Monday, July 5, 2010

Nullification is for sissies

... says Russell Longcore at

Mr. Longcore likens nullification to attempting marital counseling with a spouse who is a criminal.

Nullification is based upon the premise that staying in the Union has some value, and that the Federal government should continue to rule over the states in all the areas of governance except the ones the states nullify. But if you’ll remember, the states created the United States as an errand boy for the states.

Well, the errand boy has grown up to be the uncontrollable bully boy of the states and of the planet. The states have been subsumed by the DC crowd. They have abrogated their sovereignty and have no real authority or power to control Washington, since no states control the power of the sword or the power of the purse.

What benefits do the states presently receive from being in the Union? I contend that they receive NONE. Washington only breathes out tyranny, regulation and oppression, both on American soil and around the world. It is so cumbersome, so corrupt and so bloated that it destroys everything it touches...

My challenge goes out to my friends still embracing the concept of Nullification – wrestle your sovereignty away from DC by seceding from the Union. Stop trying to maintain a relationship with a criminal. Don’t just go to counseling with your obdurant political spouse…get a restraining order, a divorce and a gun. Then commit all your efforts to re-creating a new nation where individual liberty and property rights are respected and protected.

There is one flaw in your logic, Mr. Longcore. It makes too much sense.


Radomes, Inc. said...

You'll hear arguments that the Federal Government protects us from foreign invasion. But wait, what's happening on our southern border? The feds aren't doing the job. So there's a legitimate argument to be made that they should be fired. Each of the border states has a militia, in the form of the "National" Guard. Governors, put'em to the task. Perhaps we don't need the tyrants anymore.

Barga said...


Barga said...

While we both know that I disagree with nullification as an action, I still have yet to see any legal backing for its existence. I really do want to see either case law or a clear interpretation of either the 9th or the 10th that overrides the supremacy clause.

-Robert M. Barga

Harold Thomas said...


Let me ask you a hypothetical (I don't think it is, but you might):

Just what are we supposed to do when the system is so broken that elections and lawsuits can't fix it?
You do not accept the legality of nullification, and certainly do not accept that of secession.

In the situation I have posed, do we just let ourselves passively go into that good night of collective slavery, or do you have a better answer?

Harold Thomas said...

... short of violent revolution?