en-us http://www.intensedebate.com/users/574738 Comments by MichaelBoldin http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2012/02/02/fighting-against-ndaa/#IDComment282121067 Actually, the bill requires state noncompliance with the feds. Virginia is also considering a bill that does the same. And in TN, there's legislation that would require some state employees to actually confront the feds if they try to kidnap someone under the NDAA "law" stay tuned - lots of action coming on this beast. Thu, 2 Feb 2012 20:22:03 +0000 http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2012/02/02/fighting-against-ndaa/#IDComment282121067 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment216133487 Actually no. a Post road was a very specific type of road. Not ALL roads. For more detail on this specific issue, please reference pages 96-97 of the book, The Original Constitution. Thu, 3 Nov 2011 05:15:00 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment216133487 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment216132955 the TSA functions and exists NOTHING like armies that were authorized by the constitution. These are military forces - that were built to repel foreign invasions. Not even close. Anyone wanting to understand this more? Start by recognizing that if - like any legal document - the words of the constitution mean today what they meant when ratified.....then one needs to understand the meaning of the words at that moment of ratification. Armies - just look it up in an 18th century dictionary. Dictionary of the english language is a decent one - samuel johnson - available free on google books. Thu, 3 Nov 2011 05:13:25 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment216132955 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215805277 yes, that IS the argument of tyrants. well done! Give up your freedoms, ignore the constitution, OR - catastrophe will happen. That is the same argument that was given for unconstitutional corporate bailouts too. Not nearly as many people are falling for this kind of crap anymore. Wed, 2 Nov 2011 13:48:10 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215805277 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215599589 An attempt at least! No doubt that commerce included navigation - and other carriage. But, this was in relation to commercial activity. The mere act of personal transportation is not commerce, but something that would be defined as merely affecting commerce. Not within federal jurisdiction on an original understanding. The purchase of the ticket, however, would most always qualify as interstate commerce. To argue your point would empower the federal government to pat you down for merely walking across state lines. While you may personally prefer such a scenario, the constitutionality of it would be patently absurd. The air force comment is elementary. Raise your standards, please. As far as the rest of the question, I see it as a clear distraction. Policy Preferences should not affect the search for historical truth. Wed, 2 Nov 2011 03:04:04 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215599589 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215568225 easily? how is that? And can you make your easily-done argument fit with what the FOUNDERS had to say about the commerce clause - not just case law? I can assure you in advance - no - is the answer to that question. Wed, 2 Nov 2011 01:38:51 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215568225 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215476280 Next time you post a link to a third party product or project - try to tie it in and show how your link is relevant to the article where you are posting the link. otherwise, very few people will think it worthwhile, and might even consider it spam. Tue, 1 Nov 2011 21:00:34 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215476280 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215476277 who is going to do the firing? seems like a pipe dream. Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:59:11 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/honestly-i-dont-really-remember/#IDComment215476277 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/11/01/how-congress-took-control-of-indians-lives/#IDComment215469314 And what would that exception be - in the constitution, that is? Could you point out what you are referring to, or are you just saying that you PERSONALLY have an exception to the rules of the constitution? Tue, 1 Nov 2011 20:49:03 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/11/01/how-congress-took-control-of-indians-lives/#IDComment215469314 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/ron-paul%e2%80%99s-plan-to-restore-america/#IDComment211496499 I think the argument goes that it matter less that the tax is FLAT and more that the spending is reduced significantly. Mon, 24 Oct 2011 02:45:45 +0000 http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/ron-paul%e2%80%99s-plan-to-restore-america/#IDComment211496499 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/12/jefferson-and-giles-on-the-principles-of-76/#IDComment208340953 If I approve of giving an employee a raise today, does that somehow imply that I approve of them getting more raises indefinitely?hopefully that helps unravel the idiocy of your query. Probably not, but it is still cool for me to see how people twist. was that intentional misdirection? I wonder if anyone actually falls for such silliness. Sun, 16 Oct 2011 16:19:01 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/12/jefferson-and-giles-on-the-principles-of-76/#IDComment208340953 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/06/news-flash-the-constitution-is-dead/#IDComment206795037 By assuming that a document - ANY document - has any power at all, you make a fatal mistake - giving human life and qualities to a piece of modified tree pulp. Spooner did it and was wrong. And, so is anyone else who does the same. A document does nothing. It inspires no one. It directs no person. It is a piece of paper. People give inspiration and direction. And if people do not like what the constitution has to offer, then they will not do what is necessary to follow those words written on it. If you prefer a stateless society, so be it. But that is a different discussion altogether. I happen to like that discussion and can hold my own in a conversation about Hoppe and .....hmmm...books like The Myth of National Defense. Maybe another time. Thu, 13 Oct 2011 05:25:05 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/06/news-flash-the-constitution-is-dead/#IDComment206795037 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/09/the-tenth-amendment-prohibited-the-living-constitution/#IDComment205691493 the bill of rights applies to the federal government. This is best covered in a different forum though, as we have MANY articles covering this subject on this site. Mon, 10 Oct 2011 20:21:07 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/09/the-tenth-amendment-prohibited-the-living-constitution/#IDComment205691493 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/02/obama-jobs-bill-defies-both-the-constitution-and-the-supreme-court/#IDComment202627352 Anything more productive to add, JACK? Mon, 3 Oct 2011 17:20:08 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/02/obama-jobs-bill-defies-both-the-constitution-and-the-supreme-court/#IDComment202627352 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/27/mainstream-support-for-tenth-amendment-growing/#IDComment202330597 exactly. Sun, 2 Oct 2011 23:43:06 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/27/mainstream-support-for-tenth-amendment-growing/#IDComment202330597 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/27/mainstream-support-for-tenth-amendment-growing/#IDComment201969783 Yes, because all humans are the same. Good thinking. Sun, 2 Oct 2011 01:55:15 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/27/mainstream-support-for-tenth-amendment-growing/#IDComment201969783 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/29/winning-is-losing-for-all-of-us/#IDComment201350164 so you have no problem with all the constitutional violations that come out of DC then, right? Because that IS what you are advocating for.....more of the same. And it has nothing whatsoever to do with Ron Paul or any other candidate, but instead, with the fact that you are tolerant of the idea of violating the constitution. Fri, 30 Sep 2011 14:37:05 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/29/winning-is-losing-for-all-of-us/#IDComment201350164 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/28/its-here/#IDComment200699939 Agreed. Thanks for the feedback! Thu, 29 Sep 2011 06:33:25 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/28/its-here/#IDComment200699939 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/26/what-america-wants/#IDComment200394549 I would rather not be involved in presidential politics at all, but to say that each time he runs he loses credibility - is completely absurd. 1% to 5% to 10% is gaining, not losing. Don\\\'t expect much more talk from me about the presidential race, though - I think garbage and theater best describe it. Wed, 28 Sep 2011 16:01:36 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/26/what-america-wants/#IDComment200394549 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/22/dont-let-republicans-fool-you/#IDComment199190307 exactly. Mon, 26 Sep 2011 15:37:49 +0000 http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/09/22/dont-let-republicans-fool-you/#IDComment199190307