http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/anarchism/index.html
Certainly not of this sort, above... I don't think....
you have to be a "bomb-thrower".... if you aspire to be an
ANARCHIST... HAR....
nominal9
On Nov 2, 2:05 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Neither does your anarchist views! There is a distinction between being in
> favor of individual freedoms and being a strict constructionist of the
> Constitution, and then misinterpreting the very document that you are
> relying upon to come up with, "Anarcho-Capitalism"!
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 2:02 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > ROTFLMAO!
> > Spreading the State Gospel hardly makes you an advocate of 'smaller' OR a
> > 'realist'.
>
> > Regard$,
> > --MJ
>
> > *Will gentlemen suffer me to ask them to point out to me, if they can, the
> > power which this government possesses to adopt to system for the avowed
> > purpose of encouraging particular branches of industry? The power to declare
> > war may involve the right of bringing into existence the means of national
> > defence. But to tell us we have a right to resort to theoretical
> > speculations, as to the most convenient or profitable employments of
> > industry, and that you can, by law, encourage certain pursuits and prohibit
> > others, is to make this not merely a consolidated, but an unlimited
> > government. If you can control and direct any, why not all the pursuits of
> > your citizens? And if all, where is the limitation to your authority?
> > Gentlemen surely forget that the supreme power is
> > not in the government of the United States. They do not remember that the
> > several states are free and independent sovereignties, and that all power
> > not expressly granted to the federal government is reserved to the people of
> > those sovereignties. When I say expressly delegated, I wish to be understood
> > that no power can be exercised by Congress which is not expressly granted,
> > or which is not clearly incident to such a grant. Now, when we call upon
> > gentlemen to show their authority, they tell us it is derived from the
> > authority to "regulate commerce." But are regulation and annihilation
> > synonymous terms? Does one include the other? Or are they not rather
> > opposites, and does not the very idea of regulation exclude that of
> > destruction? I rejoice, sir, to find that gentlemen refer us to commerce;
> > for the very clause which expressly confers the right to regulate commerce,
> > by saying nothing of the regulation of manufactures, or of agriculture,
> > or home industry, seems to demonstrate that they were intended to be put
> > beyond our control, and to be reserved to the people of the states
> > respectively.
> > -- Mr. Hayne, Debates of the Several ...
>
> > *
> > At 01:54 PM 11/2/2010, you wrote:
>
> > "Commerce" is the transaction or sale of items, between one indiviual, or
> > entity, or corporation, or Nation-State, and another.
>
> > I don't need a Latin, or a 1850 dictionary to tell me what Commerce means.
> > The definition meant the same 235 years ago, as it does today.
>
> > There is also the issue of, "What Is", verus, "What ought to be". Whether
> > we like it.....Or we don't like it, our Federal Courts have determined the
> > definition of "Commerce" and has given our Congress wide latitude. (*c.f.;
> > See Lopez v. United States, and Sullivan v. Louisiana*)
>
> > I am not a big fan of, nor do I trust our Federal Government. I do my
> > part, each and every day, to make them smaller, and accountable!
>
> > I am also a realist!
>
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:41 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
> > There you go again.
> > Praise be to the Almighty Federal Government, Amen.
>
> > Americans in 1913 UNDERSTOOD the Constitution -- apparently better than you
> > -- and sought the proper course found in Article V.
>
> > Regulate, of course, does not mean ban. An Individual, of course, is not a
> > State, Nation or Indian Tribe. Commerce is the exchange of title. CO'MMERCE.n.s.
> > [commercium, Latin. It was anciently accented on the last syllable.] Intercourse;
> > exchange of one thing for another; interchange of any thing; trade;
> > traffick. Samuel Johnson 1750
> > To RE'GULATE.v.a. [regula, Lat.] 1. To adjust by rule or method.
> > Nature, in the production of things, always designs them to partake of
> > certain, regulated, established essences, which are to be the models
> > of all things to be produced: this, in that crude sense, would need
> > some better explication. Locke. 2. To direct. Regulate the patient in
> > his manner of living. Wiseman. Ev'n goddesses are women; and no wife
> > Has pow'r to regulate her husband's life. Dryden.
>
> > Regard$,
> > --MJ
>
> > To "regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the States, and with
> > the Indian tribes." To erect a bank, and to regulate commerce, are very
> > different acts. He who erects a bank, creates
> > a subject of commerce in its bills; so does he who makes a bushel of wheat,
> > or digs a dollar out of the mines; yet neither of these persons regulates
> > commerce thereby. To make a thing which
> > may be bought and sold, is not to prescribe regulations for buying and
> > selling. Besides, if this was an exercise of the power of regulating
> > commerce, it would be void, as extending as much to the internal commerce of
> > every State, as to its external. For the power given to Congress by the
> > Constitution does not extend to the internal regulation of the commerce of a
> > State, (that is to say of the commerce between citizen and citizen,) which
> > remain exclusively with its own legislature; but to its external commerce
> > only, that is to say, its commerce with another State, or with foreign
> > nations, or with the Indian tribes. Accordingly the bill does not propose
> > the measure as a regulation of trade, but as "productive of considerable
> > advantages to trade." Still less are these powers covered by any other of
> > the special enumerations. -- Thomas Jefferson
>
> > At 01:31 PM 11/2/2010, you wrote:
>
> > Hey Michael!
>
> > See Title 21 United States Code, §841(a)(1) and §846. In accordance with
> > the Constitution, the Congress has the dominion to regulate interstate, (to
> > some degree intrastate, if it affects interstate of international), and
> > international Commerce;
>
> > See U.S. Constitution, Article One, Section Eight, Clause Three:
>
> > To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States,
> > and with the Indian Tribes;
>
> > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 11:58 AM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote: Note
> > Amendment XVIII Section. 1. After one year from the ratification of this
> > article the manufacture, sale, or transportation of intoxicating liquors
> > within, the importation thereof into, or the exportation thereof from the
> > United States and all territory subject to the jurisdiction thereof for
> > beverage purposes is hereby prohibited. Section. 2. The Congress and the
> > several States shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by
> > appropriate legislation. Section. 3. This article shall be inoperative
> > unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by
> > the legislatures of the several States, as provided in the Constitution,
> > within seven years from the date of the submission hereof to the States by
> > the Congress.
>
> > and its complement Amendment XXI Section. 1. The eighteenth article of
> > amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. Section.
> > 2. The transportation or importation into any State, Territory, or
> > possession of the United States for delivery or use therein of intoxicating
> > liquors, in violation of the laws thereof, is hereby prohibited. Section.
> > 3. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as
> > an amendment to the Constitution by conventions in the several States, as
> > provided in the Constitution, within seven years from the date of the
> > submission hereof to the States by the Congress.
>
> > Now, where -- exactly -- is the Amendment that empowers those Feds to
> > criminalize -- say -- an arbitrary list of substances?
> > Give up?
>
> > Regard$,
> > --MJ
>
> > The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
> > prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or
> > to the people. -- Amendment X
>
> > This simply, is failed and misguided logic. A state is more than capable
> > of enacting environmental laws that are more stringent than federal
> > guidelines, but a State cannot legalize something that is outright
> > prohibited in this Nation.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/<http://www.politicalforum.com/>
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment