What is Digg?725 Comments
- Heysal, on 06/14/2008, -6/+443Sovereignty of a state isn't the same as succeeding from the union of the US - it is just telling the federal government that they can't just take over - they have a purpose and limits and they are bound to those and can't just walk in and take over anything and everything they feel like - such as enforcing the Real ID's or the North American Union. If all states did this, the federal government would still be there - just limited as intended.
- Jimmyb207, on 06/14/2008, -16/+396The states MUST remain sovereign entities against the federal government in order to protect its people and preserve civil liberties.
- quesi, on 06/14/2008, -29/+398The Republic of Texas needs to do the same.
- sirgonzo420, on 06/14/2008, -46/+296Do you all smell that? ......
........
..... I smell Revolution.... :)
and you still need to check out campaignforliberty.com - BrapAllgood, on 06/14/2008, -16/+188This is so badass.
- lazerus9, on 06/14/2008, -3/+165Rights are never granted! They are either "usurped" or "defended"!
- CoolHandLuke70, on 06/14/2008, -25/+156It would be great if we could get all the states to secede and then go in and dissolve/take over D.C. and jail the D.C. traitors and start fresh with close reference to the U.S. Constitution!
- inactive, on 06/14/2008, -5/+125I hope they get one from everybody.
- citcokid, on 06/14/2008, -4/+124I live in Oklahoma and I, for one, am proud of the way that our state has stood up against the oppressive misuse of power by the federal government. We have resisted the Real ID act, the NAFTA Superhighway and now declaring what is our states right under the constitution. Go OK.
- CaptainCool53, on 06/14/2008, -7/+111Every state needs to do this.
- Ciryon, on 06/14/2008, -3/+101I have a weird feeling about all this stuff. A lot of people are growing tired of being controlled by the state, not just in the USA but also here in Europe. The neo-con way of doing politics is starting to get a foothold. Here in Norway we have a think tank called "Civita" - they are trying to force a new EU vote upon us when we already have said no 2 times before. (The leader of Civita attended this years Bilderberger meeting..) And Ireland voted NO to a European Constitution yesterday, yet the leaders within EU says they are going to implement it in one way or the other. Seems like the people in USA and Europe are dividing into 2 groups - 1 group wants to hold on to local democracy and want the state to get of our backs, the other one wants a kind of New World Order (not trying to sound like a conspiracy nut here..) where there are no countries and a there is a big centralized leadership. This can get dirty..
- JATCA69, on 06/14/2008, -21/+109It's just a resolution...it hasn't been approved, it has only been approved to be introduced to the house. It will never pass and if it did the Federal Government would not allow it. As the bill clearly states the Federal Government no longer acts as an agent of the states, more over the states have become agents of the Federal Government. So, just because this gives them the constitutional right to claim sovereignty doesn't mean it would be allowed. We as Americans no longer have rights we have privileges which are striped at the Federal Governments discretion. We gave up our rights when we allowed the "Patriot Act" to pass. 9/11 was the precipice for the end of our country as we knew it...only 9/11 truth can bring about a meaningful resistance to the current power structure. The most patriotic thing you can do is to bring about a social consciousness of truth. I appreciate the idea of dissent, but not to the detriment of our country. There is valor in this effort and I applaud the ideals but the answer is not in claiming sovereignty , the answer is in unity.
- mikephimikephi, on 06/14/2008, -1/+80Correct me if i'm wrong, but this resolution seems to reinstate and reaffirm the powers of the state.
Whilst at the same time, serving notice to the Federal Government that it has acted beyond its authority in many cases (such as Real I.D) and in such cases, the Acts will no longer be the law of the land in Oklahoma. - inactive, on 06/14/2008, -16/+91I smell a confiscation of all corporate and private assets, then maybe some guillotine executions for good measure.
- sphira, on 06/14/2008, -3/+78"it's just a resolution...it hasn't been approved, it has only been approved to be introduced to the house. It will never pass and if it did the Federal Government would not allow it."
Sadly, JATCA69
You are too right-
"We as Americans no longer have rights we have privileges which are striped at the Federal Governments discretion."
I think "we rent or lease privileges" --
Off topic
I like this one posted in the forum
""1998, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms released its official position on potato cannons." When our government has nothing better to do than formulate an official policy on spud guns, it's time for the revolution."
I bet tennis ball cannons too -- - BenS, on 06/14/2008, -2/+71Whats up the the Arizona coin?
- Dumbledorito, on 06/14/2008, -40/+98Seriously. Almost every bad idea we're seeing in government today was tried in Texas. Thanks for sending your joke of a governor to the White House.
- inactive, on 06/14/2008, -5/+55We will fight for our rights. It's that simple.
- Tyrghast, on 06/14/2008, -6/+54Hey look at the ignorant *****! Guess what! Not everyone in Texas deserves your blind hatred! Bush does not equal Texas. Bush is a marionette controlled by the rich and influential of this country, just as a great deal of the high ranking public officials are.
- lazerus9, on 06/14/2008, -0/+45You must stand up for what you believe! Remember the USA was built by Norwegians as well!
People have a universal and natural right to live free and experience this life as they see fit! No one has the right to claim you as their property, not governments, kings... no one!
Assert your rights and be prepared to fight for them! - roosevans, on 06/14/2008, -1/+45The 10th Amendment Oklahoma resolution is essentially a symbolic gesture of resistance to what the State Of Oklahoma considers overstepping the bounds of the Constitution (for example with the National ID program that the Bush Administration is pushing down the necks of the States). Such was the nature of The Declaration Of Independence. I am inspired by the State Of Oklahoma.
- inactive, on 06/14/2008, -4/+42To be completely honest, I'm surprised (and somewhat shocked) that many states haven't done this in light of the madness brought down on our great country. If people are going to allow it to be hijacked, molested, raped, disgraced and destroyed, then it is time to start thinking about breaking apart and dealing with things in the way that THE PEOPLE want.
Keep in mind, this isn't succession, this is sovereignty so that states can overrule the irrational federal laws being past down to states. And that's very doable.
This country was BORN with the idea that the people will rule and steer and guide this great nation and it hasn't been like that in a long, long time. America is no longer what it was meant to be. If you can't provide me with a nation that runs things in a rational, sane and responsible manner, then I will find someplace that will.
The bottom line is that this country was hijacked, stolen and hardly anyone made a peep. And now they're paying the piper because all the fruits of Dub-yah's labor have come to light....deep recession, worthless dollar, no more privacy, anything goes, down is up, up is down and that's exactly what they wanted: a nation full of people who would roll over when the going gets tough.
So here we sit now: The laughing stock of the world; everyone is uninsured, food prices, gas prices going through the roof, school crumbling, etc, etc and nobody seems to give a *****. Well, Godspeed Oklahoma....I wish you the best in your endeavors.
Of course, you DO realize that this administration and the congress haven't acknowledged the constitution as a worthwhile document in a long, long time and that those who refer to it, quote it or study it are construed as Terr'rists! - RCourtney, on 06/14/2008, -2/+37The fed gov now tells states and individuals what they can and cannot put into their own bodies (prescription and recreational drugs, food, medical treatments, etc). Not what we SHOULD or SHOULDN'T but what we CAN and CANNOT. Personal choice removed despite the fact that what I put into my body affects me and me alone..
Another example is environmental protections. My state, California, recently wanted to enforce stricter rules on emissions than the fed gov does. However, we have been blocked from doing so by the fed gov. If we choose, as a state and people, to require people to drive more fuel-efficient cars IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA (because the resulting pollution directly affects not just ourselves but everyone else as well) we should have no problem doing that. But the government has usurped that 'right".
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22332983/
In another example, many states and even some of the meatpacking industry, wanted to test ALL cows going to slaughter for mad cow disease, but the fed gov has said they cannot. Yep, the feds tell us what we can put into our bodies but also tell us they refuse to allow complete testing of these things we put into our bodies... wait, what?!
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/29/america/ ...
I'm sure others can come up with other examples - those are just a few that fly off the top of my head but I think they clearly illustrate the usurping of rights and freedoms from the individual and state levels. - Fafnir43, on 06/14/2008, -7/+39Are you really going to look me in the eye and tell me that if you'd elected Kerry, you'd be in /deeper/ ***** than you are now with Bush? I mean, 2000 I can understand on the basis that back then Bush looked harmless, but 2004? No.
- fasda, on 06/14/2008, -6/+37But I've noticed in my life that it tends to be the state and local laws that actually hurt civil liberties and federal laws most of the time simply conditions to accepting large amounts of federal grant money.
- sirgonzo420, on 06/14/2008, -2/+32The link leads to a forum post, and that Arizona coin was someone's avatar that somehow got chosen to be a picture on here. I'm new to posting here and I wasn't able to change it. Sorry, lol.
- zephyr42, on 06/14/2008, -9/+39We would be a very prosperous country on our own. We could sell oil to the US, lol what irony that would be...
- Smigge87, on 06/14/2008, -1/+30Especially our right to party...
- cadmiumpaint, on 06/14/2008, -7/+35oklahoma gets a NBA team to move there and now they think nothing can stop them!
- fyngyrz, on 06/15/2008, -1/+28Lane, this isn't about secession -- it is about federal over-reach. No one, including Oklahoma, is talking about anything at all that has to do with GDP. They're talking about federal law enforcement that is unauthorized by the constitution.
- inactive, on 06/14/2008, -3/+29So you are against the US Constitution then.
- Fafnir43, on 06/14/2008, -1/+27No. It really isn't. One of the main preconditions for a civil war of that nature is that the /people/ - not just the government - have to care deeply about the casus belli. Ron Paul's failed candidacy seems to indicate that not many people care about states' rights. (To be clear: I'm not trivialising it as an issue, it's just that you live in a country where the Constitution is being ripped up into tiny little pieces and most of the population doesn't care.) So if Oklahoma were to secede over this (which is about what it would take to provoke war), very few people would come to help and the war would be over in a day or two. Since the people in control of Oklahoma are presumably bright enough to know this, they won't try.
What they will do (I'm guessing) is to get as much political activism going as possible, and mobilise a voting bloc - which could make the election a little more interesting. - slightlygifted, on 06/14/2008, -5/+31they're preparing.
http://digg.com/odd_stuff/8_Year_old_girl_shooting ... - Tangaroa, on 06/14/2008, -0/+25The 10th amendment regards freedom of the states from federal interference, not personal freedoms. For an obvious example, see traffic laws. The federal government controls many of them despite it being a local matter.
The feds only have the legal powers allowed under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution. Anything beyond that is just as unconstitutional as promoting a state religion or taking away habeas corpus. - freebsdmike, on 06/15/2008, -3/+28Not really. Movements have to start some place. Maybe Oklahoma will give another state the balls to say well if they're doing it then we can do it too and then a chain reaction occurs. It probably won't, but it's nice to dream.
- Stryder81, on 06/14/2008, -43/+68This is going towards a war...
- citcokid, on 06/14/2008, -6/+30This is part of the Ron Paul revolution in action. Reclaiming our rights that have been slowly eroded over the last 100 years or so and more specifically over the last 7 years under Bush. If you read the House Joint Resolution 1089 it states in part "THAT this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government, as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated powers.
- ratheunknown, on 06/14/2008, -1/+25Finally Some Real Change and not that cheap imitation bull crap the talking heads babel on about.
- pagno, on 06/15/2008, -8/+31How about we keep Austin, and you go ***** yourself.
- gak001, on 06/14/2008, -3/+25Yeah, so far no one has succeeded in seceding. See: United States Civil War.
- Pirate45, on 06/15/2008, -1/+23Bias? It's a ***** legislative resolution not an article!
- SquireCD, on 06/14/2008, -3/+24Let's ask George Bush what this means.
Does anyone remember his idiotic response a question about Indian sovereignty? - cl2yp71c, on 06/14/2008, -1/+21California should come to.
- SilentRamble42, on 06/14/2008, -8/+28You can defend your candidate, but don't just outright lie.
- sylvok, on 06/14/2008, -3/+23I live right next to D.C. Trust me, no one wants to over through these idiots more then DC. For us in this area our local news is national news and we have to deal with Bush and Co. all the time. We don't like having people who have no idea whats going on in the world decide how things are run in our area (We know its national, but it is our backyard) DC has 9 out of 10 people who are democrats living in it, why do you think giving them voting rights in the senate and house has been so fought against.
Long story short, we have no representation. DC merely has an "adviser" they have no vote and can only give advice. To top it off we then have to deal with the fact that a bunch of traitors are living right near us, and are causing the country to hate our city, not to mention the rest of the world. - philodygmn, on 06/14/2008, -2/+22So should California.
- insomniac8400, on 06/14/2008, -0/+19The beauty is that it doesn't need to pass to be enforced. All this does is declare what is already true. Any person has the right to uphold the constitution and the state has the right to tell the federal government no if they are doing something they aren't allowed to do. Say spy on the citizens of the state without a warrant.
- mlavergn, on 06/15/2008, -3/+22Question: Since Texas, the state, consumes 1.1B barrels a year and produces about 0.4B barrels a year, exactly what oil are you planning on selling to the US?
- kuantan97, on 06/14/2008, -6/+25No. We decided the freedom is still worth a try.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 731 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is