06 May 2009

Oklahoma Is OK With HCR 1028

In fact, Oklahoma may just be the anti-Minnesota (which is to say, not inhabited by under-rock dwellers). Just 10 days ago Democratic Governor Brad Henry vetoed "House Joint Resolution 1003," a bill passed by the state legislation that criticised the Obama administration for violating states rights and the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. But these folk aren't Minnesotans, rather than crumble with the veto and put their faith in a professional wrestler or rape joke foisting "comedian," they decided to find another way to wrangle the feds.

Enter HCR 1028

According to the resolution's author, Rep. Charles Key, R-Oklahoma City:

"We’re going to get it done one way or the other. I think our governor is out of step.” Key said HCR 1028, which, if passed, would be sent to Democratic President Barack Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress, would not jeopardize federal funds but would tell Congress to "get back into their proper constitutional role.” The resolution states the federal government should "cease and desist” mandates that are beyond the scope of its powers. Key said many federal laws violate the 10th Amendment, which says powers not delegated to the U.S. government "are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” The Constitution lists about 20 duties required of the U.S. government, he

Oh, no he didn't! Tell me that Key did not just use the C-word in front of Obama?

I would give one word of caution to Rep. Keys: while this resolution should not jeopardize federal funds, I wouldn't put anything past this administration. Barack Obama is proving that he is not the brightest guy in the world, but when it comes to vindictive attacks on those who oppose him, this guy is honor roll material.


  1. Sean Dayson said...

    I am from Oklahoma and I am sad that my state has fallen to tricks of Conservative Demagoguery like this. I am ashamed to call myself an Oklahoman in situations like this. This is nothing but political grandstanding--I absolutely guarantee that the state Republicans here would not want to actually return to their radical view of narrow adherence to those "20 duties" outlined in the Constitution.

    Apart from this, there is a duty of the federal government to "promote the general welfare" and to "secure the blessings of liberty".

    You guys were in power for nearly a decade. The country barely survived your ineptitude and radical agenda. You lost. Right now your job is to sit down and shut the hell up. The will of the people is to implement progressive politics.

    And, while you have a few years where we don't need to hear your crap: brush up on Texas v. White (1868). Oklahoma, like all states, does not possess the power to secede from the union--that's how a country works. Cut the anti-American rhetoric and think about making a positive contribution to this country for once.

  2. Khaki Elephant said...

    Sean, first I would suggest that you move to Minnesota. Or you could try Michigan, California or any of the other "Blue" states that are leading country in economic woes. You see, the national economy is made up of 50 (or was that 57?) state economies and the redder the state the better the economy. But those states do not need voters like you heading their way so they get jacked as well.

    And you say the country "barely survived"? I think you should have a look at Clinton's unemployment and GNP numbers vs. Bush's . . . you have to do more than watch MSNBC, my friend. Try reading.
    And while you're reading you may want to spend some time researching what secession actually means. It is not chastising the feds.
    I know that you "absolutely guarantee" that your state republicans would not want to adhere to the Constitution, well, I think you might be surprised how many Americans want to adhere to the constitution (based on Obama's Washington DC delegate and U.S. Census shenanigans we can be sure he doesn't have The Constitution listed as a Facebook friend).

    Speaking of which, thanks for trying to spin the table and call me anti-american -- that's the biggest laugh I've had since Obama kept trying to enter a White House window thinking that it was a door. Hey, did you here the one about the teleprompter?

    The bottom line is that America voted for Obama's campaign promises, not the radical agenda he is actually putting in place. The majority of Americans did not vote for spending 25% of our country's total wealth (GNP) in the first 60 days, paying for foreign abortions through his executive order when we are already in debt, giving Obama the power to fire public sector CEO and then leading the company to bankruptcy, forcing an American company to sell out to an Italian firm (that has limited liquidity) in 30 days (thus destroying any bargaining power) . . . I could go on, but you can learn more by reading my posts.

    Obama lied. That's why people voted for him. We are learning now that his associations did matter because they showed us the truth of what he is beneath the lie.

    And I am here to shed the light.

    You're welcome.