Additional Pages

Thursday, February 16, 2012

The Big Club

It is a time to coalesce the liberty movement into something distinct from Tea Parties. I will not disparage Tea Parties, they are what they are and they have put life to the Constitution, they have breathed life into a long dormant liberty movement. Many have been struggling for decades to be looked upon by our government as the rightful citizens we are, instead of children in need of guidance and scolding.

The liberty movment is distinct and separate from Tea Parties in a vital way: violence is not ruled out. This is not a promise of violence, or a threat, but those in the liberty movement are not put off by the thought of doing what our ancestors did and demand our rights by force of one sort or another. It is not a question of being afforded certain rights or liberties, it is a question of by which means they are achieved.

Make no mistake, life is important and death will not put food on the table, or comfort a child, but there does come a point where there is a question of citizenship to be addressed. Barack Obama and his ilk might shrug all of this off as nonsense, but secretly they are scared to death, every politician is. The very idea that there are those out in this great nation of ours who would risk death and imprisonment for the ideals in the document they only recognize when it comes time to grant them power do not like those who might hold them to account.

It is by no accident that the Tea Party was demonized as it was. They fear it. They fear anyone who intends to bring one major question into play: "If the Constitution is an out-dated document that is a living document and subject to constant interpretation, then by what authority do your claim power?"

See, that is the crux of the issue. If the Constitution can be altered simply by a general change in social attitudes, it does not lend itself to the type of rock-solid underpinning required of a government that is capable of putting one in prison, or taking their life. Their authority to do so are just words on an out-dated and largely irrelevant document that means nothing. Should we, as a people, or even a sufficient minority, decide that the words on the document that are out-dated and largely irrelevant might include the manner and method by which we transfer power to individuals the gig is up. In fact, it might be the irrelevance they have claimed in order to prosecute unconstitutional laws that decides whether or not they have the right or standing to remain as representatives of the people. I am not talking about impeachment, or some other Constitutionally prescribed method, that is largely irrelevant and out of date.

If it is a house of cards, let it be a house of cards. If it is a document open to interpretation, then let us interpret it any way we see fit. We are the people, the interested, the dedicated that they have to appeal to, not the MTV, Oscar and Grammy watching mind-numbed populace, but us, the interested, dedicated, opinionated multitudes who have the power to make the decisions for the rest of those who are lost in TV land. There is always a caretaker for such.

It is ours to set right because we feel wronged by it. It is ours to decide who is and who is not faithful to the document that grants them power. It does not take a nation of popular votes to decide these issues. Even the courts recognize that where there is no injury, there is no standing. In other words, those who fail to vote, or who are not mentally capable of understanding, or caring about the Constitution are not relevant to a Constitutional question of power, they have no standing in the issue.

For too long there has been an appeal to the "majority" as if we were a democracy. We are NOT. We are a Constitutional republic and if the Constitution is irrelevant, then so is the republic. The founding documents can not mean less than the government that relies on its founding for legitimacy. This is the reasoning they have all been fearing, that causes them to bring every weapon to bear on the Tea Party who invoked these ideas with the loudest voice thusfar.

They were the bright light, while those of us in the liberty movement are the big club. Sleep well, gain strength, get your affairs in order for a long stay in prison. Prepare for that and you will be a soldier in the true battle for liberty.

11 comments:

  1. It is ours to set right because we feel wronged by it. It is ours to decide who is and who is not faithful to the document that grants them power.

    Amen and posted.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Prison? I don't think so.

    How about instead: "Get your soul right with the Almighty; then follow to the rightful conclusion the course your heart tells you to take."

    ReplyDelete
  3. "...It is ours to set right because we feel wronged by it. It is ours to decide who is and who is not faithful to the document that grants them power..."

    BULL$#!+!!

    FEELING is what The Enemy does.

    "...It is ours to set right because we HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUE TO BE GRIEVOUSLY wronged by it. It is ours to decide who is and who is not faithful to the document that grants them power..."

    FTFY.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Finally, it is starting to sink in. They only follow the rules when the rules are to their advantage. Otherwise, the rules are ignored.

    So why should anyone else play by the rules?

    ReplyDelete
  5. Years ago, I worked for some very wealthy people in Souther California - I had a chance first had to see how money works in politics. At this point in life and time I am out; not votine given my belief that we are only presented with one coin (with two sides). Voting only presents the population with the ideal that 'they' have a voice in our current system - in reality 'we' have no more voice that a rock in a quary.
    Don't get me wrong - I believe in our orginal deals and will fight and die if necessary but I will not contribute to our current vile system - period.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ask the next ten people you meet what America is most all will say a Democracy. Wrong! Indeed we will have to fight at some point.Excellent post.

    China
    III

    ReplyDelete
  7. " I am not talking about impeachment, or some other Constitutionally prescribed method, that is largely irrelevant and out of date."

    Then your whole argument is null and void. Impeachment is the tool used by the Constitution. If it is old and outdated then why is the rest not so?

    The key is in John Adams "...A Moral and Religious People..." We have politicians that have taken over as the ruling elite, not that some part of the Constitution is old and out dated.

    Cruachan!

    Highlander

    ReplyDelete
  8. Highlander,

    The Constitution gives us multiple ways to remove a corrupt government? At this point I believe attempting impeachment would prove impractical. Too many corrupt officials are supported and protected by yet more corruption.

    ReplyDelete
  9. RedWulf,

    I agree that at this time and place Impeachment would be impractable, but it is not old and outdated, it is one methode available and authorized by the Constitution. Removing all of the elitist political class from power, including judges, should be the goal. Correcting those flaws that allowed immoral, self-centerd persons to gain control must be done at the same time. The Constitution as intended with the BoR, is still the best form of government that has ever exsited. I think it well worth the safing and restoration!

    Cruachan!

    Highlander

    ReplyDelete
  10. Is someone talking about impeachment, maybe having to do with the Rule of Law? Am I the only one who caught this monster TRUE conditional in this monster post?

    "...if the Constitution is irrelevant, then so is the republic."

    Logic ALWAYS holds. Antecedent affirmed. Things may change, but right now the antecedent is affirmed. That's the end of that; check a logic book if you don't understand.

    ReplyDelete
  11. "If the Constitution is an out-dated document that is a living document and subject to constant interpretation, then by what authority do your claim power?"


    Same as it ever was - Divine Right. God may have been replaced with Marx, Lenin, Mao, Che, Gramsci, etc., but that's just a technicality. They get to rule because they have decreed that they get to rule.

    ReplyDelete