Patience, Luck, and Principles or Burnings at the Stake

Quote of the Day

A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their
spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their
government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are
suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long
oppressions of enormous public debt…If the game runs sometime against us at home, we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake.

Thomas Jefferson
June 4, 1798
Letter to John Taylor, in The Writings of Thomas Jefferson p. 1050.

Witches have taken power again. I’m not certain patience, luck, and principles will prevail this time but I dread the burnings at the stake.


11 thoughts on “Patience, Luck, and Principles or Burnings at the Stake

  1. Burnings at the stake are nasty. Helicopter rides are so much “cleaner”. Sharks and patriotic helicopter crews can take care of the “witch” infestation. It’s the larger problems of public education / indoctrination and returning the Federal government to its Constitutionally mandated functions and appropriate size that will be the daunting tasks

    • This time around the people getting burned will definitely deserve it.

      • It never actually works that way. Looking at the spate of witch burnings in Early Modern Times about half were the classic peasants killing women who lived in the woods being herbalists or midwifes or just weird. The other half were the victims of professional witch hunters employed by government or church. Their victims were mostly men and often wealthy ones. This is because the witch hunters financial support came from confiscated assets. Sound familiar.

  2. Once the ANC gets hooked up with the Tun-Tun Mau coot, under the leadership of “Barbeque” in downtown America?
    Liberal white “witches” going to get raped and tire fried. Won’t be no trials or stakes.
    What we need to watch for is that everyone of those bitches out there is going to be looking for a white boy with a gun to hide behind.

  3. The people who have seized power respect, listen to and respond to only one thing. Refuse to use the “language” they will listen to and you must suffer the indignities and evils they WILL impose on you.

  4. “…..but I dread the burnings at the stake.”

    Don’t worry, the EPA won’t allow it, and even if they did the environmental impact statement would require limiting it so severely it would be merely “tanning at the stake.’

      • “What if all the witches at the EPA are the first to be burned?”

        Well, if you think “global warming” is a problem now………

  5. The book “Victoria: A Novel of 4th Generation War” opens with a scene of burning a female Episcopal ‘Bishop’ at the stake. It seems way over-the-top, obviously.

    But it’s a “future event”, and then the rest of the book works forward from “present day plus a year or two.” By the end of the book, the witch-burning not only makes sense, it’s quite reasonable. She was given multiple chances to recant and change her ways, she steadfastly refused….. Welp, OK then, if you insist.

    • When I see mention of burnings at the stake, I don’t tend to think of witches, but rather of the history of Dutch independence. That came about as a consequence of Spain’s attempt to suppress the Reformation in Holland (Calvinism, mainly). Burning “heretics” at the stake was a standard tool of the Inquisition, and naturally the Dutch objected to this practice. They had some legal arguments around historic liberties, too.

      In fact, the Dutch declaration of independence (1581) has some fascinating parallels with the US one, including a list of grievances.
      As it is apparent to all that a prince is constituted by God to be ruler of a people, to defend them from oppression and violence as the shepherd his sheep; and whereas God did not create the people slaves to their prince, to obey his commands, whether right or wrong, but rather the prince for the sake of the subjects (without which he could be no prince), to govern them according to equity, to love and support them as a father his children or a shepherd his flock, and even at the hazard of life to defend and preserve them. And when he does not behave thus, but, on the contrary, oppresses them, seeking opportunities to infringe their ancient customs and privileges, exacting from them slavish compliance, then he is no longer a prince, but a tyrant, and the subjects are to consider him in no other view. And particularly when this is done deliberately, unauthorized by the states, they may not only disallow his authority, but legally proceed to the choice of another prince for their defense. …

Comments are closed.