Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Obama - Clinton Disaster -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bill who wrote (40836)	11/5/2010 5:13:42 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 103300

Re: "should have the right to force you...." What do I BELIEVE the law should be???????????? Well, that's EASY: No, I do not believe that the Supreme Court should have (in the early 1970s) EVER so expanded it's interpretation of the Constitution's 'commerce clause' to encompass EVERY LITTLE THING UNDER THE SUN. (Thus extending federal authority in all directions.) So, no, if we can get the Court to REVERSE it's silly ruling in this area then most of the authority for a whole HOST of Big Brother Agencies and intrusions into private lives (most of the DEA, federal extra-constitutional bans on marijuana, federal requirements for individuals to purchase insurance coverage, etc., etc., ad nauseum) would vanish into thin air. And we would be very much the better as a nation for it Bill. Authority to regulate most of these matters should reside in the States themselves....