February 10, 2010
On February 9, 2010, MSNBC’s Chris Matthews attacked Debra Medina, who is running for Governor in Texas against Rick Perry and Kay Bailey Hutchinson. Matthews denounced Medina as a Southern racist and compared her to former vice president John C. Calhoun, a vocal defender of slavery, state’s rights and nullification. In order to make his point, Matthews quoted Martin Luther King on nullification.
Matthews’ remark is not surprising. The corporate media attack dog continually characterizes Obama’s critics, members of the Tea Party, and advocates of states’ rights as racists.
During the debate between Medina, Perry and Hutchinson, Medina clarified her stand on secession. Medina said she does not support secession and made it clear she does support nullification. In other words, she believes Texas has the right to nullify, or invalidate, any federal law which the state has deemed unconstitutional.
Medina also supports interposition  or a state’s right to protect individual interests from federal violation or any abridgment of states’ rights deemed by a state to be dangerous or unconstitutional (as established by the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions  authored by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison in opposition to the federal Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798).
It is Chris Matthews’ assigned task to slander by innuendo and characterize Medina as a racist little different than supporters of Jim Crow laws and the Black Codes of an earlier Southern era. It was no mistake Matthews dragged out an old Martin Luther King quote that dredges up painful memories of segregation and vicious racism. The exercise was intended to portray Medina as a political throwback or even a closet member of the Ku Klux Klan.
- A d v e r t i s e m e n t
Matthews’ message (or that of his controllers) is obvious: support the Constitution and you are no different than a racist.
According to one of Matthews’ guests, nullification and interposition must be rejected out of hand because they are “freighted” with racist and nativist connotation. In other words, political correctness is more important than the Constitution.
Matthews naturally opposes the right — or as Madison declared, the duty — to resist unconstitutional federal acts. His handlers are a gaggle of elite authoritarian banksters determined to shred the last vestiges of the Constitution and impose world government on the people of the United States.
The viciousness toward defenders of the Constitution (in this instance, the Tenth Amendment) and mischaracterizations of U.S. history are now particularly hysterical because millions of Americans are finally waking up to the growing and apparently limitless predation of the federal government.
Matthews and the “liberals” (who are the flip-side to the “conservative” statists) have a pressing assignment and that is to slander and libel and portray as dangerous racist radicals defenders of the Constitution.
Meanwhile, the Republicans are assigned with the task of subverting the libertarian Tea Party movement from within by taking it over and pushing the likes of the neocon warmonger Sarah Palin into its leadership.