Leave it to The Gay Lady to be a day late and a few brain cells short. The New York Times recently published an article by some journalism-school retread about the Cliven Bundy situation a piece containing all the usual talking points about how the racist" ranchers reasoning is really risible. Rinse wash and repeat. What interests me right now are not the facts of the case however but one particular line in the Times commentary.
The sentence is a quotation from ex-superintendent of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area Alan ONeill a line that the Times writer a Mr. Adam Nagourney obviously felt was so powerful and profound that it warranted closing his piece with. Heres the passage containing the line:
He Bundy calls himself a patriot and says he loves America" Mr. ONeill said. And yet he says he wont follow any federal laws. You just cant let this go by or everybody is going to be like If Bundy can break the law why cant I?"
Wow an example of not following the law. Shocking! Unprecedented! A threat to the republic!
All I can say about Nagourney is that for sure one of us has taken the blue pill.
Has it escaped the Times notice that the feds have been found wanting in the enforcement of immigration law for decades and that Barack Obama has basically cast enforcement to the winds? Has the paper ever heard of sanctuary cities? Have its editors gotten the memo about rule by executive order and Obamas suspension of ObamaCare provisions he finds politically inconvenient? Have they noticed that Uncle Scam has been violating the Constitution the supreme law of the land for nigh on 100 years and that Obama wipes his feet on it?
Gay Lady I hereby re-christen thee The Blue Pill Times.
The BPT is certainly right in assuming that unanswered lawbreaking makes people conclude If ______ can break the law why cant I?" But it isnt Bundy" that fills in that blank.
In point of fact the reason we had troves of people rallying to Bundys side is the same reason why were seeing state nullification movements pushing back against ObamaCare federal gun-control law and other central-government measures:
The blatant and criminal disregard the feds have shown for the Constitution the contract the American people have with one another and the feds continual overstepping of their bounds and aggregation of power have caused people to say If the feds can break the law why cant I?"
It has further made citizens realize that they have a right and a duty to oppose federal law. Why a right? Well if a party subject to a contract consistently and obstinately violates the contracts terms for the purposes of advantaging itself and undermining the other parties subject to the contract are the latter still bound by the now broken agreement?
It is rendered null and void.
As for duty to sit idly by while the feds violate the contract and trample rights makes one complicit in the crime an accessory perhaps before and certainly during and after the fact.
This mind you is the main reason I side with Cliven Bundy. The particulars of the case are irrelevant because the feds long ago demonstrated their ill will and illegitimacy. As for The Blue Pill Times its great it has discovered the value of the rule of law. Now all it need do is reveal what entity truly undermined it and the manifold ways in which it has been done. Of course this would mean actually presenting for the first time All the News Thats Fit to Print."
Leave it to The Gay Lady to be a day late and a few brain cells short. The New York Times recently published an article by some journalism-school retread about the Cliven Bundy situation a piece containing all the usual talking points about how the racist" ranchers reasoning is really risible. Rinse wash and repeat. What interests me right now are not the facts of the case however but one particular line in the Times commentary.
The sentence is a quotation from ex-superintendent of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area Alan ONeill a line that the Times writer a Mr. Adam Nagourney obviously felt was so powerful and profound that it warranted closing his piece with. Heres the passage containing the line:
He Bundy calls himself a patriot and says he loves America" Mr. ONeill said. And yet he says he wont follow any federal laws. You just cant let this go by or everybody is going to be like If Bundy can break the law why cant I?"
Wow an example of not following the law. Shocking! Unprecedented! A threat to the republic!
All I can say about Nagourney is that for sure one of us has taken the blue pill.
Has it escaped the Times notice that the feds have been found wanting in the enforcement of immigration law for decades and that Barack Obama has basically cast enforcement to the winds? Has the paper ever heard of sanctuary cities? Have its editors gotten the memo about rule by executive order and Obamas suspension of ObamaCare provisions he finds politically inconvenient? Have they noticed that Uncle Scam has been violating the Constitution the supreme law of the land for nigh on 100 years and that Obama wipes his feet on it?
Gay Lady I hereby re-christen thee The Blue Pill Times.
The BPT is certainly right in assuming that unanswered lawbreaking makes people conclude If ______ can break the law why cant I?" But it isnt Bundy" that fills in that blank.
In point of fact the reason we had troves of people rallying to Bundys side is the same reason why were seeing state nullification movements pushing back against ObamaCare federal gun-control law and other central-government measures:
The blatant and criminal disregard the feds have shown for the Constitution the contract the American people have with one another and the feds continual overstepping of their bounds and aggregation of power have caused people to say If the feds can break the law why cant I?"
It has further made citizens realize that they have a right and a duty to oppose federal law. Why a right? Well if a party subject to a contract consistently and obstinately violates the contracts terms for the purposes of advantaging itself and undermining the other parties subject to the contract are the latter still bound by the now broken agreement?
It is rendered null and void.
As for duty to sit idly by while the feds violate the contract and trample rights makes one complicit in the crime an accessory perhaps before and certainly during and after the fact.
This mind you is the main reason I side with Cliven Bundy. The particulars of the case are irrelevant because the feds long ago demonstrated their ill will and illegitimacy. As for The Blue Pill Times its great it has discovered the value of the rule of law. Now all it need do is reveal what entity truly undermined it and the manifold ways in which it has been done. Of course this would mean actually presenting for the first time All the News Thats Fit to Print."