What the Right is upset about is that the Feds are preventing the States from banning things.

They aren't about what we consider rights, namely individual rights, they are about collective rights - the right to pass whatever laws you want. That's also how they reconcile themselves to the unfreedom of the War on Whatever Annoys Bush Today: they are defending the collective right to foreign policy.

I had a saying back in the day: "An Anti is no better than any other kind of Communist."

This is one of those "freedom is slavery" things, I hope it doesn't make too much sense.

OK, bad metaphor, slavery is, in fact, one of the freedoms lost to liberalism.

Another thing that sort of makes sense is that section about the right to secced. The civil war did fundimentaly change the relationship between the Fed and the States. And it doesn't take a nut to be of the opinion that those changes are contrary to the intent of the Founders in writing the Constitution. The Republicans (bit of irony there) were out to turn a federation of at least theoreticaly independant States (and at the time, that meant what we call "countries" now) into a single Republic. A rather blatant piece of unconstitutional nation-building, which the Federalists rightly opposed.

But I'm glad the Federalists failed, for a couple of reasons.

One is that as a Wisconsonian, I probably would have been drafted to invade Illinois over the air pollution that drifts from Chicago to Milwaukee by way of Lake Michigan. Wouldn't have taken an occupation or regime change, just removing Chicago and convincing them not to rebuild it in that spot. A cow did it once, we have lots of cows. Hmm, Mrs. O'Leary's Cow as a WMD...

The other is that very oppression that our author is talking about. In a strict reading of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights is basicaly meaningless. The liberties it describes would only restrict the Feds, leaving the States to do whatever they wanted to their citizens and residents, as long as it didn't interfere in interstate commerce. So the USA couldn't tell you you have to worship KThulu, but your home State could tell you "convert or die". Your home State would be free to demolish unathorized churches, and prevent you from complaining abut it. But your State would have to allow heathens from other States to engage in commerce.

Yep, the Civil War, by force and not law, allows the Fed to walk all over the rights of the States, and impose civil liberties on States that consider them inconvenient or even immoral.

And as one of those evil Liberals, I actually think that's a good thing. I wish it had been accomplished in a more civilized manner, and I see that it goes too far on a regular basis. But all in all, I prefer being an American to being a Wisconsonian, or Saint's preserve us, an Illinoisan.

(Yes, I'm aware that the story of the Chicago Fire being started by Mrs. O'Leary's Cow is now considered questionable at best, but still...)