hprinze Loc: Central Florida

What is the rule of law, anyway?


Sylvia Thompson
Sylvia Thompson
April 20, 2014

Talking heads and elitists from both the left and right of the political spectrum are decrying that Cliven Bundy (the rancher who recently defied the federal government) must follow the "rule of law." Why should he? Barack Obama, the President of the United States does not follow the rule of law. Eric Holder, the Attorney General of the United States, pays no heed to the rule of law. Why, then, must an average citizen?

Recently, a Congressional Committee called upon a group of legal and policy professionals to testify regarding Obama's blatant disregard for his Constitutional limits. In that committee hearing, a Cato Institute policy director (Michael Cannon) offered that if citizens conclude that government officials are not bound by law, they may also conclude that neither should they be. And I will add that citizens most certainly will not see a need to obey wrong-headed laws that serve to enslave them.

Yes, the jackboots who control the government can bring down the full force of that government upon citizens, and to varying degrees, they have been doing just that. What else would you call the IRS scandals and the umpteen lawless agencies at their command to harass citizens? Yes indeed they can and do exert force. The issue, however, is not what this corrupt, vile government can and will do; the issue is how long Americans will cower on their knees in the dirt, shielding their necks from the next boot drop. That is the issue.

The organized group of armed Americans who came to the aid of the Bundy family were not thinking in terms of "I might be killed today," although they knew that could happen. They were more likely thinking that on this day if I do not stand up to the federal jackboots, I will live to see myself and my progeny enslaved to people who are drunk on power and hateful of individual freedom. I am sure that this is the thinking looming foremost in their minds.

The irritating hype coming from all the media types (conservative and otherwise) imposing themselves on the situation to bring "calm" and to "avoid violence," was so typical of weak people with agendas. The most disgusting to me were the politicos who glommed onto petty issues, such as the construction of the "Free Speech" zones by the feds and the over-dramatization of a woman being pushed, or a Bundy son being tasered. All that energy expended on relatively minor issues when it should have been laser-focused on the diabolical, tyrannical United States federal government that ordered the armed agents there in the first place.

While the Washington political and pundit elites (including Fox News) are whining and moaning about preventing violence and the rule of law, the Bundys and their supporters (who, I think, represent a majority of Americans) have vowed that they will not play victim to an enslaving government. Freedom is what the Founders envisioned for America, so much so, that they endured a revolutionary war and a civil war to bring the vision to full fruition. Some of us do not fear the power of the federal government and are not willing to see that freedom destroyed without a fight. Thank God for that.

I am encouraged by my sense that the Americans standing up for the Bundys are worlds apart from the likes of the Nevada Governor (Brian Sandoval) and the Clark County Sheriff (Douglas Gillespie), the two officials who seem most fearful of the federal government. I am also heartened by the fact that so many Americans are armed and are fighting leftist and federal attempts to disarm them. The only reason that those people were able to face down federal agents is because the Constitution allows them to be armed. Additionally, there were alternative media to the mainstream news agencies. Those alternative sources reported in real time what was transpiring. The federal government could not lie about the consequences of its behavior.

My fervent hope and prayer is that organized militia groups spread out over America (many, by necessity, remaining under the radar) are poised and at the ready to do what they have trained to do. Fight for their country against tyranny from within. They will receive no encouragement from conservative leadership or any government entities, or any elites – those who profit from the status quo. Nor will they receive support from media pundits, left or right. The left will always vilify and condemn and the right will implore them to lie down and grovel – for the sake of nonviolence and peace. I say ignore them all. These patriots must keep ever vigilant and always prepared to fight, with weapons if necessary, and maybe, just maybe, more will have the courage to join them in that inevitable (and I stress inevitable) final clash over what will be the future of America.


Sylvia Thompson is a black conservative writer whose aim is to counter the liberal spin on issues pertaining to race and culture.

Ms. Thompson is a copy editor by trade currently residing in Tennessee. She formerly wrote for the Conservative Forum of Silicon Valley California Newsletter and the online conservative blog ChronWatch, also out of California.

She grew up in Southeast Texas during the waning years of Jim Crow-era legalized segregation, and she concludes that race relations in America will never improve, nor will we ever elevate our culture, as long as there are victims to be pandered to and villains to be vilified. America is better served without victims or villains.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Unless it's your intent to overthrow the Government, then militias have no place. Militias are to be under the direction of the Governor of the State in which they're formed. So, to overthrow the Federal Government, the States would have to combine forces. You and I both know, that's not going to happen. Illegal militias, performing outside the law, would be considered domestic terrorists and rightly so.

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

[quote=lpnmajor] Illegal militias, performing outside the law, would be considered domestic terrorists and rightly so.[/quotr]

==================================

I consider Obama and Holder and their cohorts to be domestic terrorists.

Patty

They can go one way or the other. It will be their chose. People will not allow themselves to be enslaved as is the plan clearly stated here.
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf

and here.
http://info.publicintelligence.net/USAMPS-CivilDisturbanceOps.pdf

Patty

This is the inevitable consequence of letting the public to lose faith in the law enforcement and the justice system, especially when dealing with wrongdoings of government officials. There are other nations headed down the same path.

I warn you that this is graphic.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-04-21/furious-chinese-rioters-beat-corrupt-policemen-death

Liberty Tree

By your definition the Minutemen and Sons of Liberty were domestic terrorists. If that is so then, according to your thinking, the American Revolution was wrong and the people in 1776 should have just continued to bow to the tyranny of King George III and the British parliment.

Patty

:thumbup: :thumbup:
A guy posted this on Zero named Stacker.
These links show what is really going on in our police state.
Little bird gun runs down Biscayne Blvd in Miami

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klJkrp-cnOw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sB3QcvQYf0



Downtown attacks on LA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7LvbWxFsM50



Boston

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnpe7uNx918



Houstoin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pp6AAuFCD3M



Minneapolis

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jep7NhJM070



and many others

Viral

In the terms of legality, it was illegal. Doesn't mean it wasn't the right thing to do ultimately, but it was still illegal.

Such was why it became war, to enforce British rule and the colonists rebelling against it.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

I would say that one need only open their eyes & their minds & seek just where the real problems are coming from.

hprinze Loc: Central Florida

===========================
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

They are looking for the enemy & they have found them.

It is us the general public.

You can say all you want but first & foremost it is about civilian control.

It being sold to us the masses that it is in our best interest.

Patty

“Some even believe we [the Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

- David Rockefeller, David Rockefeller: Memoirs, p. 405.


:thumbup: :thumbup:

buffalo Loc: Texas

The militarization of police forces all across the US has been going on for some time now. Why? Control of the masses? It is being sold to the sheople that it is in their best interest. Sadly most will agree.

LAwrence

The militia is to attack unlawful invaders/terrorists within their state not the federal government or invading DC.

Paul Andy

This article got me thinking again. That's why you hear that rattling sound! LOL! Perhaps the best reply is to first state, for the record, I fully concur with your posting. Primo!

That said, let us answer it's title question: What is the rule of law? The rule of law is summed up thus: THE CONSTITUTION! The Constitution is not a perfect document. It was written by humans, and humans are imperfect. But, it does represent the best wisdom accumulated from centuries of human governance, and has served us well for over two centuries.

The Constitution is predicated upon the proposition that, if people were all angels, we would-n't need any governing structure in the first place! As such, our Founders called upon Divine Providence to oversee, and lend His blessing to their undertaking. The people of that time had a lot of experience living under tyranny: 'Ole King Georgy were-n't no pushover! But, in the Constitution, we had the embodied concept that your "civil rights" end where the tip of my nose (big as it is) begins!

And, the essence of the Constitution was to balance the imperative for popular desires to find representation, with the equal-and-opposite imperative to prevent a tyranny of the majority. ( If you want a good idea of what tyranny of the majority looks like, think of Iran, following the 1979 revolution.) As such, the Founders knew that democracy, per say, leads to chaos, and chaos to tyranny.

The Founders ALSO understood that, once government accorded unto itself the ability to seize personal property and wealth to redistribute in any way it sees fit, it's all over; for now, the voting electorate could vote itself any amount of seized largess it desires, and those from whom it is seized would have no recourse, other than to stop producing! That's precisely why they founded NOT a democracy, but a representative republic. For those who insist otherwise: Study the ORIGINAL Constitutional document, and tell me where you see the words "democracy" or "democratic."

But, as with all things human-related, even the best governing document the world has yet known is not bullet-proof. If the public has acquired unto itself the aforementioned means to vote itself "hope and change" largess from the producers; and the ruling classes, to perpetuate their power, desire to be the redistributors; then even the most iron-clad, perfect document, is soon corrupted, it's laws disregarded and despised by the rulers and people alike, followed by chaos, and tyranny after all.

WE NOW HAVE SUCCUMBED TO THAT FEARED TYRANNY! And, sadly, once Constitutional standards are disregarded and destroyed, without anything to succeed it--other than power-mad would-be tyrants--then there is no rule of law! That's where we are today.

So, for those of you who decry the establishment of armed militias, I ask the following: When you finally realize that elections can no longer set things straight--precisely, in part, because the ruling classes have corrupted them anyway (Doubt me? According to election officials in Ohio's Cuyahoga County, NOT ONE voter there voted for Mitt Romney in 2012's election. Sure came as a surprise to many of my father's friends who live there, and voted for Mitt Romney! Maybe there were too many dangling chads. LOL)--What is your solution? Yet ANOTHER fraudulent electoral cycle? Or perhaps another law?

Now do you understand why the Regime FEARS and despises armed Americans? It's precisely because they also fear that armed Americans just might also eventually find a way to organize themselves in such a manner as to threaten their proposed tyranny! We have no real rule of law. If we did, there is NO WAY that the long-discredited little monkey, Harry Reid, could possibly evict folks like the Bundys from land they have used for grazing purposes for generations, in the name of some supposedly endangered turtle; all the while preparing to turn said land over to the ChiComs, to cement a deal with them, which will help make Reid's son wealthier.

Lesson: In the absence of Constitutional rule of law, we've nothing but corruption, anarchy, and hellish, unlivable chaos. I never thought I'd have to say it, but, armed militias just might be our ONLY HOPE NOW! I hope I'm wrong, but experience seems to indicate otherwise. So, perhaps we might better ask ourselves, WHERE is the rule of law? Just sayin'!