Except DC is now the British Parliament stand-in.

The Marshall Court started the march towards unfettered federal powers in 1810 with Fletcher v. Peck where the court basically ruled that people had no democratic remedy to correct the bribed action of a corrupt legislature in their own state. The Constitutional Convention denied the Congress the power to veto acts of state legislatures. It did not turn around and say the Courts should have that power. The Marshall Court ruled that it did have that power, so we are where we are because of the federal court system, in this case particularly the SCOTUS, which has recently used the Commerce Clause in many cases to grant the Congress unfettered power and rarely sided with the states.

Marshall, more than any other justice, is responsible for turning the nationalists defeat in the Philadelphia Convention into a long-term total victory. The SCOTUS decisions under Chief Justice Marshall at that time have played themselves out since in more and more power being concentrated in the hands of a few to lord over the many. We literally now have a system in place that has scary parallels to the system in place in 1776. That of a national government having more powers than the states and the people. Exactly the opposite of what our founders wanted and were trying to avoid.

Many of our founders warned us what would happen and were not optimistic we would hold the republic. As usual, their wisdom and prescience are astounding. They truly understood the nature of man in a way many today do not.

If Congress does not begin to govern as our founders intended and our states do not begin to re-assert their power, the high passions and forces may be funneled in a direction none of us really want. That is why it is now, at this time in history, so critical for Republicans to stand tall, not buckle, lead like statesman, and not make empty promises that won’t be full-filled. I heard Boehner talk about de-funding ObamaCare and already I am hearing how this is just an empty promise for the troops to hear.

Prove the naysayers wrong and do it if you take back the House. Stand up to Obama. If there is a government shutdown, pass bills to keep the government running at minimal levels as states stand up and divert federal tax dollars for dispensation to programs and people that would need the money within their borders. We can take back this country but only IF we are willing to make some hard decisions short of violence.

Otherwise, I believe a tipping point will be reached. The Declaration of Independence described it as a “long train of abuses and usurpations”. How long is the train now?

If the Supreme Court is truly listening and wants to correct the errors of the past, they certainly can expedite the case of individual mandates and rule in our favor. They can also expedite other challenges on other grounds and rule in our favor. The SCOTUS started this ball rolling in 1810. Maybe in 2010 they can stop it from ruining this country. The institution itself put us here, now its up to them to fix things.

That’s my opinion.

At least in Oklahoma City, where my brother is a police officer, if you make someone believe you are going to harm them it is assault. If you follow through it is assault AND battery.

From a strictly psychological point of view, frustration is relieved in many ways. Frustration and anger is more ways. Frustration, anger, and a feeling of helplessness are a very dangerous combination. Add to that worry about the future (yours, your parents, children, etc) and you add anxiety into the mix. This can spin into depression, even psychotic depression, or aggravate unstable mood disorders, or other neurosis. These are the first to spin out of control. The point of now return that I keep reading about is the point where normal people have had it.

So I understand the anger and I fear the direction it could take. That is why it is so critical right now that our leaders in the GOP show us progress and the fighting spirit. Give us something to cheer about. Be statesmen and leaders, not wimps. Follow through on your promises no matter how hard it is or how painful the consequences may be. Lead. Fight. Obstruct. Win.

People will project their hope onto good leaders and statesmen and in the process lose their sense of helplessness. This will go a long way to diverting the flow of resentment and misdirected passions. Don’t go wobbly on us now – or ever.

DeMint is a good example. For a bad example, look at McConnell and Cornyn. In the House, Paul Ryan seems to be a good up and comer. Are there others – sure. Can any of them turn out to be typical pols – you bet. It’s time to separate the wheat from the chaff.

I’m actually quite amazed at the writer’s keen perception, although I disagree a little with his MLK analogy. MLK himself preached non-violence. Those around him sometimes listened and sometimes did not. That does not negate a non-violent approach. But the writer does show how the funnel is directing the force towards a logical conclusion that may not be non-violent. I’ll need to think about this a bit. I don’t want to think the liberals are that smart, but maybe they are. Very good post with good points. I would have left the link off though as it does give you a credibility issue, but the arguments themselves stand up well on their own, so I guess it was not too bad an oversight.

But it requires that state legislature and you and your governor to stand up. It’s called nullification and I won’t back down from presenting this as an option. The Tenth Amendment Center (www.tenthamendmentcenter.com) is chocked full of excellent articles by very intelligent scholars concerning this matter, so to just call it dumb is to forfeit the debate.

Get the book “The Politically Incorrect Guide To the Constitution”. Fact check it as you read to ensure you are not being lead astray. You will you are not and, when complete, will see exactly how we got to where we are, how many of our founders saw it coming over 200 years ago after the debacle of the Marshall Court, and how to address the issues that face us. I thought the book would be boring. It’s so fun to read I could not put it down and finished my first pass in just two days.

The culmination was Wallace standing in the doorway blocking African American students from entering the building. He was on the wrong moral side and his own NG turned on him and were going to remove him until he capitulated on his own. Some say this was the last nail in the coffin of state’s rights.

The same techniques can be used for a non-violent nullification movement or civil disobedience movement to destroy ObamaCare, not through the courts or the federal politicians, but through the people. This will make a much stronger statement and put DC on notice they are not longer the ones with power. And no violence would be required. Results with no violence from our side. Sounds good to me.

I take my previous comment back. The book is eerie in its parallels to today’s United States. Good point Jack. Sometimes the lines between fiction and reality are blurred and art imitates life. So the link is not so bad after all.

Let’s talk about a metaphorical “first shot” or “throwing the first punch”. Let me use an analogy.

I do have a relative in Canada who almost died during routine Gall Bladder surgery (they nicked an artery). The surgeon was a typical Canadian surgeon – not very good at what he did and living under the hell of socialized medicine. I am not saying there are no good surgeons in Canada, just that there are fewer than there are here – a lot fewer per capita.

What if, for example, your child or another loved one died during a surgery that, by today’s standards, they would have survived but in this future scenario their death can be attributed to the loss of highly skilled surgeons. Or let’s say they were denied life-saving treatment (like the NHS denied Herceptin to breast cancer patients until a lengthy lawsuit forced a change in policy) and subsequently died because of it.

That is what was voted into law against the will of the people of this country. Now assume this future event takes place. Is that the equivalent of firing the first shot or throwing the first punch? The death of a loved one due to rationing?

To be clear – I am for a non-violent approach. But like Erick in his story above I am not at all surprised by the reactions we are seeing, although I believe the media is feeding a narrative that is far more benign than they are letting on while simultaneously experiencing collective amnesia concerning liberal violence and threats of violence.

Now I would to ask all those who state they are non-violent to ask themselves a question. At what point do you break? At what point does your commitment to non-violence dissipate? When will you consider the first shot to have been fired?

This is only a question. I have always been very interested in human behavior and the what happens at the edges, when one is pushed to the point of breaking. It is telling how people can state one philosophy and be completely shocked at what they are capable of in an unforeseen situation. In another comment below I bring up the question, what would happen if, like Zimbabwe, our economy experienced a massive hyperinflation period and our economy collapsed. Would non-violence or violence be the norm?

Somewhere between where we are now and the other extreme I just described, is a breaking point. We like to dance around the subject, or state that those who bring it up are closet radicals, but I can assure you I am not. So lets address this burning issue. I have an opinion of when this point will occur and I will not share it here. My breaking point is much further than the point I have in mind. Where is yours?

And the F and R are next to each other so I have an excuse.

My opinion is that we are very close to a tipping point and if the politicians fail us and the SCOTUS fails us (heck its their fault we are even here thanks to the Marshall Court starting in 1810) then some folks might really lose it like the left does (they actually use violence and have since the 60s – hypocrites). Of course, I believe we would have also failed ourselves by not finding a way for the people to address this issue with non-violent civil disobedience. I can only hope now, as nobody seems to want to actually do anything on a large scale, that politicians and federal judges save this country. With their track record though, I would be seriously but pleasantly surprised and would make a prediction: If SCOTUS knocks down OCare, watch the left really lose it and watch the MSM find ways to excuse it.

n/t