Idaho Supports Obamacare Nullification, Is Talk of Secession Insane?

I think everyone has a personal hero. One guy in history that we all admire. My guy was Thomas Jefferson. His personal life was one of very dubious character. So Jefferson takes some heat for that.

His professional life was absolute devotion to his country. Jefferson was a genius, polymath, and patriot- perhaps the greatest this country has ever had. Jefferson's ability to see history accurately and to know that one day, a tyrannical government might rise and steal our freedom is now happening before our very eyes. That it hasn't happened sooner is testament to his will and unflinching devotion to give states the sovereign rights that they have. It was Jefferson and James Madison, Presidents 3 and 4, who supported nullification. The time has come to flex that dormant muscle. 

This is what John F Kennedy had to say about Jefferson with a collection of 49 Nobel Peace Prize winners gathered at the White House in 1962.

...probably the greatest concentration of talent and genius in this house except for perhaps those times when Thomas Jefferson ate alone.

 

So who started this nullification process? If the Federal Government ignores states rights, indeed those of it's citizens...just who is nullifying who? I'd like to extend this premise. That the Federal Government denied states and citizens any kind of voice or inclusion in Obamacare planning, indeed they didn't even read it themselves, and now they claim states are out of line? So just who is out of line?

 

The Obamacare bill was the single greatest intrusion into personal liberty that has ever been undertaken by our tyrannical government to date. Forget party politics and those esoteric arguments that everyone should be entitled to health care. I will give you those points. Freedom and liberty trump all of those arguments. They really do. And that is a very critical issue. Having those rights trampled might have been tolerated by our states and our people had it not been for three other key issues.

 

The process and how it was conducted, the timing of that process and the staggering costs associated with it, and most importantly- isolating and marginalizing the participants. Demanding that we pay for it and delivering a very unfair and substandard process administered by a tyrannical government that has has snatched failure from the jaws of victory many times. The United States Government doesn't exactly have an untarnished resume'. To debate those points is not why I am writing this. I am focused on what rights does a state have when a tyrannical government shoves an intolerable piece of legislation down our throats.     

 

Is nullification legal? Probably not although it was Jefferson and Madison who promoted the original idea. Is secession legal? Yes, probably it is.

 

Think of it this way. You are married to a tyrant. He gets drunk every night, spends all of your money, and cheats and lies to you. Is there any law that requires you to stay in that marriage? Of course not. That is the same sovereign rights that a state has. The same protection and rights that Jefferson fought so hard for. That is freedom. 

 

So while nullifying Obamacare might be technically illegal, secession might not be. Secession is really what we are talking about here. Because we all know that everyone of those nanny judges on the Supreme Court was appointed by the tyranny. We know how they will see it. We saw what a Federal Judge and the 9th Circuit did to Arizona's immigration law. It was DOA. Indeed, the tyrant sues the state while ignoring thousands of banking and criminal fraud prosecutions, years older.

In my humble and lowly opinion, it may be best to hold a Constitutional Convention prior to any challenge of Obamacare. I say that because all law is based on precedence. Once the tyranny gets the decision they want, every challenge after that goes moot. Bad precedent will rule the day. While I don't think an adverse ruling prevents a Constitutional Convention, it certainly doesn't support the Convention once it has been called. I am no constitutional lawyer or scholar. What we are talking about are individual human rights and the rights of states and individuals to decide how they want to spend their money and what product they want to purchase. If the tyranny cannot avail itself and extend those basic individual rights and freedoms, I am all for abolishing our government by whatever peaceful means is available to us. It's no different than a bad marriage. I am not and should not be required to stay in it. Nor should I have to kill anyone to get out of it.

I am proud that in Idaho, the nullification law has sailed through the House committee over the objections of our nanny Attorney General. I hope the legislature passes it. The whole point of nullification was to remind these petty lawyers and judges that the sovereign rights of states trump the judicial system. That has got to come as a real shock to jurists who are used to having the last say on virtually everything. From Boise with love...

http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/114683304.html