![\"\"](\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/angry.net\/blog2\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/07\/constitution.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n
First, allow me to post the section of the Constitution with the wording of the Commerce Clause:<\/p>\n
Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:<\/b><\/p>\n
[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes; <\/b><\/i><\/p>\n
There have been literally hundreds of cases brought before the courts regarding the Commerce Clause, and the abuse of it by the Federal Government. In one case, the Progressives tried to ban the possession of Firearms within 1000 feet of a school. This was a clear violation of the 2nd<\/sup> Amendment and was slapped down. (In my case, the Anger Central Primary Dwelling is within 1000 feet of a school, and I would have not been allowed to have a gun, even though I am not on school property)<\/p>\n The basic idea of the Commerce Clause was to keep states from blocking interstate commerce as well as preventing states from lawfully trading with foreign nations. This is where Washington State has crossed the line. They are preventing companies from shipping coal to customers through their ports. Here are the details from Fox News<\/b><\/a>:<\/p>\n A lawsuit has pitted six landlocked states against Washington State over a simple question: Who owns the federal ports? Washington State is denying the states the permits required to build a large coal export terminal along the Columbia River. The states have sued and Washington filed a motion for dismissal. <\/b><\/p>\n But U.S. District Court Judge Robert Bryan rejected Washington State\u2019s motion, setting the stage for a legal showdown over who really gets final say over which products flow through the nation\u2019s sea ports. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019re talking about the Constitution and the rule of law,\u201d said Montana Attorney General Tim Fox, \u201cOne state can\u2019t discriminate against another state\u2019s commodities in this way.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n The primary reason this is coming to a head is the government of State of Washington is run by CommuNazi Ecofreaks and Moonbats. They don\u2019t like coal so they are going to prevent anyone from using it if they can.<\/p>\n Montana and Wyoming are leading plaintiffs and two of the largest coal-producing states in the country. The Powder River Basin contains 2.5 billion tons of recoverable coal and currently supplies 40 percent of the coal used in the United States. But as many states wean themselves off of electricity from burning coal, coal companies are looking to boost exports, primarily to Asia. But they have a major problem: there are no ports along the West Coast currently set up to load coal onto ships.<\/strong><\/p>\n One of the things the CommuNazis did under Der Fubar, Barak Obama, was work to destroy the coal industry in the United States. Felonia von Pantsuit, in a rare moment of honesty, told coal industry workers that she planned to throw them out of work once she was coronated Empress of America<\/i><\/span> elected President of the United States. When President Trump became President, he began undoing the damage done by The Great Mistake.<\/p>\n However, coal is inefficient now as an energy source and will be phased out. However, it will occur through the natural process of Free Enterprise and not due to the whims of the Progressive Totalitarians of the CommuNazi Party.<\/p>\n The Millennium Bulk Terminal, proposed for the port in Longview, Wash., was supposed to solve that obstacle. It was designed to export 44 million metric tons of coal a year. Important allies and trading partners Japan and South Korea were eager to buy the coal. But after conducting an environmental impact study, the state of Washington denied the terminal a required water permit. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cI think we\u2019re on sound ground,\u201d said Washington\u2019s Democratic Governor Jay Inslee, \u201cbecause we\u2019re enforcing our environmental rules for clean air and noise and some other issues.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Actually, I don\u2019t think they are, however, I\u2019m not a lawyer. (Thank GOD!) So, what was the justification the Barking Moonbats used?<\/p>\n The Washington Ecology Department cited a slight increase in cancer risk to Longview residents due to increased diesel emissions from additional train traffic, significant vehicle traffic delays, noise, the destruction of 24 acres of wetlands and a 25 percent increase in ship traffic on the Columbia River. An Ecology spokesman denies rejecting the coal terminal because of any bias against coal or the environmental impacts caused by burning the coal in Asia. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cIt is insulting to all Washington residents that proponents of this facility have chosen to minimize and ridicule the impact diesel emissions from the largest operation of the largest coal export facility in North America would have had on the people of Cowlitz County,\u201d said Ecology\u2019s spokesman Dave Bennett. <\/b><\/p>\n But Governor Jay Inslee makes no secret of his disdain for coal. In his 2007 book, \u201cApollo\u2019s Fire: Igniting America\u2019s Clean Energy Economy,\u201d Inslee wrote, \u201ccoal is killing us. If we fail to restrain growth of CO2 emissions all six billion of us on this little spaceship are at risk.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n He also wrote that coal and cars are in a race to be the greatest danger to our climate. And at a recent news conference in which he announced Washington state would file its 32nd<\/sup> lawsuit against the Trump Administration over the dismantling of president Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan, Inslee said: \u201cWe\u2019re breathing smoke from Mississippi, we\u2019re breathing smoke from the rest of the United States. We have an interest in reducing coal smoke from all over the United States.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n If this moron intends to try and use the lie that any air pollution is coming from other states to the east of Washington, he\u2019s going to have his head handed to him. The predominate weather patterns are from west TO east, not the other way around. Inslee\u2019s big mouth also damages what little chance this case had.<\/p>\n Hal Quinn, president and CEO of the National Mining Association, said it\u2019s perfectly clear that Inslee and the state\u2019s Ecology Department blocked the coal terminal because of their opposition to coal. <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cCoastal states like Washington cannot use their personal preferences to block trade, international trade, or even interstate commerce,\u201d said Quinn. \u201cThe Constitution bars that, this is exactly what our founding fathers had in mind to avoid.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n And there is the call to enforce the Commerce Clause. Of course, the Barking Moonbats see it differently.<\/p>\n But a lawyer for Earthjustice said there\u2019s nothing illegal about being biased against coal and wanting to protect citizens from the impacts of climate change. Kristen Boyles argues coal companies are already able to get coal to foreign markets through ports in Canada, the southwest and East Coast. <\/b><\/p>\n Here\u2019s the thing. Transporting coal through the east coast terminals adds thousands of miles and huge costs to the suppliers and buyers. The cargo would have to be put on ships that can get through the Panama Canal instead of on much larger and efficient ships that just cross the Pacific. However, CommuNazis don\u2019t care about that. Their goal is the destruction of the global coal industry by any means necessary, regardless of little things like the law, the Constitution or facts.<\/p>\n \u201c[Coal] does not have to go this particular way,\u201d said Boyles, \u201cand there\u2019s nothing in the Constitution that says products have to be shipped by the shortest route or the cheapest route.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n Tim Fox said that argument misses the point. He argues this fight is over preventing chaos between states that disagree politically. If Washington state can block exports of coal, what\u2019s to stop Georgia from blocking exports of Washington apples? <\/b><\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s irrelevant whether you could go elsewhere,\u201d said Fox. \u201cEach state has the right to market their commodities without interference from another state.\u201d <\/b><\/p>\n In olden days, the actions of the Moonbats of Washington would have seen a very different response. The 6 states being threatened by their antics would have sent in their militias to \u201cExplain\u201d things to them. This is why the Commerce Clause was written. To prevent one state from hanging the leaders of another state, no matter how much they deserve it.<\/p>\n This is going to run its course through he courts and in all probability, Washington is going to lose. Then the new terminal will be built and cargo will be shipped through it. Oh yes, that new terminal will do something else that CommuNazis hate. Provide real jobs, both during the construction phase and through port operations. Obviously, the CommuNazis can\u2019t allow that!<\/p>\n Thatisall<\/p>\n ~The Angry Webmaster~<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Good day all. The Commerce Clause in the United States Constitution has been abused by the federal government for decades, many times with the willing connivance of the courts. However, there are times when it needs to be used, and … Continue reading <\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n<\/a><\/p>\n (1<\/strong> votes, average: 5.00<\/strong> out of 5)
<\/span><\/span>Loading...<\/span>\n