as well as lots of other criminal shenanigans in the real estate foreclosure debacle of the last 5-6 years? Well, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet! Part two of the housing slump is getting ready to happen. The big settlement now allows banks and lenders to finish foreclosures that were previously clogged up. It doesn’t matter whether the banks have legal title to the house. The inventory of troubled homes in America is said to be north of 9 million. That means that (1) in the process of liquidating these properties, values are going to continue plummeting, and (2) the housing market will not find bottom any time soon, and (3) the housing market will not begin to recover until 9 MILLION houses clear the market. That means somebody will have to accept the losses on all the foreclosures and write them off. Don’t expect the banks to do this. They’re too big to fail. By the time the housing market hits true bottom, expect to see housing prices about a third of what they used to be. Not 33% lower…67% lower. A $100,000 house in 2006 could sell in the mid-$30,000 range over the next 2-5 years. Are you in the real estate business? Are you in the mortgage business? Perhaps you might think about another career path. Last week, we talked about trends, and sunset industries. Real estate is a sunset industry. Massive amounts of overpriced inventory can only mean one thing…fire sale pricing. Does it make sense to keep trying to milk a dry cow?

That brings me to tonight’s commercial message. Energy is the last industry in North America to deregulate. Think about all the industries that have deregulated in the last hundred years…shipping, trucking, air travel, long distance services, the phone companies, and more. When deregulation happens, there is always a massive transfer of wealth from the old monopolies to the new competitors. Companies like UPS, Fedex, Sprint, Verizon, Southwest Airlines and Airtran….none of them existed until deregulation happened. And now energy deregulation is sweeping across America. The energy industry is also the biggest industry ever to deregulate, a $500 Billion a year giant. The new trend, my friends, is energy deregulation. Here’s my question: Do you want to take advantage of a fast-growing trend that will continue growing over the next 20-30 years? Every adult that lives indoors pays an energy bill every month. Energy is a non-negotiable life-essential monthly expense. Many people will pay the light bill before the rent simply because if they don’t, the utility will cut off their service. But YOU can position yourself so that you get paid a monthly income when hundreds or thousands of individuals and businesses pay their monthly energy bills. Those visionaries who get in early stand to make fortunes over the coming years! To learn more about my Energy business, go to: MasterpieceEnergy.com. Watch the opening video about “Lifestyle.” Then look to the left and click on “Defining Moments” to learn about a truly recession-proof business.

Economy I: The number of actual new unemployment claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 311,339 in the week ending March 31, down only 12,054 from the previous week. Yet, the Labor Department reported 357,000 new jobless claims…a number higher than the real number by over 46,000!! Folks…what am I missing? What possible benefit is there to the Obama Administration to over-report new jobless claims numbers week after week? Apparently, I’m missing some Machiavellian reason for lying to America.

Sports Part I: The University of Kentucky stepped up strong Monday night and beat Kansas for the Men’s basketball national title. Congratulations, Wildcats!

Sports Part II: The Baylor Women’s basketball team went 40-0 this season, and their last win was the national championship. And most of their star are undergrads and will return next year. I wonder how far they can extend this streak? Should be a great year for them next season.

Entertainment: Professional smartass Keith Olbermann got his smartass fired last week from Current TV, the cable channel founded by Al Gore. With a decidedly liberal, socialist-loving, big government supporting viewpoint, the channel decided that Olbermann was too much of a petulant wannabe star to put up with any longer. Current TV hired Olbermann and was building their whole persona around him. Olbermann sued Current TV for about $50 million, and his former bosses are countersueing for unspecified damages. Think about it. How bad do you have to be to get Al Gore to get a belly full of you? Go back to sports, Keith. I liked some of your stuff on Current TV, but stop being a prick.

That’s all for tonight. Thanks for watching. I am Russell D. Longcore. For all of us here at Dump D C: Good night and good luck.

Dump DC: Six Letters That Can Change History.

Copyright 2012: Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Flash Editorials March 31, 2012

March 31, 2012

By Russell D. Longcore

The Nation I: It is reported that Former Vice President Dick Cheney had a heart transplant last Saturday. That’s not quite true. Yes, he did have heart surgery, but it was to install a heart that had never been there before.

The Nation II: John Corzine, the former President of MF Global, was found to have personally placed orders to move billions of dollars out of his own customer’s accounts into wildly risky Credit Default Swaps. And this criminal will not see one minute of jail time for his felonious actions.

The Nation III: Did you buy a lottery ticket for the Mega Millions lotto game for Friday night? The jackpot is an estimated $650 million, an all-time record. If you tune into this website next week and find it unchanged, you’ll know I won and I retired. I guess I could leave a final video saying goodbye. We’ll see…

The Nation IV: President Barry has been running around making speeches this week about how the big oil companies are making huge profits, that he wants to take their tax benefits away from them. Just like a socialist to blame everybody for the shit that he caused. Ladies and Gentlemen, the reason that American are paying north of $4 a gallon for gasoline is that Barry and the Congress borrowed trillions of dollars and then flooded the world with them. America, what you’re experiencing is INFLATION, not obscene corporate profits. When the value of the dollar drops, it takes more dollars to buy the same products and services. All of Washington lies, friends. They caused our economic trouble. They just count on you being too stupid to know the difference.

The Nation V: And here’s another stupid thing Obama is saying lately. He keeps telling audiences that the rich have to “pay their fair share.” I could go on for hours about this one, but let me make one point. I’ll even concede the high ground of the lexicon, and accept the ridiculous concept of the “fair share.” I will pay my fair share as a taxpayer after, and only after, Washington starts SPENDING its fair share. Spending $1.40 and only taking in $1.00 is not fair. Borrowing trillions is not fair. And a Federal budget running north of $2 trillion a year is not fair. When DC gets serious about making real spending cuts in current year budgets, then and only then will I come to the table and talk about paying my fair share.

The Nation VI: Final Obama story, I swear to God. I don’t want to create nausea in you fine viewers and readers. The Supreme Court heard oral arguments for and against ObamaCare this week. And many State Attorneys General were in attendance. But this is being handled in the wrong place. No state should come hat in hand to the US Supreme Court and ask for standing and a ruling against the FedGov. The State legislatures should pass laws nullifying the ObamaCare law in its entirety, with monetary and criminal penalties for Feds who try to enforce the law in states. Oh…I forgot. The state governments have accepted that they are little more then provinces of the kingdom and must bow to Washington. There is an old saying…“You train people how you want to be treated, even when you do nothing.” Apparently, the states like being slaves.

The Nation VII: Mitt Romney picked up the endorsement this week of globalist former president George HW Bush. So the New World Order has started to show its hand as to its chosen candidate. Folks, don’t you get it? The election system is rigged. If you continue to vote, you are part of the problem, not the solution.

International I: Pope Bennie spent three days in Cuba last week and met briefly with hard-to-imagine-he’s still-breathing Fidel Castro. So there they were together, face to face…two despots…one man representing a system whereby human beings are oppressed and impoverished while their human liberty is stolen by repressive laws, dogmatic rules and fear…and Fidel.

International II: Myanmar…formerly known as Burma, is having a national election soon. The Union Solidarity and Development Party is led by President Thein Sein. The nation has an autocratic president, a rubber-stamp parliament and a strong military. Even if the seats in parliament that are up for grabs are won by the opposing party, nothing will really change. Sounds exactly like the United States. Even the name “Union Solidarity and Development Party” is like Washington. The Federal Government is the honey pot for the unions in America, and in the USA, “development” means “fund-raising,’ like the Development Department of your favorite charity. So it’s unions and raising money in DC. Congratulations, Washington. You’re just like a repressive totalitarian regime in Southeast Asia. Or perhaps Myanmar is like you.

Business: Today’s business report is a lesson in trends. Electronics retailer Best Buy is in deep trouble. This week, they announced that the company is closing another 50 stores and laying off over 400 employees in management and support. Same store sales are down over 2%, and they are headed for doom like their old competitors Circuit City and CompUSA. Why? Because lots of shoppers go to the Best Buy stores to test out various electronics and games, and then go to the Internet to make their purchases for lower prices. Best Buy is trying to switch from its big-box-store format to smaller stores in a bid to save the company and maintain profitability. How is this about trends, you ask? Being on the back side of a trend is a ticket to oblivion. Think about all the trends you’ve seen come and go in your lifetime. Remember leisure suits, and disco, and vinyl records, then reel-to-reel tape machines, and cassette tapes, and urban cowboys, and day traders, and music on CDs, and pagers? And cell phones in a bag or the size of a brick? Trends are also some of the economic bubbles America has experienced, like the stock market run-up of the mid-80s with the Black Monday crash of 1987, the tech boom of the mid-90s to early 2000s, and the real estate boom that just collapsed in 2006. When a trend is building, it’s easy to make money. But on the down slope of a trend, lots of people go broke. If you were the best vinyl record manufacturer in the USA, who cares? And if you are betting your financial future on a sunset industry, you are in for some rough times ahead. So in business, don’t you think it would be best to take advantage of any trend that is gaining momentum…rather than losing momentum?

That brings me to tonight’s commercial message. Energy is the last industry in North America to deregulate. Think about all the industries that have deregulated in the last hundred years…shipping, trucking, air travel, long distance services, the phone companies, and more. When deregulation happens, there is always a massive transfer of wealth from the old monopolies to the new competitors. Companies like UPS, Fedex, Sprint, Verizon, Southwest Airlines and Airtran….none of them existed until deregulation happened. And now energy deregulation is sweeping across America. The energy industry is also the biggest industry ever to deregulate, a $500 Billion a year giant. The new trend, my friends, is energy deregulation. Here’s my question: Do you want to take advantage of a fast-growing trend that will continue growing over the next 20-30 years? Every adult that lives indoors pays an energy bill every month. Energy is a non-negotiable life-essential monthly expense. Many people will pay the light bill before the rent simply because if they don’t, the utility will cut off their service. But YOU can position yourself so that you get paid a monthly income when hundreds or thousands of individuals and businesses pay their monthly energy bills. Those visionaries who get in early stand to make fortunes over the coming years! To learn more about my Energy business, go to: MasterpieceEnergy.com. Watch the opening video about “Lifestyle.” Then look to the left and click on “Defining Moments” to learn about a truly recession-proof business.

Economy I: The number of actual new unemployment claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 319,349 in the week ending March 24, down only 33 from the previous week. Yet once again, the Labor Department reported 359,000 new jobless claims…a number higher than the real number by over 39,000!! For an administration that wants to get re-elected in November, these bureaucrats certainly have forgotten how to cook the books to make Obama’s economy look better. If they just told the truth. But what was I thinking? The Federal Government NEVER tells the truth.

Sports: The NCAA Final Four is Kentucky, Louisville, Ohio State and Kansas. Who do you like? I like coach Rick Pitino of Louisville. He’s been to the Final Four six times with three different schools. They spanked Michigan State to get there. Go Cardinals.

Sports II: Coaching legend Bill Parcells will be the head coach for the New Orleans Saints for this coming season, replacing Sean Payton who has been suspended from coaching for A YEAR by the NFL for his role in the Saints’ bounty scandal that put price tags on opposing players. Good choice by the Saints. Parcells sure knows how to win, although he wasn’t able to put together a winning program as the VP for the Miami Dolphins.

Entertainment: The movie Hunger Games opened on March 23rd and took in $152.5 million in its first weekend. If you want to see a fantastic film that is entirely Libertarian in philosophy, see this flick. And remember that this book series is wildly popular with teens. So What? That means that the upcoming generation understands that big government is the enemy, and they will be looking for an alternative. Secession is the answer to all their questions.

Dump DC: Six Letters That Can Change History.

Copyright 2012: Russell D. Long core. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Ockham’s Razor and Secession

March 21, 2012

By Russell D. Longcore

(This is an update of a 2010 article.)

Ockham’s Razor is the principle that “entities must not be multiplied beyond necessity” (entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem). The popular restatement of this principle is that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

William of Ockham was a 14th-century English logician that came up with this principle. The term razor refers to the act of shaving away unnecessary theories to get to the simplest explanation.

So today we’re going to look at secession, founding documents and compare them to the other solutions presented by various modern thinkers and writers.

The Articles of Confederation

We should begin this discussion with thirteen new sovereign North American nations in 1781. They decided that they wanted to be a confederacy of thirteen sovereign nations. The Articles of Confederation (AOC) were ratified that year, but had been sent to the various new nations for review as early as 1777. That tells us that the colonies, due to the words of the Declaration of Independence, considered themselves free and independent nations, and were fighting the British prior to ratification of the AOC. The war did not end until 1783.

The Articles of Confederation acknowledged and guarded the sovereignty of each new nation, and created the united States of America as an errand boy…sort of a property management company, designed to do the bidding of the principals. The USA was funded by the several State legislatures. The AOC formed a Congress of only one house, the unicameral legislature. The USA only existed as a Committee of the States when the Congress was in session. And, alteration of the AOC had to be approved “in Congress assembled” and ratified by ALL thirteen States.

The AOC was pretty simple and required no Bill of Rights. After ratification in 1781, the United States was ineffective until 1787. The weakness of the AOC was intended to protect the sovereignty of the States. Consequently there were lots of disputes between States…primarily about commerce between the States…that the United States was unable to settle. Then Shay’s Rebellion occurred in Massachusetts (Massachusetts politicians deserved it), and many made calls for a stronger government. Thomas Jefferson refused to be alarmed by the rebellion, and uttered the famous quote: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

So, for a confederation of thirteen sovereign nations who wanted to solve common problems, the Articles of Confederation were the simplest solution. But malevolent men brushed it aside for a new government with nearly unlimited powers.

The US Constitution

The Philadelphia Convention of 1787 was organized and held under the premise of amending the AOC to settle the ongoing trade disputes between the States. But the more radical leaders like Alexander Hamilton pledged to entirely rewrite the AOC into a new Constitution with overarching power for a new nation, setting the stage to subsume the States under a strong central government. (For a detailed history of the Constitutional Convention, read “Hologram of Liberty,” by Kenneth W. Royce.)

Perhaps you didn’t know that, of the 55 delegates to the Philadelphia Convention, only eight had signed the Declaration of Independence. Men like Sam Adams, Thomas Paine and Christopher Gadsden were not even chosen. Patrick Henry refused to sign the Constitution, saying, ”I smelt a rat.”

As Lysander Spooner wrote in his epic “No Treason,” “The Constitution has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it.”

The US Constitution was a quiet coup d’etat. It established the foundation for an uncontrollable and unaccountable central government. The seeds sown in 1789 are now a maturing crop of crushing taxation, relentless regulation and unchecked tyranny. The US Constitution was designed to be ambiguous, to protect the Federal government from the citizens, and to perpetuate the Federal government into the future. Everything that is touched by the Constitution, and the Federal Government created by it, is part and parcel of its ability to enslave. One cannot be separated from the other. Reform is impossible. The Federal Government that has grown like a cancer on the American population is now so complicated…so ubiquitous…that it cannot be controlled. Ironically, even the Federal Government cannot now control its own growth. And like a cancer, soon the Federal government and its Constitution will consume its host…we Americans…and it will die.

So Ockhams’ Razor cannot be used to shave away the unworkable and unmanageable bureaucracies of the Constitution and its whelp, Washington, DC…any more then a close shave separates one from the pigment of one’s skin. The Constitution created the Federal Government. They have both played their roles exactly as intended by the Framers. The corruption and tyranny is genetically designed into the Constitution.

Nullification

Nullification begins with two preconceptions: (1) that there is a compelling reason and some unknown, unstated benefit for states to remain in the Union; and (2) that states and “we the People” retain power not delegated to the US. But the Tenth Amendment phrase, “nor prohibited by it to the States,” usually goes unmentioned. In order for states to nullify Federal law, states must have the ability to enforce their own will. That is simple human nature. A father who cannot enforce his will has unruly children. A teacher that cannot enforce classroom discipline has bedlam. A law enforcement organization without guns and the authority to use deadly force would be entirely ineffectual. And finally, a nation without its own money and without its own militia cannot enforce its will.

By ratifying a Constitution authorizing the Federal government to collect taxes directly from the people, and power to control the state militias, and by giving the Federal government the power to coin money, the states willingly sold themselves into slavery to the United States.

It is common for slaves to groan under the weight of the oppression of their masters. But slaves who have no money of their own and no weapons to defend themselves can only balefully sing “Nobody Knows The Trouble I’ve Seen”…while they continue to obey the Master.

Applying Ockham’s Razor to nullification shows the simplest explanation: Nullification is only possible if the slavemaster allows it. (Remember the Federal REAL ID Act?) Any time that the slavemaster resists nullification and moves to punish the slave for resistance, he will lay the lash to the back of the slave without mercy.

The Constitutional Convention

Many today call for a “ConCon.” They optimistically propose that if we can only rewrite the Constitution, “We The People” can bring the Federal Government under control once again. Those hopeful folks must not have read that old Constitution and the method whereby a ConCon can occur. The deck is stacked in favor of “the house.” In Article V, it states that two-thirds of the state legislatures (34 states) must apply for a ConCon, or that both houses of Congress must approve of the ConCon by a two-thirds majority. A ConCon opens the Constitution to any amendment or to be entirely rewritten. Then, whatever is produced by the ConCon must be ratified by three-fourths of the State legislatures (38 states).

Why would two-thirds of the ruling class in Congress voluntarily open themselves to being fired? They already have all the power. There is no benefit to Congress to participate in a ConCon. And to think that 34 states would agree to a ConCon, and then that 38 states would ratify a new Constitution, is naivete writ large. So, Ockham’s Razor, applied to the ConCon, leads us to the conclusion that the states are too inured to the US Constitution to change it.

Election Victories and the Two-Party System

Most Americans still believe in elections. Most Americans still believe in the two-party system; roughly 40% are Republicans, 40% are Democrats. They faithfully trot to the polls whenever they are told to. But there is no quorum…no minimum number at which an election is made null and void. So if only three votes are counted, someone will win. And now, in the age of electronic voting machines that are reprogrammed to commit fraud in nearly every election, the integrity of the voting process cannot be guaranteed. As if it ever was. Ockhams’ Razor applied to elections tells us that elections are intrinsic to the Constitution and the Federal Government’s system. To continue voting is to perpetuate the system, but voting cannot abolish or amend it.

Secession and Sovereignty

Any entity subject to the US Constitution must play by its rules. That includes the US Federal Government and the serf states. But in 2012, Washington completely ignores the Constitution and does exactly what it desires. There are absolutely no control mechanisms on the Federal Government. Ockham’s Razor will indicate that any effort to reform the United States cannot succeed, since remaining a part of the system requires slavish obedience to it. Voting in Federal elections only mollifies the voter and makes him believe his vote matters. Nullification cannot be successful since the States cannot enforce it.

The only solution…the simplest solution…is Secession. Secession makes nullification, Constitutional Conventions and Federal election victories irrelevant. It removes a State from the dictates and tyranny of the Constitution and the United States Federal Government. It seeks no overthrow, desires no further amendment, begs no permission. It is the embodiment of the natural law of freedom of association.

The only solution to the darkness of tyranny is the sunlight of secession. Who will be first?

DumpDC. Six Letters That Can Change History.

© Copyright 2012, Russell D. Longcore. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.


Constitutional Sheriff

May 2, 2011

by Cassandra Anderson

(Editor’s Note: It gladdens my seditious heart to learn that law enforcement officers like Sheriff Tony DeMeo exist and are willing to stand in opposition to the Feds. This is the only form of nullification that actually works. The office of County Sheriff is the most powerful law enforcement office in America. County Sheriffs have enormous power to either protect individual liberty and property rights…or stand down and allow individuals to be victimized by Washington. To the extent that any state can muster the support of its sheriffs, that state can thwart all of Washington’s unconstitutional acts.)

In this 3-part video interview with Tony DeMeo, Sheriff of Nye County, Nevada, he explains that he is a Constitutional Sheriff and that authority for public office holders is derived from the people. He tells the story about how he used the Constitution as his foundation in the saga of Nye County rancher Wayne Hage’s disputes over encroachments by the federal government. While Wayne Hage’s case centered around property rights in federally managed lands, Sheriff Tony DeMeo’s example is relevant for everyone to understand the power of local government, the importance of following the Constitution and upholding the Tenth Amendment (states’ rights and sovereignty).

Wayne Hage, the author of “Storm Over Rangelands, Private Rights in Federal Lands” owned the Pine Creek cattle ranch in Nye County. Wayne Hage wrote his book after suffering illegal cattle seizures by armed federal agents and chronicled the history of how the robber baron bankers and railroad magnates monopolized the western states over 100 years ago. Hage wrote that the northern core financiers were aware that there are two ways to monopolize any resource, “One, get all of it for yourself that you can; two, keep anybody else from getting what you can’t.” Public Lands and National Forests were created along with restrictive regulations, using environmental protection as the excuse.

PART ONE:

The first video covers Wayne Hage’s discovery that the US Department of Forestry, an agency of the USDA, filed a claim for his water rights and later seized his cattle; the USDA Forestry Service used armed agents to accomplish the seizure. Hage believed that his cattle were confiscated so that he would be unable to show that he was using his water rights for ‘beneficial use’ in order to shut down his ranch. Water is scarce in Nevada and unless the landowner can prove he is using the water rights for ‘beneficial use’, the rights are removed.

part one

PART TWO:

In the late 1990s, before Sheriff DeMeo took office, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), an agency of the Department of Interior, seized more of Hage’s cattle off of his ranch, using armed federal agents. The sheriff at that time left town on a fishing trip.

Subsequently, when Sheriff DeMeo took office in 2003, he told his deputies that illegal cattle seizures were prohibited and that any federal agents attempting to confiscate cattle would be arrested. Shortly thereafter, the BLM arrived at Hage’s ranch to perform a seizure. The Sheriff’s Deputy told the federal agents that there would be no seizure or taking of cattle, per DeMeo’s decision based on the Constitution. The Deputy was told that the BLM federal agents intended to arrest DeMeo and use armed force to take Hage’s cattle. Sheriff DeMeo advised the federal agent that their SWAT team would be faced with Sheriff DeMeo’s SWAT team if they proceeded.

Sheriff DeMeo clearly stated that he refused any unlawful seizures on Wayne Hage’s estate. He further advised federal agents that if they could produce a lawful court order for seizing cattle, he would not take the cattle off of the land, but impound them there on Hage’s ranch. This is important because if seized cattle were to remain impounded on Hage’s ranch, then Wayne Hage could still show ‘beneficial use’ of his water rights.

part two

PART THREE:

In 2004, the BLM wanted authority for law enforcement over the roads in the federally managed Public Lands. Sheriff DeMeo said that because they were asking for the authority, that meant that they didn’t have that law enforcement power. Nye County passed a Resolution forbidding the BLM from encroachment, protecting state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment. Nevada also passed a State Law in 2005 (NRS 565.125) that requires a court order from the court of competent jurisdiction and submission of the order to the Sheriff’s Office before any agency seizes animals. All cattle ranches in Nye County are independent family owned operations.

Sheriff DeMeo also explains that his deputies are empowered to refuse unlawful orders, if the orders violate the US Constitution, the Nevada State Constitution, local laws or policy.

part three

PUBLIC LANDS:

Sheriff DeMeo said that while Nevada is more than 90% federally managed, these Public Lands are actually owned by The People and the federal government is limited in their authority under the Tenth Amendment and states’ rights.

Land ownership in Nevada is a complicated issue and the land is divided into “split estates”, or land that has both private and government interests. This means that while the private property owner holds title over his land that is Public Land (National Forests), he may or may not also own the water, mineral, grazing, oil, timber or wildlife rights on that property. Wayne Hage’s book “Storm Over Rangelands” details the history of the laws that bind the Western States to federal land management.

Public Lands are lands owned by the people of the United States under our Constitution Section 8 Clause 17: ‘To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;’

Sheriff DeMeo said that since the federal government has authority over 10 square miles, then the Public Lands are owned by the people for the benefit of all.

The federal government’s jurisdiction and authority in Public Lands are important for all Americans to become aware of because the federal government is expanding its control and privately owned property across America is targeted by the Wildlands Project.

CONCLUSION:

Sheriff DeMeo reported that after several disputes with the USDA’s Department of Forestry and the Department of Interior’s BLM, an understanding of jurisdiction has been accomplished to the satisfaction of his office. In fact, the federal government has since established annual meetings, the Western Sheriffs Summit, between these agencies and western area sheriffs.

Sheriff DeMeo studied the Constitution in New Jersey when he was a police officer, as it was a requirement for promotion. He said that because nearly every encounter with the public involves some aspect of respecting the Constitution, he has added additional study of the Constitution to the Nye County Sheriffs training academy curriculum that was in place before he took office.

Additionally, he has given his deputies decision making authority based on the Constitution, the Nevada State Constitution, local laws and policy. They are empowered with the right to refuse unlawful orders. Sheriff DeMeo issues Empowerment Cards to his deputies which set policy for deputies when they are in contact with the public and allows deputies to make field decisions as long as they do not violate the respective Constitutions, State Law and Policies.

Download Nye County Sheriff Empowerment Card (PDF) Sheriff DeMeo created the Empowerment Cards for his deputies shortly after he entered office in 2003. He attended a seminar given by Alan Brunacini of the Phoenix Fire Department who was the original author; DeMeo modified the cards to apply to law enforcement for his deputies to reference in the field. Sheriff DeMeo is interested in encouraging his deputies to make decisions and to be leaders.

A Sheriff’s Forum is held each month in Nye County and Sheriff DeMeo addresses all questions and concerns from the public.

©2011 Infowars.com is a Free Speech Systems, LLC company. All rights reserved.


Schweitzer calls ‘nullification’ bills in session ‘anti-American’

February 25, 2011

As reported by Mike Dennison on HelenAir.com

God help us…Montana Democrat governor Brian Schweitzer didn’t mean to get it, and he didn’t.

Chuck Baldwin must be so proud to live in Montana now.

Schweitzer actually expressed horror at nullification bills making their way through the Montana legislature, calling them “not the American way.”

But Governor, according to the US Constitution, it is the American way.

States created the US Federal government as their errand boy, with defined powers and duties. And when the Federal government oversteps their authority to act, it is the states that are supposed to correct the Washington errors. Nullification should be an important tool for states to use to keep Washington in line. No thinking individual should expect Washington to keep itself in line.

Then Governor Candy Ass says, “Does this create a job…educate a child…help a disabled person?” As Mr. Jefferson said in the Declaration of Independence: “…that to secure these (unalienable) rights, Governments are instituted among men, deriving the just powers from the consent of the governed…whenever any form of Government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.”

It is not the state’s right or duty to create a job, educate a child or help a disabled person. It is the state’s duty to protect and secure our unalienable rights.

People of Montana: Ignore your ignorant Governor. Replace him ASAP. Nullify everything that comes from Washington, since it is all illegal and unconstitutional. That will give you a taste for secession. Then one day, you’ll wake up and realize that sending your money to DC makes no sense, and you’d be better off keeping it. Then you will secede and thrive.

Read The Article HERE.


Null. Void. Of No Effect.

January 19, 2011

Pre-Secession Strategic Acts That States Can Do NOW

by Michael Boldin, Founder
Tenth Amendment Center

(Editor’s Note: States can certainly take these actions now. But if Washington fights back, no state presently possesses the autonomy to win against DC, since no state wields the Power of the Purse or the Power of the Sword.)

When Washington D.C. violates the constitution – as it does every single day – the essential question is – “what do we do about it?”

For countless decades, Americans have been responding through protests, lawsuits, and “voting the bums out.” Yet, year in and year out, federal power always grows. And it doesn’t matter which political part is in power, or what person occupies the white house either.

THE RIGHTFUL REMEDY

In 1798, Thomas Jefferson wrote that “whensoever the general government assumes undelegated powers….a nullification of the act is the rightful remedy.” [emphasis added]

Notice that TJ didn’t advise us to use nullification as a remedy “once in a while.” And he certainly didn’t tell us that a nullification is the rightful remedy after “we vote some bums out” or “we sue the federal government in federal court” or after anything else for that matter. Jefferson was pretty straightforward and recommended that every single time the federal government exercises powers not delegated to it in the constitution (there’s about 30 powers and nothing more), that we’re to reject and nullify those acts on a state level as they happen.

HAPPENING NOW

Already, more than two dozen states have virtually stopped the 2005 Real ID act dead in its tracks. How? By refusing to implement it. Fifteen states – most recently Arizona – are using the principles of the 10th Amendment to actively defy federal laws (and a supreme court ruling, too!) on marijuana. Eight states have passed Firearms Freedom Acts in an attempt to reject some federal gun laws and regulations. And seven states have passed Health Care Freedom Acts to block health care mandates from being enforced.

NULL. VOID. OF NO EFFECT.

Get used to reading these words, because the political climate is starting to swing a new direction. There is a growing number of people in America that are recognizing a simple truth – asking, demanding, or suing to get the federal government to fix problems caused by the federal government just doesn’t work.

Take, for example, the Federal Health Care Nullification Act, first introduced in Texas as HB297, and now also introduced in Montana (SB161), Wyoming (HB0035), Oregon (SB498) and Maine (LD58). Here’s an excerpt:

“the federal law known as the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act,” signed by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010, is not authorized by the Constitution of the United States and violates its true meaning and intent as given by the Founders and Ratifiers, and is hereby declared to be invalid, shall not be recognized, is specifically rejected, and shall be considered null and void and of no effect.”

But these bills, as introduced in Texas, Maine, Montana, Oregon, and Wyoming are far more than mere declarations or position statements.

ENFORCEMENT

Implied in any nullification legislation is enforcement of the state law. In the Virginia Resolution of 1798, James Madison wrote of the principle of interposition:

That this Assembly doth explicitly and peremptorily declare, that it views the powers of the federal government, as resulting from the compact, to which the states are parties; as limited by the plain sense and intention of the instrument constituting the compact; as no further valid that they are authorized by the grants enumerated in that compact; and that in case of a deliberate, palpable, and dangerous exercise of other powers, not granted by the said compact, the states who are parties thereto, have the right, and are in duty bound, to interpose for arresting the progress of the evil, and for maintaining within their respective limits, the authorities, rights and liberties appertaining to them.

In his famous speech during the war of 1812, Daniel Webster said:

“The operation of measures thus unconstitutional and illegal ought to be prevented by a resort to other measures which are both constitutional and legal. It will be the solemn duty of the State governments to protect their own authority over their own militia, and to interpose between their citizens and arbitrary power. These are among the objects for which the State governments exist.”

Here Madison and Webster assert what is required of nullification laws to be successful — that state governments not only have the right to resist unconstitutional federal acts, but that, in order to protect liberty, they are “duty bound to interpose” or stand between the federal government and the people of the state.

All five bills explicitly include this principle, and if passed, would impose penalties on federal agents for attempting to enforce National Health Care mandates in their state. For example, from Wyoming’s HB35:

Any official, agent or employee of the United States government or any employee of a corporation providing services to the United States government that enforces or attempts to enforce an act, order, law, statute, rule or regulation of the government of the United States in violation of this article shall be guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than five (5) years, a fine of not more than five thousand dollars ($5,000.00), or both.

Sources close to the Tenth Amendment Center tell us to expect approximately ten states to introduce such bills in the 2011 legislative session.

© 2011 by Tenth Amendment Center


The Secession Party

December 1, 2010

by Mitchell Langbert, Ph.D.

(Editor’s Note: Langbert is starting to think clearly. But the idea of a Secession Party maintains the notion that liberty can be re-established by politics.)

The United States of America has become too large and needs to be broken in two. As well, New York and other states that have an urban-rural split ought to be split. The nation has become too large to manage, as today’s Congress attests. This would be so even if ideological differences did not divide the nation and the states. The nation should be broken up into a red nation and a blue nation and New York should be broken up into upstate and downstate.

The Secession Party would aim to dissolve the union, undoing the work of Abraham Lincoln and reasserting the aims of the anti-Federalists, who opposed the scope and extent of federal power that came to pass under Washington.

When the United States was established in 1789, there were approximately four million Americans and 65 members of the House of Representatives. That is 60,000 Americans for every Representative. Today the nation’s population is 310 million and there are 435 members of the House of Representatives, 713,000 Americans for every Representative. Only special interests and financial donors have full access to Representatives. Increasing the number of Representatives would be administratively difficult because a House as representative as it was in 1789 would have 4,800 Representatives.

Historical Precedent

One nation in western history has been equal to the United States in terms of its power: Rome. By the late third century Emperor Diocletian established a rule of four, whereby two senior and two junior co-emperors oversaw a quarter of the Roman Empire each. He also began a shift of power from Rome to other cities. Ultimately, Byzantium, later named Constantinople, survived the western Roman Empire by nearly one thousand years. Diocletian could not have anticipated that quartering the Empire would allow part of it to survive. I claim that halving the United States into free and social democratic halves would allow the free half to survive as the social democratic half sinks into a dark age.

American Decentralization

The forces that encouraged Diocletian to think in terms of decentralization are at play here. Management theorists recognize that there are limits to rationality. The way to run a large firm is to break it into operating divisions. Likewise, the Founding Fathers or Federalists, including Alexander Hamilton and James Madison, believed that the federal government needed to be combined with decentralized states. Under the Constitution the states are responsible for much administration. Part of the reason is that the states are better able to represent their citizens. Large scale leads to complexity which makes management and representation difficult from the center. The federal government suffers from centralization without representation.

The Civil War began an assertion of federal power that has escalated past the point of diminishing returns. The Civil War’s cause, prevention of the expansion of the “slave power” was just. But a side effect of the Civil War was squelching of important aspects of states’ authority. It was not and is not clear that states do not have the right to secede or to nullify their participation in the union.

Progressivism a Form of Insanity

Recently, I had a discussion with an attorney who believes that regulation is desirable. I pointed out to him that workers’ compensation does not work. He agreed. I pointed out that the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) has not worked well. He did not know much about it, but he was willing to agree. I pointed out that the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, which was meant to limit monopoly, has had the effect of expanding the size and power of big business. I pointed out that the Federal Reserve Bank has massively subsidized the wealthy at the expense of the poor. I pointed out that Social Security turned out to be a wealth transfer vehicle from the 21st century’s workers to the 20th century’s retirees. He offered no meaningful counter-arguments, only to say that the sub-prime crisis was due to the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act. But he could not explain how, after 75 years of securities regulation Wall Street is more destructive than it was in the 1920s.

Despite the long list of regulatory failures, the left-wing attorney believes that regulation must be increased. He suffers from a religious mania with which it is impossible to argue.

A recent study found that about two or three percent of government agencies are ever terminated. In contrast, 80 percent of businesses fail within their first five years. People who believe that government programs, no matter how destructive, cannot be terminated are incapable of rational discussion.

Since there is no common ground between those of us who believe in freedom and those who believe in socialism, there is no longer common ground required for a single nation. The United States was founded on a belief in freedom. But half the nation believes in the slavery of social democracy, in tyranny of the majority. The union is no longer tenable.

Large Scale Has Advantages

Large scale has advantages. These include the ability to support a strong military and to permit large scale economic activity. However, there are limits to these kinds of advantages, and there is no reason why independent units cannot permit large scale economic activity across borders.

The advantages of large scale have limits as do the advantages of small scale. There needs to be balance. But under the influence of New Deal Democrats and Rockefeller Republicans the nation has discarded the notion that small scale offers any advantages. When government employees are paid 40 percent more than private sector employees, it is just in the centralizers’ opinions. When private sector firms innovate, it is greed and must be regulated. No degree of centralization is sufficient for America’s big government mono-maniacs.

Party System Committed to Large Scale

Left-wing Democrats and the Rockefeller Republicans claim to hate each other. But both favor large scale. The Democrats have ritualized regulation. The Republicans have ritualized big business. The fact is that big business would not exist without big government, and vice-versa. Just as regulation has repeatedly failed even as the Democrats mindlessly chant its mantra, so has big business repeatedly failed as the Republicans chant its mantra.

Need for a Pro-Secession Party

The election of Barack H. Obama has proven that American democracy no longer functions. The nation is too large to represent its citizens. Smaller units are needed now. The two party system is too corrupt to permit the decentralizing impulse. A new, pro-secession movement needs to energize America.

Copyright 2010 Mitchell Langbert.

Mitchell Langbert is associate professor of business at Brooklyn College.


Stop Worrying about Words on Paper

November 26, 2010

by Jeff Matthews

A recurring debate always arises when critics argue with proponents over the language included in various state-level nullification resolutions and bills. They argue over whether certain provisions are lacking, improper, will not be effective, etc. I, too, criticize such language from time to time. It is natural to do so when we think in terms of the “rule of law.”

However, the “rule of law” is only a fiction for some invisible, greater authority upon which our conduct is claimed to be justified. Let me explain it by this question: Are federal usurpations legitimized if legislative nullification efforts are not successful? Clearly, the continued ability to engage in a wrong does not make it right. So, if our rights to redress for our grievances do not end with our state legislatures, where do they end? In what way are our remedies bounded?

The most limiting aspect of the movement to reclaim state, local and individual sovereignty is that so many proponents are looking to the “rule of law.” The right words – the right concepts in the right place – seem to dictate so many thoughts on the “proper” strategy. Looking back at America’s procurement of its independence from Britain, where did all of our words take us? Britain did not read our declarations, our pleas, and our demands and conclude, “Well, my dear boy, we do believe that makes perfect sense. You shall have your independence. Cheerio!”

Words mean nothing. Popular sentiment means everything. Do not worry about the “why,” the “how,” and such, when it comes to scriveners’ attempts to accomplish our ultimate objectives. These are just acts of scriveners.

The Constitution says nothing about nullification. Nullification is simply implied out of the fact that there must be some remedy somewhere when the federal government usurps its powers. Most certainly, the Constitution does not prescribe a procedure for nullification. Madison and Jefferson simply made up the procedure they attempted to implement.

Where does it say that in responding to federal usurpation, we may only resort to measures which confine us to not treading on the sovereignty of the federal government? The Constitution is written with an assumption that our respective governments will operate within their confines. It says nothing about the rules of the game when the compact has been breached. It should be clear that in this paradigm, it is a “no-man’s land” where anything can go.

More particularly to this last point is a concept within contract law. Contract law principles are useful to those who view the relationships created by the Constitution as contractual or as a compact. Suppose Paul Plaintiff enters into a contract with Don Defendant to mow Don’s lawn for fifty dollars. Paul shows up with his equipment and is ready to begin when Don says, “I am not going to pay you.” Must Paul still comply with the contract and mow Don’s lawn?

The contract is breached. Once breached, the aggrieved party is no longer required to perform under it. Thus, our efforts to reclaim state, local and individual sovereignty are not restricted in any way. The Constitution does not limit the means by which we may redress our grievances. Therefore, bear this in mind when evaluating legislative measures proposed by local representatives.

Sure, they might be improved in ways that make them better reflect the people’s sentiments, but these words are not what count. What counts is whatever it is that happens when enough people have had enough of the overreaching, corruption and incompetence which emanates from Washington.

Jeff Matthews is a practicing attorney in Houston. He graduated from the University of Texas, School of Law in 1993 and was licensed that year.

Copyright © 2010 by Tenth Amendment Center


A Review of “Nullification” by Dr. Thomas Woods

September 11, 2010

courtesy of PalmettoRepublic.org

Thomas Woods is a libertarian author and a student of the Austrian School of Economics and has recently written a treatise on state’s rights entitled “Nullification: How to Resist Federal Tyranny in the 21st Century.” I have a lot of respect for Dr. Woods after watching many of his videos on YouTube including the classic: “Interview with a Zombie” in which he parodies the typical ignorance and prejudice of the mainstream media. I also have read his book “Meltdown” in which he details the financial collapse of 2008 and fairly spreads the blame around to all of the various government personalities and entities that caused that catastrophe. Dr. Woods is a very intelligent man and, more importantly, he has the unique talent of being able to take his uncommon insight and knowledge and turn it into understandable material that is both easy to read and easy to comprehend.

I read this book, “Nullification,” with the hopes of finding out exactly where I stand on the issue. I had a general understanding of the Principles of ’98 beforehand, but I wanted to get some added perspective on the issue and possibly find out about some things that I might not have been expecting. Obviously we at Third Palmetto Republic want Independence for the state of South Carolina, but independence doesn’t necessarily mean severing all political ties with the United States. It may be possible to remain within the union under the Constitution, yet regain control of our lives and control of the laws which govern us. At least, that was the possibility that I wanted to explore…

Dr. Woods begins his book with a detailed investigation into the concept of nullification using Thomas Jefferson’s Principles of ’98 along with selected writings from Federalists Hamilton and Madison, along with taking a look at the Constitution itself. He does an excellent job of establishing the legitimacy of the principle of nullification along with showing examples of how it has been used in the past. He defends the idea from baseless claims of racism by showing how nullification was used by abolitionist states to refuse the fugitive slave laws. He defends the idea from progressives by illustrating how the ratifying conventions of each state would never have adopted the constitution unless they were guaranteed that the newly created government would have ONLY the powers outlined in Article I, Section 8. The bulk of this book is this investigation and I must say it is the best I have seen in explaining the concept, the history, and the legality of nullification.

Next, Woods moves into a discussion of what nullification would look like today, citing some cases of modern day resistance to federal tyranny. The main case he points to is medicinal marijuana in California, where the state has decided not to enforce federal drug law, and despite some federal raids the people have decided to grow and sell the stuff anyway. He then takes on some objections to nullification, like the potential loss of federal funding, by saying that the people can just nullify the federal mandates and not need the funding. His basic premise is that if enough people within a state refuse to obey a federal law, and if a state refuses to enforce it, then the federal government is essentially powerless to do anything. He shows how several states are acting to nullify Obamacare, through various means from state government resolutions to lawsuits by attorneys general.

Finally, the book concludes with a series of historical writings that have a part in the history of nullification, from the “Virginia Resolutions of 1798, where that state refused to imprison people for speaking out against the government, to “Nullification vs. Slavery,” where Wisconsin refused to return a fugitive slave under the principle that the state was not required to abide by an unconstitutional law. Woods even includes John C. Calhoun’s Fort Hill Address from 1831, where Calhoun was defending the principle of nullification while serving as the Vice President of the United States. These documents cover about 70 years of history yet are astonishingly consistent in their message: whenever the federal government steps outside of the bounds of the Constitution, nullification is the remedy.

Dr. Woods does an excellent job and this book is well worth the read for anyone who is looking for a thorough reference on nullification. If you’re a fan of Tom Woods and you’ve already read “Meltdown,” then buy this book and read it as well. If you’ve never heard of Woods or of Austrian Economics, this book is a good introduction to the man’s style and hopefully will serve as a jumping off point for your self-education.

However, after reading this book, I am still not convinced that Nullification is a viable strategy to return Independence to the people of South Carolina. In the second chapter of the book, Dr. Woods attempts to refute the big three “gotcha” clauses in the Constitution (Article I Section 8)that the federal government uses whenever it wants to grow its power outside of the limits of the document: the general welfare clause, the commerce clause, and the “necessary and proper” clause. Unfortunately, Woods fails to disprove the accepted meaning of any of these clauses. For instance, let’s look at the General Welfare clause:

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises , to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Now when I read that, I take it to mean: “The federal government can tax the ever loving **** out of us and spend it on whatever they like” and in fact, this is what they’ve done. Woods does mention that anti-Federalists such as Patrick Henry took objection to this clause, and “warned that the new government could thereby exercise whatever power it wanted on the grounds that it somehow promoted the general welfare,” yet he doesn’t delve any deeper into their position and instead gives the typical answer that “such fears were unfounded, the federal government, they said, had only those powers expressly delegated to it.” Woods then goes on to say:

James Madison was particularly adamant. The very structure of Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, he said, ruled out such an interpretation. If the general welfare clause granted the federal government a general power to do anything that might advance the general welfare, why did this section of the Constitution then bother to list specific powers the government could exercise? Wouldn’t these specifics have been superfluous and absurd, on the heels of a general grant of power that obviously included the powers that followed and made their enumeration unnecessary? … Thus Madison wrote in Federalist #41, “For what purpose could the enumeration of particulars be inserted, if these and all others were meant to be included in the preceding general power?”

Isn’t it obvious? The Federalists (who were in fact interested not in federalism but in a strong central government) inserted the general welfare clause and then listed the enumerated powers to purposefully confuse the subject, to insert a “Trojan Horse” into the Constitution that they could later exploit. This is just like a modern day hacker who might give you a nice piece of free software that inserts just a small little bit of “extra code” that is harmless at first, but later is used to destroy your entire computer and all of your files. History, in fact, proves me correct in this, as any casual glance at the current stack of United States government legislation would show.

Woods then goes on to talk about my personally most hated founder, Alexander Hamilton.

It might be objected that Alexander Hamilton, the country’s first secretary of the Treasury, took a different, more expansive view of the clause. Of that there is no doubt. But we may question how much weight Hamilton’s position should carry. For one thing, prior to New York’s ratification of the Constitution, Hamilton noted in Federalist #17 and #34 that the clause did not mean that an area like agriculture would come under the purview of the federal government. But having given the people that assurance, Hamilton then declared, several years after the Constitution was ratified, that the clause did mean agriculture could be directed by the federal government. Which of these opinions is more weighty: the one intended to explain the Constitution’s intent to the people as they were deciding whether or not to ratify, or the opposite opinion given suddenly and after the people’s decision had safely been made?

Again, isn’t this obvious? The second one! Another way to ask this question would be: “Which of these opinions is more weighty: the one intended to swiftly push through the Constitution by pulling the wool over the people’s eyes, or the opposite opinion given after Hamilton and his speculator buddies were secure in their new government and had made a fortune by backing the Continental Dollar by the full force and credit of the newly created government? (thanks to the Constitution.) It seems to me to be readily apparent what the intentions of the Federalists were: to ram the Constitution through without much investigation from the public so that they could drastically centralize power and enact the same mercantilist system that the revolutionaries had just fought a war against.

There is another fatal flaw in the Constitution that comes into play here: the process of actually enacting a law, and how it fails to detail any sort of veto by the people of the general states (such as nullification.) To review: if congress passes a law and the president signs it into law, or if congress overrides a presidential veto, then that legislation is now a law. It doesn’t matter what the Constitution says, the new law goes into effect. It is at this point that the people can resist the law and can appeal their case to the supreme court. This turns patriotic citizens into criminals if they think that a law is unconstitutional. They have to fight their case in court and then if they are lucky enough to be heard by the Supreme Court they have to fight federally appointed justices for their rights against the federal government. It is at this point that the Supreme Court falls back on one of the Trojan Horse clauses of the Constitution, then takes that citizen and makes an example out of them.

Unfortunately, I believe the same fate would befall a state that decided to nullify any law of any real consequence. Let’s say South Carolina decided to nullify the income tax. Oh wait, that’s a bad example, the income tax was made legal by the constitutionally afforded 16th amendment. Let’s say South Carolina decided to nullify Social Security, refusing to allow any further Social Security or payroll taxes in this state, and demanding that the feds reimburse those people who have paid into that program. The federal government clearly would not allow such a thing to happen, and so they would take various legal and financial measures to prevent it. They would certainly not reimburse any of us, and they could cut off South Carolina’s credit supply, unseat our representatives in Washington, stop all federal spending in South Carolina (military bases, SRS, SPAWAR,) or cut off all federal funding. I’m sure they would avoid any obvious calamities as to not upset the rest of the states, but as long as we remain under the federal dominion then they will simply find a way to prevent our independent action – just look at the recent case of the illegal immigration battle in Arizona.

Finally, my last objection to nullification is simply: why bother? In order to regain our independence from Washington and have the people of South Carolina control their government and therefore their lives, we would have to nullify about 99% of federal legislation in one fell swoop. Can you imagine all of the legal battles that it would take to do such a thing? How many times would we have to disprove the General Welfare clause, or the Commerce clause, and which supreme court justice other than Thomas would agree with us?

I say the answer is simple: secede. Secession is clearly the most justified, most moral, most responsible action we can take to restore independence and liberty to the people of South Carolina. How can we remain the members of a gang if we are going to pick and choose which rules we’ll follow? How can we hold such high regard for a constitution that gives our overlords the power to tax the ever loving **** out of us? We can’t. We must take responsibility for our own government and for our own lives, declare our independence, secede from the corrupt gangster U.S. government, and build a South Carolina that represents her people and protects their freedom.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 17,448 other followers