If I'm understanding you correctly...we are in agreement. Humanity will never be able to reach the sort of government that is touted by the anarchy system. There will always be plenty who will want to kill/subjugate their fellow man.

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

I don't buy that. In fact, I think we're much closer to a critical mass of people who reject violence than we realize. Seriously, ask around, talk to your friends and relatives. The vast majority of people today eschew violence NOT because they're afraid of getting caught, or because government prevents it, but because they think it's wrong. It's a fairly small minority who seek violence as a way to solve problems. And all too often they end up working for the government.

The biggest problem we have today is that people accept that notion that killing on behalf of the state is somehow exempt from the morality. We've even bought into the idea that such violence should be glorified. We'll have to get past that one before real progress is made.

How much of that is simple States' rights; or religious freedom?

With a more perfect Union of States at the interState level, we could ensure a republican form of government, anywhere there is an excessive amount of anarchy. It could be modeled after our own Constitution and Bill of Rights.

Or, funded UN mandates could solve much of that issue if it were implemented, where public works can do the most good: third world anarchies.

Im sure Texas would be happy to have all federal support withdrawn, and to defend their soverignty by force. I dont think the federal govt would win this time however. Id love to see the news coverage of the federal govt ordering the military to shoot Texans because they dont want cap and trade, or healthcare, or oppresive taxes.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

You really dont have a clue as to what would happen do you? These "heroic texans" you wanna hold up would be nothign more than criminal dogs. They would be in violation of Federal law and would pay the same price as any other criminal. If they resisted or even worse fired on Federal agents there would be another Waco sized hole in Texas.

What soverignty? They are a state of the Federal Union. They are part of the United States of America and as was settled by the Civil War the United States Federal Law trumps, beats, and can tell state law what to go do with itself. There is no such thing as state soverignty in the modern USA. States rights is dead and buried and forgotten. Get over the civil war was won by the good guys who wanted to preserve protect and defnd the nation as a whole and not fight for slavery. We are a Federal Union. Texas is just one of 50 states that has no right to dictate terms to the federal government. They just need to sit down STFU and be good little boys and girls and do what they are told. Either that or be punished like any other criminal treasonous traitorous dog licking scumbags.

__________________
“If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of
a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.”

– George W. Bush in Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2000

Honestly, I was clueless. In my case I suddenly became aware. And, no, I don't like what happened there. Call it stupidity, complacency, whatever, something didn't seem right so I started to look into things. Seems to me I should start with the Constitution itself to learn what is what.

It led me to start this post, which by the way, is helping me greatly.

__________________
You do realize you are arguing with a mindless vegetable, don't you?

Your scenario is a little naive. You honestly think, given that situation, all of the FBI and military would follow the orders of the government to put them down? The majority of the military are conservatives. I know if that situation came up I would, more than likely, be on th side of Texas. Texas also has a certain amount of military equipment with the National Guard. Also that whole block of states would probably join Texas (Oklahoma/Utah/Arizona/New Mexico/Kansas/Louisiana/Mississippi/etc....). I'm sorry, but your little dream world imagination of the whole US united against a stand alone Texas just doesn't hold water.

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

You have some control issues you need to work out? The Federal government is not the states Master. You talk like the states should bow down to Federal power. Without the states, there is no federal government. Perhaps it is you who should STFU.

__________________
It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning. Henry Ford

Perhaps?

__________________
Democrats, finding new ways to destroy wealth for over 100 years.

Why even bothering arguing with that. Some people are just crazy.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

The only part I have an argument with is the "perhaps" part.

I say he definitely needs to STFU.

I don't know where people get the idea that the 10th Amendment is somehow null and void. I think it's wishful thinking.

__________________
Democrats, finding new ways to destroy wealth for over 100 years.

If youve read his other posts, its just more of the same. No capacity for rational debate.

__________________
"To take from one, because it is thought his own industry and that of his father has acquired too much, in order to spare to others who (or whose fathers) have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association, "to guarantee to everyone a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it."

-Thomas Jefferson

Last Friday Palin signed Sovereignty Resolution

The Real ID Act has been faced with friction from the States. Perhaps the posturing from the States will have some effect on what the Feds can or will do in the future.

__________________
You do realize you are arguing with a mindless vegetable, don't you?

Actually I dont think you have been paying attention to the way the world works. States rights and the 10th amendment have been dead since the end of the civil war when states tried that whole states rights crap last time. They had military force applied to them when they committed treason.
You act like every Texan would turn on their own government and commit treason. Ther ewould be quite a few loyal citizens who would not go along with any disloyal action like you are proposing.
Yes I do believe that the federal government would send the FBI in to arrest the leaders who are calling for seccession or disobedience of federal law or anyone who has broken the federal law. If those FBI agents where fired upon or killed then the criminals would be treated as such and sufficient force would be applied to arrest them and bring peace back to the region. That the rule of law cannot and must not be disobeyed just because some jerkwad doesnt like the current ideology in the White house. Tough the scale of power has the Federal Government right at the top.

So your preciouos first amendment right to free speech only applies when it is somethign that the right wing nutjobs agree with? I see. Not gonna happen.

Yeah like you're a poster boy for that yourself.....

__________________
“If this were a dictatorship, it’d be a heck of
a lot easier, just so long as I’m the dictator.”

– George W. Bush in Washington, D.C., Dec. 18, 2000

Why would this issue not be settled in court? How would the theory of nullification be adjudicated if the several states refuse to recognize any federal authority concerning powers delegated to the general government of the Union?

The power tax is specifically enumerated.