Posted on 04/16/2014 9:56:23 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Now you’re defending the courts as something infallible and always correct, and as though the USA has never suffered from judicial activism. The status quo of this country is greatly due to judicial activism and corruption in the courts. That nonsequitur can also be brushed aside.
Never mind your deliberate mischaracterization of the events of 1776 and afterwards.
The Founding Fathers established civil law, and here you are implying that what they established was neither civil nor law.
“Now you’re defending the courts as something infallible and always correct, and as though the USA has never suffered from judicial activism. The status quo of this country is greatly due to judicial activism and corruption in the courts. That nonsequitur can also be brushed aside.
Never mind your deliberate mischaracterization of the events of 1776 and afterwards.
The Founding Fathers established civil law, and here you are implying that what they established was neither civil nor law.”
Nowhere did I defend the court as infallible or always correct. What I said is that settling civil matters in court is the current reality.
Maybe the decision handed down by the court is unjust. Maybe it’s been unjust the multiple times it’s been handed down. I don’t know enough facts about it and probably you don’t either.
Not liking an outcome doesn’t make it unjust or the court corrupt for deciding in a way you disagree with.
Nowhere did I say that there isn’t corruption in the court. There’s always corruption in any institutionalized body.
Your position seems to be that because you disagree with this decision that the only possible explanation is corruption.
I have no idea what deliberate mischaracterization you’re talking about.
It’s no longer the days of the frontier. Society has moved away from frontier justice and 18th & 19th century solutions.
The “current reality” is an abomination, and any justification of it is equally abominable. I see Bundy’s abuse by the courts in the same light as judicial abuses such as Roe v. Wade and the other assaults on the family (and hence civil society), frankly. A lawless government cannot be construed as “civil” by any stretch of the imagination.
Go back and read the Declaration of Independence. Anyone who is willing to abrogate the “Right of the People” to “alter or abolish” a tyranny gets only tyranny.
“Society has moved away from ‘frontier justice’”? What “frontier justice”? The type the BLM was trying to impose? With all due respect, you’re talking like John Kerry when all he had to say in response to Putin’s aggression was that Putin’s behavior was a supposed nineteenth-century anachronism.
“The “current reality” is an abomination, and any justification of it is equally abominable.”
And yet it’s still the reality you have to work with.
Sorry friend. I wasn’t trying to upset you. This is obviously something you have very strong emotions over.
Have a great week.
One can “work with” or work against. The politicians and judicial activists have no problem working against. They are not people you can work with. There is such a thing as malevolence in government—which our Founding Fathers had fought against (or “worked against”) and won, and subsequently attempted to design our Constitution to prevent, but ultimately declared that it is the “Right of the People” to send those packing that would subvert that design.
With all due respect, you seem to have no faith, in a spiritual sense. Faith in the governmental status quo is greatly misplaced.
Oh, how I so agree with you!
When I saw the massive federal force being assembled, all the wannabe SEALs, the overwhelming force to show off and rub his nose in it, well, as a free man, I was incensed!
At that moment I could not have cared less about what fee he didn’t pay or pay, and what some court said about a turtle.
HELL NO!
We cannot forget if they get away with it, it will happen again and again. And it just might be one of us next.
Get you Gestapo ass back on the road and don’t come back!
I am an Oath Keeper, and pledged my very life to it.
“With all due respect, you seem to have no faith, in a spiritual sense. Faith in the governmental status quo is greatly misplaced.”
The government is just a body of people.
What I don’t have is a belief that everything any governing institution does is wrong all the time.
Certainly they’re not all correct.
I know the rancher in question started fighting this 20 or so years ago.
The fact that he lost every time tends to make me think he doesn’t have a case.
Notice I didn’t say he doesn’t have a case I don’t know enough law to know and probably you don’t either.
If he didn’t have a case the fact that I may be sympathetic to his plight doesn’t mean he isn’t at fault or that it’s a corrupt court or evil govt.
If I decide not to pay my property taxes for 20 years and after multiple legal efforts that I lose, my property is finally seized, I can’t very well claim the mantle of downtrodden victim.
Absolutely disagree.
Resistance to tyranny is eternal. Tyrants only stop being tyrants when confronted. To not do now what they did in 1776 would make 1776 meaningless. I am not saying that we're at the same point as 1776, but if and when we are, free men have a duty to fight tyranny.
More nonsequiturs. This is not about “wrong all the time”, but wrong where they are wrong. King George III was not “wrong all the time” either. And if a government is wrong more times than it is right, then it is a tyranny, especially when it threatens its own citizens with brute force in this manner for false reasons.
This is the same BLM that is euthanizing one of their excuses for this debacle (the desert tortoise) due to numbers arbitrarily deemed too high (and this is somehow “protection” of the species, which evidently is at numbers high enough so that such “protection” can be withdrawn). Never mind the other malfeasance of the BLM especially related to wild mustangs, which is tangential to this.
As for alleged “property taxes” (we don’t pay these to the federal government; this would be taxation without representation) or “grazing fees”, this is a purely socialist act that the federal government ultimately has no right in engaging in. Rottenness to the core.
BTW, by saying that the government “is just a body of people”, what are you implying?
Very collectivist to claim that “we’re all wired together”, is it not. I’m sorry I didn’t address that with him. Never mind the mischaracterization of the events of 1776 as merely “taking a rifle out to join the fray” as if it were a spurious act of disaffected gangsters.
“very collectivist to claim that “we’re all wired together””
You’re wired into the internet right now. Commie lol.
You’re banking, medical, employment records are all accessible online.
That’s what I meant by wired together.
Ex post facto definition?
“As for alleged “property taxes” (we don’t pay these to the federal government; this would be taxation without representation) or “grazing fees”, this is a purely socialist act that the federal government ultimately has no right in engaging in. Rottenness to the core.
BTW, by saying that the government “is just a body of people”, what are you implying?”
The grazing fees were part of the contract. I should have used a different example. I don’t pay my mortgage for 5 years and go to court and lose, I get foreclosed on. I can’t claim victimhood. I knew I was in breach.
You seem to still be adding extenuating circumstances to a simple contract breach.
I get it. Really I do. People like their heroes clean.
I’m not implying anything. I’m saying govt is made up of individual people who bring the same imperfections to that they do to all other endeavors. So no I put no spiritual faith in govt.
What contract? Where did the federal government contract with this man, and where is such a power granted to the federal government by the people?
Nobody believes in the existence of a “squeaky clean” hero; that’s another nonsequitur. Not even Samson, the judge of Israel who is revealed in the Bible to have received super strength from the Holy Spirit, was squeaky clean.
“Resistance to tyranny is eternal. Tyrants only stop being tyrants when confronted. To not do now what they did in 1776 would make 1776 meaningless. I am not saying that we’re at the same point as 1776, but if and when we are, free men have a duty to fight tyranny. “
Sorry. I didn’t see this.
I agree free men have a duty to fight tyranny.
I just disagree that a legal dispute between the BLM and a rancher in arrears on his grazing fees is tyranny.
“What contract? Where did the federal government contract with this man, and where is such a power granted to the federal government by the people?”
Oh I thought he was in arrears on his grazing fees.
I thought that was why his cattle were confiscated after being informed that he was in arrears.
What grazing fees? The BLM are credible on this? How about the desert tortoise, their other go-to excuse?
The actions of the BLM in response to the alleged grazing fee arrears is quite indicative of tyranny. A civil government would put a lien on the property, if a legal contract exists.
But there’s a history of driving cattle ranches out of business in this area, so it’s a lot deeper than that. Never mind the “desert tortoise” canard.
Now that there are no other ranchers left, you would think that Bundy could run lots of cows, especially since it has been found that the cows actually help the tortoise, and make the soil more fertile and organic.
Pretty obvious that they want the land for some other purpose than what they have stated, and they are willing to exercise and incredible abuse of power to get their way.
Wretched writing. Lowry should be fired for letting logorrheic trash like this go to ‘print’.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.