Category Archives: federalism

The State can’t Protect you, …but it doesn’t want You to Protect YOURSELF, either

Two news items, both from Oregon, and both dealing with the right and ability to defend yourself. Apparently, the fine folks in Oregon are intent on having you as defenseless as possible.

The first one is from a week or so back, and received scant attention before the Memorial Day Weekend. From

911 emergencyAn Oregon woman was told by a 911 dispatcher that authorities wouldn’t be able be able to help her as her ex-boyfriend broke into her place, because of budget cuts.

Oregon Public Radio reports that an unidentified woman called 911 during a weekend in August 2012 while Michael Bellah was breaking into her place. Her call was forwarded to Oregon State Police because of lay-offs at the Josephine County Sheriff’s Office only allows the department to be open Monday through Friday.

“Uh, I don’t have anybody to send out there,” the 911 dispatcher told the woman. “You know, obviously, if he comes inside the residence and assaults you, …can you ask him to go away?

Continue reading

The Rule of Law vs. “Calvinball”

I’ve been swamped all week, so I’m re-posting an item from last summer, back before our readership really started to climb. And given much of the news we’ve been seeing lately, this post is even more applicable now than it was then

Please note its author is Dapper Dan, a buddy of ours who blogs over at Principles, Not Men. Any and all kudos should be directed to him. 

I’ll simply mention what I said six months ago: anytime you can combine Hayek, the Federalist Papers AND ‘Calvin & Hobbes‘ into a single, highly cogent post, you’re doing somethin’ right.

Happy Friday, gang.



Rule of Law

The term “Rule of Law” is an important term in political dialogue.  Accepting this belief or not will determine where you stand on many, if not most, of the issues.

In The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek describes it thus:

Continue reading

Laws SHOULD be Simple, (…which is precisely why they aren’t)

Ah, another week, another day-to-day grind of attempting to decipher what the heck new story/law/bill/excuse/meme Obama-&-Company’s pushing, and if it even makes any sense to them.

And ‘sense’ is the operative word.

That whole “making sense” aspect of rhetoric by our leaders is becoming rare indeed. Worse, it is completely unheard of in the laws which they pass. Consider Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, and numerous others: these were Gigantic bills which then became, well…. Gigantic-er.

They also became virtually indecipherable.

Our good friend, Dapper Dan, has a post up which speaks to this issue. You really, really, need to read the whole thing, so I’m just going to give a very small portion below:

Because of the pages upon pages of incoherent language, the law can be “understood” in any way the powers want (or however the right amount of money can buy).  When we all read the law, we should all come to the same conclusion about what it says.  If we don’t, then the law needs to be re-written until it is clear.

James Madison in Federalist 62 said,

“It will be of little avail to the people that the laws are made by men of their own choice if the laws be so voluminous that they cannot be read, or so incoherent that they cannot be understood.”

Anyone remember Nancy Pelosi saying we need to pass Obamacare so we can find out what is in it?

E.C. Wines in his ‘Commentaries on the Laws of the Ancient Hebrews‘ said,

“The style in which the laws are written is not beneath the attention of legislators. It should be concise, simple, clear, and explicit. It should excite in every mind the same ideas; and this because the object is to establish justice and teach duties—not to furnish specimens of rhetoric.” 

In addition, DD also includes references and quotes from Larry Arnn, F. A. Hayek, and Ayn Rand in his discussion.

Good stuff. Please, click HERE and go read it all.


As the following few weeks progress, remember that what we are electing this year is much, much more than simply one man, or even a pair of men. We are electing almost our ENTIRE legislating body, and we need men & women at all levels of government who will take up this fight on our behalf.

I pray we each choose well.

**Courtesy of johngalt & the boys, over at YouViewed/editorial**


From the pen of Michael Ramirez :

View original post

Have a nice day!

You may wish to sit down for this one.

Last year, southern Arizona fell victim to a natural disaster. Dubbed the Monument Fire (since it started in the Coronado National Monument), it claimed roughly 30,000 acres in a two-week period.



(The Monument Fire)…denuded the hillsides of vegetation. After the fire, record-breaking monsoon rains hit the region, triggering huge mudslides that left boulders the size of cars tumbling down hillsides.

The slides crushed Tombstone’s mountain spring waterlines and destroyed reservoirs for the town’s main water supply network.

And from

Tombstone’s main water source are springs bubbling up in Miller Canyon, but the recent flooding after the fire has messed it all up.

Jack Wright, Tombstone’s Water Operator said, “It’s moved some boulders through here. You have seen caverns that didn’t exist. This was a drivable road a month ago.”

And then, …the real disaster happened. A Federal Government agency showed up.

From the

George Barnes, Tombstone’s city clerk and manager, explained to The Daily  Caller that since many of the pipelines are in a “wilderness area,” the U.S.  Forest Service will not allow the mechanized equipment needed to fix the  water-lines into the area for environmental reasons.

“We began working with the Forest Service but then we realized and found what  an incredible boondoggle that could be, even though we are very confident we  have a special status because our rights there pre-existed the Forest Service  and even the BLM [Bureau of Land Management]. We were there long before anything  and all we are asking is to fix our stuff,” Barnes said.

And perhaps my favorite quote:

……instead of allowing repairs as has happened in the past, “federal bureaucrats are refusing to allow Tombstone to unearth its springs and restore its water-lines unless [city officials] jump through a lengthy permitting process that will require the city to use horses and hand tools to remove boulders the size of Volkswagens.

Got all that?

A town, here in the United States, in the year 2012, needs to get their drinking water back, and a Federal agency says, “Sure, but please use machinery from ….the 1800’s, okay? Have a nice day!”

Tombstone is fighting this in court, but they need to win quickly, since a slow victory will still be a loss for whatever townspeople are left.


This whole fiasco is eerily reminiscent of the California case back in 2009 with the San Joaquin Valley vs. the delta smelt, the main difference being this time the concern isn’t people’s livelihoods but rather their lives.

I have no idea whether this is merely typical, everyday environmental extremism, or just the latest example of federal overreach gone mad. And I really don’t want to consider the possibility that it has anything to do with President Petulant’s previous issues with the state of Arizona.

That would be impossible……wouldn’t it?