Some people are more equal than others

As near as I can determine these people believe that if you can convince your state legislators to assert rights guaranteed to the individual states by the Tenth Amendment you are not a legitimate part of the political process. Apparently only those people that advocate for the infringement of states rights are legitimate.

They haven’t publically proposed a punishment yet but I suspect they have thought about it.

Here is a sample:

The UA researchers identified what they termed the “Commerce Battering Ram Strategy,” a legal-political apparatus that “private lawmakers” – unelected individuals who thrust themselves into the political process – have developed to harness states’ legal powers in an attempt to break open federal laws.

“Using the Tenth Amendment as its core log, a Commerce Battering Ram mobilizes states to challenge the federal government,” Orbach said, adding that legislation and litigation are key to such mobilization.

In effect, individuals within the movement attempt to propel as many state laws as possible toward weakening the government’s control of guns, the research team said. 

While it would appear that individuals within the movement are merely exercising their legal rights as citizens of the United States and participating in the democratic process, Orbach, Callahan and Lindemenn all argue that that use of battering rams “is not equivalent to legitimate participation in the democratic process.”

“Commerce Battering Ram”? That sounds like a phrase straight from Josh Sugarmann’s playbook like “assault weapon”.

7 thoughts on “Some people are more equal than others

  1. “Using the Fourteenth Amendment as its core log, an Equal Protection Battering Ram mobilizes the Federal Government to challenge the State government,” Orbach said, adding that legislation and litigation are keys to such mobilization.

    In effect, individuals within the movement attempt to propel as many Federal laws as possible toward weakening the State’s control of niggers, the research team said.

    The authors argue that such laws have become a prominent force in attempting to “redefine the relationships between the States and the Federal government.”

  2. from the end of the article

    Orbach said: “Niggers and nigger lovers, who use funds from undisclosed sources and harness Federal legal powers to further their ideologies, hijack the process from all of us.”

  3. These same fools seem to also have forgotten the First Amendment Rights of the American Citizen, i.e.: ….”or the RIGHT of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” So if a group of Citizens decides to change the Law, and gets their Elected State Representatives to Agree, and it applies only to the State in which they live, that is “BAD” according to these UA Idjits? This is an example of what I meant in my last reply regarding Government Employees telling their Bosses what to do. State and Federal Tax Dollars pay these fools, and they need to be removed from their source of funding ASAP.

  4. YA example of the Left accusing its opponents of what it, itself, is doing. Conforming to the rules of the game is illegitimate, you see, because it exposes THEIR end-runs and subversions for what they are: blatant lawlessness.

    M

  5. “Orbach said: ‘Private individuals, who use funds from undisclosed sources and harness states’ legal powers to further their ideologies, hijack the process from all of us.'”

    Soros?
    Joyce Foundation?

    Idiot. Educated idiot.

  6. Last I checked, elected representatives still have to vote for these acts for them to become law. Unless this changed without my knowledge, how is it hijacking the legislative process for a group of citizens (or even a single citizen) to participate in the creation and promotion of legislation? This sounds like good civic participation in the democratic process, if you ask me.

Comments are closed.