From Glenn Reynolds, during a podcast:
If you’re the president, if you’re a member of Congress, if you are a TSA agent, the only reason why somebody should listen to what you say, instead of horsewhipping you out of town for your impertinence, is because you exercise power via the Constitution. If the Constitution doesn’t count, you don’t have any legitimate power. You’re a thief, a brigand, an officious busybody, somebody who should be tarred and feathered and run out of town on a rail for trying to exercise power you don’t possess.
So if we’re going to start ignoring the Constitution, I’m fine with that. The first part I’m going to start ignoring is the part that says, I have to do whatever they say.
Given the massively unconstitutional policies and legislation at present being pushed by the progressive left, and by President Biden, I think Prof. Reynolds offers us the perfect response. It's the same response we should have to any public servants (?) trying to impose upon us some unconstitutional measure, such as gun confiscation, etc.
A plague on all their houses!
Peter
9 comments:
Those of us paying attention feel the same way.
"You want to ignore The Constitution and the constraints contained therein? Fine...then we get to ignore anything you impose."
This is not complicated. Maybe the bums will get a clue. Probably not, because they have forgotten their explicit charter, believing they are better purely by position. Pretty sure early American's left England for the same reason.
Always remember that the powers that be on the progressive left do not hate firearms despite their anti gun rhetoric. What they loathe and fear is the mass of well armed citizenry willing to resist with force if necessary all their grand and glorious plans to rule over us.
Give a certain type of person any vestige of power and they immediately become bullies with no desire other than to call the common people to heel by any means whether fair or foul, and doing so is ever so much easier with an unarmed and defenseless populace.
"A Lion in Winter" had a speech about why the protections given by the law must be respected, for if they are not respected in regards others, why should they be respected for you.
Of course, Shakespear said it better, but then, he usually does. :-)
John in Indy
Governments are not amorphous blobs. They are not all-powerful demonic entities. Governments are people. People who have names and faces and addresses.
If they want to play by playground rules ("Because I said so!" "Because I'm bigger than you!"), then so be it. Do unto others as they would do unto you.
Ed Driscoll's quote from Calvin Coolidge is quite important, too (although his link doesn't work). Calvin Coolidge's Speech on the 150th Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence uly 5, 1926:
https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/speech-on-the-occasion-of-the-one-hundred-and-fiftieth-anniversary-of-the-declaration-of-independence/
"About the Declaration there is a finality that is exceedingly restful. It is often asserted that the world has made a great deal of progress since 1776, that we have had new thoughts and new experiences which have given us a great advance over the people of that day, and that we may therefore very well discard their conclusions for something more modern. But that reasoning can not be applied to this great charter. If all men are created equal, that is final. If they are endowed with inalienable rights, that is final. If governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, that is final. No advance, no progress can be made beyond these propositions. If anyone wishes to deny their truth or their soundness, the only direction in which he can proceed historically is not forward, but backward toward the time when there was no equality, no rights of the individual, no rule of the people. Those who wish to proceed in that direction can not lay claim to progress. They are reactionary. Their ideas are not more modern, but more ancient, than those of the Revolutionary fathers."
There are already local governments ignoring state and federal laws they don't like. This is happening more and more as unreasonable and unenforceable laws increase.
A great example is a business near me that has a sign posted "No masks allowed, remove before entering". It's been there for 2 years now, even though this state had a strict mask mandate.
With respect, NO.
If the Constitution is no longer the authorizing document, the first sections I will ignore will be the ones concerning Sedition and Mayhem.
At my own discretion, with a purpose, and with a vengeance.
TPTB gotta problem with that? They should bring a lot of friends, leave the married men at home, and best make sure their posse is well-mounted. And their families are on the menu.
You didn't like U.S.A. Rules?
You're really gonna hate Pineland Rules.
To your marrow.
As Jesse Kelly pointed out, the Constitution is a contract. A binding contract on both People and Government.
When one side, government, repeatedly violates the contract, the other side, the people, cannot reasonably be expected to continue to cleave to it.
John in Indy: I think that’s a “Man for All Seasons.”
William Roper: So, now you give the Devil the benefit of law!
Sir Thomas More: Yes! What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
William Roper: Yes, I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
Sir Thomas More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws all being flat? This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast, Man's laws, not God's! And if you cut them down, and you're just the man to do it, do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then? Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law, for my own safety's sake.
While it’s a good and noble speech—the Devil doesn’t care about your laws. Never has. Never will.
Post a Comment