Beck claims struggling states are in danger of "los[ing] their sovereignty" because federal gov't will "nationalize" them
May 18, 2009 1:14 pm ET
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
















BTW, aren't the states alraedy nationalized? I thought that was the whole idea in 1776 or so?
Beck is seriously deranged-- I never would have thought that, but his audience shows have become completely nuts.
He exhibits classic psychotic behavior in the way he jumbles around all sorts of disparate points, all at the same time. The first 30 seconds or so he's alright, then he immediately goes awry with the non sequiturs. He really does need some specialized help.
I'm beginning to accept that the Right's characterizations of MMFA are right. Please shake that belief! Please show me some awareness of the thinking of the other side. Please show that at least some among you have actually even listened to what Beck is saying ... agree with it or not. Please show me that any of you are not just echos of the MMFA version of reality.
In fact, please show me that any of you even know what the issue is.
OK, how would this be done under the constitution? Explain the exact government mechanics of how it would come about.
Definition of soveriegn
1 a: one possessing or held to possess sovereignty b: one that exercises supreme authority within a limited sphere
Since states CANNOT pass laws or even allow their constitutions to over rule Federal LAW much less THE constitution no definition of soveriegnity fits States they are NOT soveriegn they have THEIR authority but it is NOT supreme it CANNOT overrule federal authority it really is that simple. If you want to argue this or that falls under THEIR jurisidiction instead of Federal jurisdiction that is a completely different argument. Beck is an idiot. You can TRY to convince us his idiocy is being smart and WE are the ones that dont get it but all you are doing, as with most of your posts, is embarassing yourself since a WHOLE BUNCH of the posters here are in fact VERY intelligent. Moreso in fact than anything you have EVER written suggests YOU are.
The reason why Beck is wrong is that this federalization complaint became antique over 100 years ago. The complexity of the world makes state soverignty impossible these days-- and the courts have consistently ruled this way for the last 75 years or so.
This complaint has also been-- like, say, floridation of water-- a classic crank issue, and it's unfortunate that it is reappearing under a new guise. What sovereignty fans never recognize is their hypocrisy, too, in selectively accepting federal dollars at the same time they excoriate the federal government.
As for this issue? Can you (or Beck) really offer any evidence AT ALL that the States are somehow losing some actual power that they currently posses? (You know... IN REALITY, not just is your and Glenn's minds.)
I applaud your vocalization because there is exposure to a real issue! There is journalism! There is an issue worth exploring! There is a problem worth fixing! There is somebody not controlled by FOX! GO MEAT!
Which would prevent them from doing -- what, Glenn?
Forming a "more perfect Union??
OH, NO!!
What. An. Idiot.