factbat.com

A recent article, posted in the oft-bombastically liberal New York Times, proposes that the separate sovereign states of this nation are somehow prohibited from taking legal action to secure their borders against trafficking of illegal aliens - essentially an “invasion” - should the Federal Government refuse to enforce this nation’s immigration laws.

However, there is not one article of the Constitution, nor one amendment of the Constitution, nor even one relative statute thus created which even remotely supports the author’s many statements in the piece - titled “Stopping the Free-For-All” - wherein he also claims that “states are taking immigration policy into their own hands”.

States - such as Arizona - are in complete compliance with the United States Consitution when enacting laws which protect their borders, and thereby all citizens, from indisputable elements of criminality.

Furthermore, there is not some kind of “free-for-all” occurring, as the author would have people believe. States taking action to secure their borders is one of the primary tenets of Freedom, and is specifically designed to prohibit the “free-for-all” the author suggests.

The author also claims - absent any actual legal documentation to support it - that “immigration is a federal responsibility that the states cannot usurp.” When, in reality, the fact is that the United States Constitution’s enumerated Federal Powers were never in any way intended to remove from the states, nor the people, their inalienable rights. But, on the contrary, were specifically designed to secure, through limitations, the checks and balances which protect and defend them.

Should the United States Federal Government - a group populated of, for and by the people - ever refuse to honor their oath to uphold, protect and defend this nation’s Constitution, then it is the unequivocal duty of a state, or the many states, to enact lawful provisions which seek to establish structures which are capable of addressing any inequities thus created.

Furthermore, the 10^th amendment is clear in its representation of the people, over-and-above that of the federal government. To the extent that simply “taking up the slack” is only the first step in setting things aright.

To be perfectly clear, the states also reserve the right to hold the federal government legally, and criminally liable, for its actions, should said government’s actions present a “clear and present danger”. And certainly, should its actions prove to undermine this nation’s national security.

The NYT article even proposes that states do not have individual rights, even going so far as to say that they are somehow fragmenting national security by evoking their singular status in this united nation.

However, it is the many separate states, and their collective bargaining, which is ultimately responsible for the liberty and security that is under constant attack by the treasonous, liberal left.

It is entirely obvious that the author of the NYT article has not one concern, whatsoever, for the security of this nation, nor the welfare of its citizens. But, on the contrary, is merely seeking a rancorous bully-pulpit from which to spew venom and lies which are intended to create nothing but chaos and disorder.

It is this chaos and disorder which has become the trademark of the Democrats, and their Liberal cronies. As they skulk and sneak across the scorched landscape they have created with their social IEDs (Illegal Enforcement Demands), suffocating reasonable dissent with acrid personal attacks on honest, hard-working Americans, bludgeoning and burdening anyone who is courageous enough to meet them on their rigged battlefield.

Now they are inciting riotous behavior, likened to mutiny, as they cultivate an “occupy” mentality, supporting scores of illegal aliens, criminals and malcontents in their attempts to overthrow this nation.

Droves of intemperate reprobates are now marching in the streets with the express intent of limiting, or even prohibiting, the free movement of a significant portion of this nation’s citizens. All at the behest of liberal leaders who are consistently overstepping their Constitutional boundaries in an effort to create civil unrest and rebellion.

These people refuse to take responsibility for their personal contribution to what has become a very unbalanced social and economic structure. And certainly intend to ignore the very real fact that it has been their lazy, complacent and near-sighted nepotism which is most to blame for their current predicament.

The United States Constitution provides more than enough resources and recourse for those who may become dissatisfied with the system in this nation. And none of them, in any way, insinuate that citizens possess the right to demand change through force…for this would then create among us the many inequities we have so long sought to repudiate.

Change through force is Dictatorship. And anyone who prefers this method of change is a traitor to the American Ideal.

Reference:

NYT article “Stopping the free-for-all” @ http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/opinion/stopping-the-free-for-all-in-immigration-laws.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha211