Everyday I find it easier to get by without "News"

I am an edjamakated redneck, not a high tech one; I usually have trouble getting hypelinks to work; but I'll try agian:

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jt3az5VG6IknYbPlaelNSr-SJblgD96M31OG0

This article (which I found via blake's blog, The Bit Maelstrom {http://bitmaelstrom.blogspot.com/}) is a hachet job if I've ever seen one. But the most egregious comment is from Richard Hesse, professor emeritus of constitutional law at the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord (New Hampshire):

“When you think about this claim that if a state believes a federal law is unconstitutional it can just ignore it, then I presume if a county believed a state law was unconstitutional it could just ignore it," Hesse said. "Really what's implicit in this is an unwillingness to recognize a lawful authority."

This guy TAUGHT ConLaw?!?!?!?

I admittedly am no Conlaw expert, but if the 10th Amendment limits the power of the federal government to its enumerated powers, and the states are seeking to exercise their rights under the 10th Amendment;

FIRST: how can Hesse state that they states are ignoring what they consider to be unconstitutional? They aren’t ignoring anything- yet. The states are putting the federal government on notice that they seeking to enforce their 10th Amendment rights.

SECOND: the county/state comparison doesn’t fly, unless a state constitution has a similar clause, limiting the power of the state to its enumerated powers and reserving all others to the county.

No state I am aware of has such a clause; in fact, don’t most state constitutions start by claiming sovereignty?

THIRD: this is not an unwillingness to recognize lawful authority; it is a return of the lawful authority to the states and removing it from the federal government.

The whole article as a hack job, and the author probably had to search long and hard to find a senile old professor who would give him the quote he wanted.

And they wondered why nobody buys a newspaper anymore.