<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: States&#8217; Rights Showdown, Texas Style</title>
	<atom:link href="http://athousandnations.com/2009/07/28/states-rights-showdown-texas-style/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://athousandnations.com/2009/07/28/states-rights-showdown-texas-style/</link>
	<description>Towards a Cambrian Explosion in Government</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 May 2012 02:19:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Col</title>
		<link>http://athousandnations.com/2009/07/28/states-rights-showdown-texas-style/#comment-578</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chris Col]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:40:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athousandnations.com/?p=509#comment-578</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have reservations about that phrase, &quot;states&#039; rights.&quot; States don&#039;t have rights; people do.  I think that &quot;state prerogatives&quot; would be better, or &quot;state sovereignty.&quot;]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have reservations about that phrase, &#8220;states&#8217; rights.&#8221; States don&#8217;t have rights; people do.  I think that &#8220;state prerogatives&#8221; would be better, or &#8220;state sovereignty.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: happyjuggler0</title>
		<link>http://athousandnations.com/2009/07/28/states-rights-showdown-texas-style/#comment-564</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[happyjuggler0]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:40:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://athousandnations.com/?p=509#comment-564</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Assuming the Supreme Court actually chose to defend the Constitution strictly, where is the authorization for &quot;Obama Care&quot; in the Constitution, noting that the federal government can&#039;t legally do diddly without explicit authorization?

I guess what I am trying to say is, don&#039;t rule out the 10th amendment here. Of course one still needs a majority of SCOTUS to agree with my point of view for that to happen....]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Assuming the Supreme Court actually chose to defend the Constitution strictly, where is the authorization for &#8220;Obama Care&#8221; in the Constitution, noting that the federal government can&#8217;t legally do diddly without explicit authorization?</p>
<p>I guess what I am trying to say is, don&#8217;t rule out the 10th amendment here. Of course one still needs a majority of SCOTUS to agree with my point of view for that to happen&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

