User Answers

THE FALLOUT CONTINUES: SOUTH CAROLINA BILLS

The fallout is continuing, as states broaden their response to the flood of federal executive orders. W.G. spotted this article about bills before the South Carolina state legislature, and considered in toto, they are a clear indicator of emerging trends:

South Carolina State Lawmakers Roll Out ‘Pushback Agenda’

Consider the following paragraphs:

Taylor’s nullification bill – which he plans to introduce this coming week – would require South Carolina to “ignore illegal White House executive orders that are unconstitutional.” Specifically, it would require the office of S.C. attorney general Alan Wilson to “review the constitutionality of executive orders.” Assuming they are determined to be “unlawful or unconstitutional, the executive order would be nullified and not enforced” in South Carolina.

“Remember, liberal-leaning states have been doing this for years,” Taylor wrote, citing the establishment of sanctuary cities for illegal aliens.

Like last year’s proposed “COS” legislation, this bill would make an application to the U.S. Congress on behalf of the S.C. General Assembly to “call an amendment convention of the states pursuant to Article V” of the U.S. Constitution.

...

Legislation to stop social media censorship – H. 3450, sponsored by state representative Mike Burns of Taylors, S.C. – is part of the initiative, too, as is another bill sponsored by Burns (H. 3491) which would crack down on mob violence by making it a crime to “unlawfully obstruct public highways and roads.” Burns’ bill holds that anyone “instigating, aiding or participating” in a riot would be on the hook for mandatory restitution to victims, too.

The “pushback agenda” further incorporates a host of bills taking aim at various government edicts issued during the coronavirus pandemic – including a bill that would protect religious freedom (H.. 3105), one that would ensure Covid-19 vaccines are not made mandatory (H. 3217), one that would void the enforcement of federal mask mandates (H. 3218), two bills that would protect businesses from Covid-related liabilities (H. 3597 and H. 3698) and one that would limit the emergency authority of the governor’s office during states of emergency (H. 3443).Likely to be among the most popular components of the agenda with GOP primary voters? A bill (H. 3410) sponsored by state representative Steven Long which would require a witness signature to confirm any absentee ballot – and require the witness to provide their driver’s license or voter registration number as verification.

...

Rounding out the “pushback agenda” are a trio of bills taking aim at revisionist history – including legislation to protect the Palmetto State’s monuments and memorials (H. 3249) and enhance students’ knowledge of the history of America’s founding (H. 3002)

When one considers all these bills together, one has, as LewRockwell's website summarised them (see https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/south-carolinas-new-nullification-freedom-fighters/):

  • Call for the state to ignore unconstitutional White House “executive orders” as determined by the state itself;
  • Consider all federal laws that exceed the delegated powers in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution “null and void and of no force whatsoever”;
  • Call for an Article 5 convention of the states to amend the Constituton(sic) to impose additonal (sic) constraints on the federal government;
  • Redefine the right to bear arms as “a fundamental and inalienable right”;
  • Criminalize Antifa/Black Lives Matter-style mob violence, including shutting down public highways;
  • Protect religious freedom from COVID lockdowns;
  • Prohibit mandatory vaccines;
  • Void any federal enforcement of mask mandates;
  • Limit the state’s governor’s authority “during states of emergency.”

Now, here's the problem, as I see it, and with it, today's daily high octane speculation: consider that third bullet point: "Call for an Article 5 convention of the states to amend the Constitution to impose additional constraints on the federal government." The last time we had such an event was the Philadelphia convention of 1787, which was intended to amend the Articles of Confederation, under which we successfully prosecuted the Revolutionary War. The founders, however, took the occasion as the opportunity to create a whole new system of government, i.e., the current Constitution. The problem here is, that the Bill of Rights, or as I like to call them, the Bill of Afterthoughts, were only added at the insistence of the Anti-Federalists. They were not, so to speak, "front and center" for the Philadelphia convention "big names", and that in and of itself should afford a clue as to where their sympathies really lay. My point here  (and it's a point I've made before in connection to an Article 5 convention), is that would we trust a group of people with far less character and depth of thought to come up with anything truly beneficial? It's worth noting in this regard that the call for a constitutional convention has been echoed not only by the political right, but the political left in recent years.

Consider, for example, the prescient criticism of the Anti-Federalist "Philanthropos" which appeared in The Virginia Journal and Alexandria Advertiser (note the British spelling, thankfully still in use as Daniel Webster had not yet laid his hands on the language!) on December 6, 1787:

The Congress's having power without control to borrow money on the credit of the United States; their having power to appoint their own salaries, and their being paid out of the treasury of the United States, thereby, in some measure, rendering them independent of the several states; their being judges of the qualification and election of their own members, by which means they can get men to suit any purpose.... There are men amongst us, of such dissatisfied tempers, that place them in Heaven, they would find something to blame;

(Consider only our current crop of "progressives".)

and so restless and self-sufficient, that they must be eternally reforming the state. But the misfortune is, they always leave affairs worse than they find them. (Boldface emphasis added)

In other words, "Philanthropos" was concerned that payment of federal legislators from the Federal treasury created a "federal political class" with no financial incentives or ties to their respective states, or to put it even more bluntly, an oligarchy reliant upon, and compliant with, federal privilege. That in turn would create a federal legislature unresponsive to the people of the several states... and here we are.

It strikes me therefore that what we may be looking at is a classic case of problem (Bidenenko's executive orders), reaction (state nullifications), solution (convention of the states), under which we might emerge with an entirely different system of government, ala the precedent set by the Philadelphia convention itself.  So, while South Carolina's bills seem to be addressing specific  issues, it's that third bullet point that disturbingly opens the door to all sorts of mischief, and unfortunately, there don't seem to be too many Anti-Federalists around this time...

See you on the flip side...

 

49 thoughts on “THE FALLOUT CONTINUES: SOUTH CAROLINA BILLS”

  1. The more one considers this administrations nonchalant misuse of the pen in the guise of “orders” there is a distant matter of “lawful orders” from a military perspective coming nearer. The details of those orders warrant scrutiny where the nation’s national security is measured. It will not be one person’s tyrannical rule or hateful opposition believing that switching off what was put into place is OK that has the ultimate say nor the bureaucratical employment around the Belt Way, either. Neither those nearby on K Street though they usually try. There are quite a few people who can point out unlawful orders by any commander in chief or by extension, an officer or NCO, especially, under the circumstances and history in which such a position was attained.

    The work of the States is a clear indicator of necessary scrutinization where law, legislation, and people are merging. It is already known where outside influence was ill conceived and playing out. It’s also clear that there are those of chaos desperate for an opportunity to strike out again when the funding and manipulation appears from those it appeared from before. It’s as if they’re waiting, biding their time (again), for a slip up to take advantage of the ignorant. Like others from afar, they need only one chance to succeed. It’s best to deny them battle, the chance to strike. Not Being their opposite.

  2. Conventions are symphonic harmonies, when well orchestrated.

    An Entmoot speaks of wind blowing, through crowns of trees.

    A false statement has no roots, when thought and intent are divided.

    Druidry is through and through.

    1. Among the Druid class there were the law speakers (reciters), the educated, the physicians (apothecary) of healing, but the best known were the religious leaders. Not the barbarian some have suggested they were.

    1. This nutjob just won’t go away. It would seem prudent to stay away from any mainstream medication as much as possible – all of it is suspect. Also, finding/creating income streams outside of the system so you’re not subject to this waterfall of new medical requirements would increase one’s ability to avoid this despicable Agenda.

    2. Mr. Gates would like to see a Global Alert System–a GAS. A GAS will save us. I don’t want to be
      GAS-sed.

    3. Notice his words “This the best deal the world can BUY”? Shouldn’t he banned from Twitter for ruining the world’s standards?

  3. But we live in a nation that never gave itself a name a nation that says it has a constitution but doesn’t teach it in its schools both public and private. All welcome to Oceania.

  4. It does look more and more like Bidenenko’s steal is forcing nullification. CAF talked about this years ago I think with you, Joseph. The point was to end the federal government and delete all their liabilities, especially those owed to us.

  5. There are some things about this “trending” business that’s buzzing around the noggin that’s suggestive of the “Commonwealth of Massachusetts,” given its current sublime role in matters. But what is it?

        1. Not the enemy but the [loyal opposition.] To the British, the American Revolution was a conflict between the British – The British fighting the British. Even today the British understand better the Language of the United States Constitution and rule of law better than any who might try to usurp its foundation under the guise of a twisted hegemonic intent.It is the same as their own. History is still an important lesson to learn in these here United States. Tyranny of any crown, no matter where from, is another matter and not necessarily the people of the same language.

  6. Leave it to South Carolina to once again demonstrate why the federal government is agreement incapable! Because I am someone who considers text as important I am very much aware of that there is a documentary tradition with South Carolina in matters of it’s association with the Constitution and its articles of secession. Both are very illuminating and are worth consideration here.

    [1] The ratification document for South Carolina’s acceptance of the Constitution along with its qualifications: https://www.usconstitution.net/rat_sc.html

    [2] The articles of Secession by the State of South Carolina: https://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/south-carolina-declaration-of-causes-of-secession/

    Of the two the latter is potentially the most disturbing to most modern readers–and there is good reason. As disgusting as the institution of slavery was in our historical culture, one has to deal with the historical facts of the case in context–and the context here is compelling. Why? If you take a copy of this document and replace the issue of slavery with 2nd amendment rights or other civil liberties the whole argument takes a very different–and compelling case. In the secession document itself you will discern a pattern of behavior that should sound both modern and familiar to us here–in all of its consequences. Herein lies a fundamental problem with modern attitudes toward documentation approaches to research–sometimes the analysis of one set of sins exposes an even greater set. That is especially true in this case, for in the articles you will find three trends:

    1. The usurpation of a state’s sovereignty with respect to property rights by neighboring states in violation of the Constitutional compact;
    2. The unilateral declaration of “sinful” practices by a one section of the federal system against another using a crisis and a platform that maximizes division rather than unity;
    3. The elevation of the executive branch of government to unprecedented authority in violation of the clear, enumerated powers limited to the office, but should never include any additional powers not granted within the compact.

    It is unfortunate the issue argued by the state of South Carolina concerned the odious practice of slavery. Excepting that one major detail, one might be tempted to suggest the arguments are not only cogent–but prescient. Against any particular attempt to link this response to hidden or systemic racism on my part, I would offer the following observation.

    When it comes to these matters my ancestors during this time were both Native American and European. To my knowledge none of my ancestors have any links to the practice. But the records are our family heritage are long gone–possibly because of Union policies during the invasion of the South. The tribe to which I have ancestral roots is Cherokee. If one knows anything about Native American history one notices a very odd set of circumstances among these peoples. Members of the Cherokee nation were particularly successful plantation owners before Andrew Jackson’s Trail of Tears. Throughout the Carolinas, east Tennessee and northern Georgia the Cherokee plantations were typically the smallest, the most friendly toward slaves, the most likely to offer manumission and employment opportunities for former slaves with respect to economic development without competition, and the most environmentally conscious of the age. Cherokee plantations had a very high product yield in smaller plots for agricultural goods over extended periods of time because their practices did not strip the soil due to over farming or excess tilling. Yet, by the time of the War Between the States, the majority of these plantations were long gone, their owners reduced to outlaw status, repatriated and given into poverty or slavery in other places. Why? After all “Marxist” excuses are exhausted, there was a common opinion by their neighbors that the lands chosen by the Cherokee were often “better soiled”. Never in their wildest dreams did they think it was superior agricultural technologies and economic practices. The Cherokee learned long ago that when governments come to make agreements, one might as well leave–or be repatriated. The U.S. government has never issued a treaty it intended to keep once its goals were met–and the U.S. government is often the tool of choice for people who have an appetite for properties they do not own and cannot acquire through conventional, economic means. Playing by the rules means little–because the rules will change as often as they change their underwear. So, if the racist accusation is played, one has to look at all of it–not just the convenient bits. I, for one, have moved on and encourage you to do the same. It is better to love people for who they are–not what their “ancestors” did when the majority of those were not even here at the time. (We are, after all, a nation of immigrants.) An honest and intelligent understanding of the past will help us to avoid repetitions of sins. Of that avoidance, I am a strong advocate.

    From where I sit the State of South Carolina is once again suggesting that the U.S. government is incapable of keeping its own agreements–and the conditions of the violation remains the same. By pretending the argument for slavery was the only argument involved with the Secession statements is a total misrepresentation of the whole evidentiary stream. The arguments for property rights and social contract theory are very cogent when applied to modern arguments–if you care to read the arguments with a discriminating eye. Why would those who advocate a strong federal government be otherwise so inclined to bury these documents unless they feared their use? The latter is not a comfortable or easy read, but it is a necessary one.

    1. Robert Barricklow

      I was thinking of the culture then[1776] and the culture of today[2021] w/respect to the Colonies/USSA. There is, w/o question; something lost in translation. The difficulty arises in so many ways, as to be nearly impossible to boil down into an essence that truly translates.
      Even the words, that would be used in new documents; are loaded w/ambiguity. The language meanings then; as opposed to now?

      Is there a similar, recent time; when history might rhyme – somewhat?
      Germany, the Warsaw Ghetto, in the diary of a prisoner:

      “No more words, no more words, no more words.”
      In other words, action speaks.
      Make your actions, your words.

    2. Well said OC. Makes me wish a state had been sharp enough to call Lincoln et al’s bluff in a Trump like troll move. Imagine if a state had outlawed slavery unilaterally before the war.

      Another point that gives most open minded people pause on racist calls is the response I’ve given a few folk of color I have worked with and for in the last 35 years. Slavery was not abolished in the US. It was spread north and made universal. Imagine what all those slaves and peasant workers both north and south lost during that great reset of the Civil War. Imagine the radical starvation inducing labor market changes throughout the country during and after the war.

    3. Jurisprudence is also agriculture.

      One tilts the law. One tilts the land.

      Ideas grow plentiful, well soiled, amongst Cherokee.

      Convention is forest grown, an Entmoot.

    4. Thank you OrigensChild for this thoughtful post.

      People in various places are taking up regenerative agriculture practices again. It is replenishing their soil, increasing water retention as well as yields. The indigenous peoples that still remember their culture are a valuable source of information pertaining to food production; many also have embedded in their culture a lifestyle that befriends nature making the relationship mutually beneficial. Those that have been shunned because their culture does not support predatory and extractive practices are the ones, in my view, that we need to seek out and listen to so a future hums in harmony.

      Regarding government, it is my view that no one has the right to impose their will upon another. There are natural laws that provide guidance as to what is good and what is not. Anything beyond that should be decided upon by the people on a local level with every adult having an equal say. Government is and has always existed to benefit itself not the people subject to its actions. My two cents.

    5. Good points, Origen!!! The bankers paid for the Commie Rev. in Russia & I would assume they are still paying for the ongoing messes we see today!! Go Burma!!!

    1. Robert Barricklow

      Again, the cognitive dissonance democracy; where the China Joe side wants to destroy the economy and union to have Wall Street puppet masters; say goodbye to Federal obligations; where the States are exercising their rights[under the 10th amendment], for independent self governance and/or free citizens. Two systems, One China?
      [couldn’t resist]

      Ah! Remember the CommieCrats were doing it under Trump in the sanctuary cities for the illegal alien commie voters.

      Outstanding! A bill to stop the USSA’s CCP-style censorship of the information monopoly platforms[which set-up the CCP censorship platforms & CCP firewalls].
      Another bill to stop the CIA[read CCP] color revolutions. [Yes, I implied that the USSA’s CIA is inexorably entwined w/the CCP].
      The Bills just keep on giving. Freedom of Religion.
      Beginning to sounds like S.C. is putting the anti-Federalist points
      & Bill of Rights into State laws.
      These independent thinking and Acting States are leading the way!
      Voiding mandatory operating system injections, aka vaccines; and the mandatory wearing, submission of rights, masks!
      Laws to protect small businesses.

      Have to stop reading and interject: Looking like the Red Book Commies. er Red Coated British, er, Commiecrat USSA is going to War!

      [Late!
      White Rabbit]

      1. Robert Barricklow

        Yes!
        Attempt to put integrity back in the voting system; that the China Joe Team obliterated in plain sight, despite mainstream’s Eyes Wide Shut!
        Yes!
        Protecting historical culture; and stop flushing the likes of
        Aristotle & Plato down the China Joe memory holes.

        Like today’s algorithms being structurally biased; the Const1tution itself was biased toward Federalism; especially weighted in rewarding those rooted in Federalist power, versus State Power.
        Trying to right that wrong; would only tempt further structural violence written into any new document.

        Yes!
        There is an under current, a powerful tide, that wishes to break asunder; any waves of holding the country together, w/in the spirit that originally brought it together – that long ago Natl Treasure:
        The Declaration of Independence.

    2. Texas has it’s own power grid not connected to others. We are experiencing rolling outages here in south Texas today under the pretext of building up the power grid. However we have plenty of power plants but some are sending their electric power to Mexico which pays more per kilowatt.

      1. Good point, Billy Bob!!! I wondered what happened to that….TX having its own power grid?!!!

  7. Along similar lines I listened to what Patriot Nurse had to say in her most recent broadcast. One of the things she mentioned was how the influx of people moving from states such as NY and CA into more conservative states is creating a, what I will term, a cultural problem. In other words, these conservative states are morphing through demographical changes into having an increasing liberal bent.
    I’ve linked the videocast; as with any information source, I tend to agree with some of the ideas/info espoused but I can’t say I ever agree fully. That said, take a listen if you’re interested.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJo2tu5PpWA

    1. I’ve been considering different states to move to for a few years now, and I’ve seen the cultural problem you mention developing in various places around the country. Personally, I wouldn’t mind a mix of people if politics weren’t so polarized and psychotic, but that’s not the reality today. I’m hoping that people who value freedom will also start moving to some of the states that are pushing back. That might help forestall any huge political changes in those states.

      1. I am seeing conservative people where I am move to more conservative states so what you’re hoping, is happening to a degree.
        A few years back I lived in FL (this is where you are if I recall correctly). Not sure what part you are in; I was on the West Coast around Sarasota. Beautiful place with great fishing! 🙂 Snowbird season increased the population by about a third and that, from my perspective, was too many. Their influx also ratcheted up the real estate prices which pushed a lot of people out. Politics were mixed but that wasn’t a big issue back then (not as much polarization – people could still openly express differing views). Similar stories across the US and elsewhere.
        You’ve probably already thought of this, but I’ll mention it anyway. People here at Giza are from all over the place; some may live in areas you’re considering. Chances are, if you put out a request, they’d be happy to share with you what the local culture is like, how it’s changing, pollution issues, cottage industry regulations, etc.

    2. Robert Barricklow

      She’s alright.
      I listened, here & there,
      to get an idea of her stance;
      she’s got her act together.
      Thanks for the link.

    3. Austin Texas our state capital is crammed with commiedemos from other states. One of the them is from Michigan and sits on the state board that governs the electric companies of Texas. They are all about wind turbines and solar grids to replace conventional power plants. Needless to say they don’t work so good during the current deep freeze when the turbines can’t move and clouds block the sunlight. Thus we get rolling blackouts that have lasted since 2am Monday morning. My power has been off four hours and the temperature is 25 degrees right now. Wrote a ranting letter to them tonight I know will be trashed and ignored but then I got it off my chest and out of my heart.

      1. Do you have a generator Billy Bob? or maybe an old wrought iron Franklin Stove? I hope you have some way to stay warm. Hugs.

        1. No but both are now on my shopping list. I do have a down feather comforter that came in handy and made for a warm cozy night. My camping experience came to the rescue. Was stocked up on propane for the camping stove and plenty of batteries for illumination. House is currently at 55 degrees so all is well. Thanks for your support.

      2. Hopefully, NOW, all Texans will clearly see the problem!! How can there be a Texit if the power supply doesn’t meet the needs??? May I ask, what do you heat with?? BTW, two of my children were born in Edinburg, TX!!

  8. Dr. Farrell – The same “fly in the ointment” leapt out at me too! I can’t see any good coming out of any convention of the states in this day and age. Given the info available right now, though, it seems to me the state-level pushback is mostly a sincere effort to untie states’ hands. That doesn’t mean the pushback effort won’t be infiltrated, hijacked, and derailed–in fact, we should expect there will be attempts to derail it. Right now, there’s no telling how all this is going to shake out.

    1. In one’s humble opinion, that proverbial “fly in the ointment” seems to have its origins from outside this Constitutional Republic and most assuredly from outside the Constitution of the United States. It’s a red color, too, with hegemonic characteristics.

      1. I’m sure the red-colored wannabe hegemon is supporting everything that’s causing trouble in the U.S. But I wouldn’t underestimate how much the U.S. and Western elites are supporting it too. The Western oligarchs and CCP oligarchs have been making common cause for a long time.

      2. That red fly in the ointment came here during the period in question from my original post–and had great influence among powerful families here stateside. They embraced the ideology and began to leverage their wealth, prestige and banking/railroad interests in such a way as to retain control (and the greater share of economic benefits) to prevent governmental seizure. Karl Marx was far more influential much earlier than most people suppose. It spread here before the U.S.S.R–and was ported to the U.S.S.R. by the same Wall Street crowd who wanted to destroy the Russian monarchy for its interference in the Civil War. When the Russians a few years ago spoke about the dismemberment of the United States into multiple economic and cultural zones, they were echoing the old European plan in new cloth–the same plan the Russians prevented with two armadas. This red influence has been with us for a long time. As I said once before, Joe McCarthy may well have known a lot fo this backstory–and was crucified for bringing up the subject in public. This is just a modest proposal without much research–partially because of how they responded to the suggestion. Me thinks they protested too loudly.

    2. Besides eliminating the Fed’s liabilities (our social safety nets OWED to us) these possibilities make all the states smaller and weaker and more easily swallowed by a much larger much wealthier and progressively more openly hostile entity that Richard hinted at.

  9. Eddie Worthington

    I am happy to see the pushback, but also saddened to see that states don’t realize they are sovereign. What the USA needs more than anything are governors with a good grasp of history, a desire for independence, and a strong will to act. Kristi Noem appears to be best fit these metrics. I am hopeful others will step up.

    1. Saw the first plausible attack on Noem today. Someone on twitter noted her use of state paid flights for personal use today. Will be surprised if Pharmakeia doesn’t pay huge (yuge) bounties to assassinate her any way they can.

    2. If there was ever a time for a trend, States resuming there already given Sovereignty is an excellent reminder for what they already have.

Comments are closed.