Rebane's Ruminations
September 2013
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  

ARCHIVES


OUR LINKS


YubaNet
White House Blog
Watts Up With That?
The Union
Sierra Thread
RL “Bob” Crabb
Barry Pruett Blog

George Rebane

The NC Republican Women Federated have been working hard to bring Sheriff Richard Mack to speak in Nevada County.  Today The Union ran a piece on the 18oct13 affair to be held in the GV Vets Hall.  Sheriff Mack is the founder of the nation’s constitutional sheriffs movement and a celebrated public servant to most conservatives.  You can find out more about the man’s thinking on his website here.

As predictable as the sunrise, our designated reader sent me a copy of the first of what promises to be many hyper-ventilations by the local Left to somehow diminish the scheduled speaking engagement, or preferably to ban it altogether.  The big insult to these open-minded progressives is that Sheriff Mack will be introduced by our own elected Sheriff Keith Royal.  Now isn’t that an outrage if I ever heard of one?

As pointed out regularly in these pages, it is always the looney Left that wants to proscribe anyone and everyone who doesn’t agree with their message.  Why is that so one-sided?  I’d be quite happy to have them invite Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, Maxine Waters, Rev Sharpton, Rev Jackson, Rev Wright, Bill Ayers, …, hell, even Harry Belafonte up here to speak.  I would definitely be in the audience to hear what they had to say.

[18sep13 update]  Apropos to the asymmetry pointed out above, the comment stream to this post is also illustrative.  In there we see the notion of selective enforcement of laws taken up.  Our progressive commenters are all in a lather about the intentions of certain local sheriffs to enforce only laws, regulations, mandates, etc they consider constitutional or have a proper legal basis.  These commenters treat this notion as if it was invented yesterday by the so-called ‘constitutional sheriffs’, and as if it has not been long practiced by all governmental executive offices during the history of our republic.

Today’s egregious end-runs by POTUS and various state governors of their respective legislatures that has raised hue and cry across the land does not even come up on their radar.  That Obama publicly stated he will constructively legislate through his agencies and bureaus (both criminal and regulatory) does not concern these worthies one whit.  And that the President has already brought untold misery in job destruction and economic malaise nationwide is not their concern as he has promised to continue this policy for the remainder of his term.

Reading these commenters and their lines of argument is truly an education in the study of our polarization and the widening gulf that divides us.

Posted in , ,

131 responses to “Sheriff Mack to speak, Left’s undies knotting up (updated 18sep13)”

  1. George Rebane Avatar

    JoeK 1014am – Indeed my ideological position is so “ensconscd” on the side of sanity that I will not support the umpteenth redo of demonstrated socialist (cum communist) error and misery. Large scale collectivism in any of its forms is a slippery slope and a confirmed scourge to humanity. You guys should really abandon your own sclerotic ideological tenets and again give liberty, individual responsibility, and entrepreneurship a chance.
    Carping that ‘next time we’ll get it right’ only works with the sheeple. But then again, therein lies the strength of your message.

    Like

  2. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Calvin Coolege was President when buying stocks on the margin became legal therefore resulting in what was a significant but not catastrophic decline in the market-around 15% turning into a catastrophe when the stocks were recalled by the lenders. In my view that was indeed a bubble and he sat on his hands and did nothing much like Bush. Money was flying around and fortunes were made and there was no leadership to guide the country.
    ” Buying stocks on margin means that the buyer would put down some of his own money, but the rest he would borrow from a broker. In the 1920s, the buyer only had to put down 10 to 20 percent of his own money and thus borrowed 80 to 90 percent of the cost of the stock.
    Buying on margin could be very risky. If the price of stock fell lower than the loan amount, the broker would likely issue a “margin call,” which means that the buyer must come up with the cash to pay back his loan immediately. ”
    http://history1900s.about.com/od/1920s/a/stockcrash1929.htm

    Like

  3. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 1029am – that kind of argument gets you nowhere. Free markets to tend to oscillate and correct themselves very quickly when allowed to clear (it’s systems science thing). It is the subsequent intervention that deepens and prolongs the misery, and more so when the central planners decide they know enough to prescribe draconian rules intended to smooth out future bubbles and dips. The only smoothing there that has worked is nationally uniform economic destitution resulting from such prescriptions from collectivist governments.

    Like

  4. fish Avatar
    fish

    ” Buying stocks on margin means that the buyer would put down some of his own money, but the rest he would borrow from a broker. In the 1920s, the buyer only had to put down 10 to 20 percent of his own money and thus borrowed 80 to 90 percent of the cost of the stock.”
    I agree….Calvin Coolidge was the main reason people in the 1920’s were stupid.
    Or are your ideological positions so ensconced as to limit your thinking as to other possibilities?
    I’m all ears Joe…what do you propose?

    Like

  5. Gregory Avatar

    “You even point to the sentence, “States therefore may refuse to use their legislative or administrative resources to enforce federal law”, without even stopping to think what it may mean. In short, you don’t know what the heck you are talking about.” Frisch 4:04AM
    Frisch, you keep refusing to think about what it means. There is apparently no law that compels sheriffs to use their administrative resources to enforce laws they believe to be unconstitutional, and they answer to the voters of their county. If the state, or the feds, want something done, they remain free to do it themselves.
    Your perversion of equal protection is particularly odious; prior restraint against millions of people on the slim chance that one of them is likely to shoot Steven Frisch in the head if they were allowed to own an icky semi-automatic rifle that has been widely available for the better part of a century isn’t “equal protection” any more than forbidding unregistered printing presses (or web servers) would be an equal protection case for people concerned about libel.
    ” effect of granting these rights to Sheriffs would be that everyones individual rights are diminished.”
    Frisch, they have the right to prioritize enforcement now. Putting the enforcement of laws the sheriff doesn’t think constitutional below doughnut, coffee and potty breaks appears to be the sheriff’s prerogative.

    Like

  6. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Re: George’s Update:
    Proof point: “Hey, screw you Washington, I don’t believe in Brown versus the Board of Education of Topeka Kansas, thus I refuse to enforce it. Let little brown ones live with separate but equal.” Response: National Guard de-segregates schools.
    Selective enforcement may be PRACTICED but it is not legal…as found by the SCOTUS and backed by force if necessary. If a state legislature passes a law banning assault weapons, and the courts uphold it, the Sheriffs have to follow it, no matter whether they BELIEVE it is un-Constitutional or not, just like a school board or a governor has to follow a de-segregation order, or they will go to jail…and all your [and Greg’s] exhortations that you think you know better don’t mean crap.

    Like

  7. Paul Emery Avatar

    A reliable source informed me that the hammer to squash a bug proposal on outdoor gatherings was initiated by Sup Nate Beason because of a noisy party on Cement Hill earlier this summer. Typical Conservative motive. Oppose regulations unless it is to support the convenience of your friends.

    Like

  8. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 1258pm – that would indeed be a surprise if Nate “initiated” that ordnance. Any government stricture to prevent, control, limit public gatherings should be carefully reviewed, and opposed if there is a shadow of a doubt that it can be misused by overzealous govt agents/agencies. Is it a secret to reveal which Supervisor originates which such initiative; in short, why is that not an item of public information???

    Like

  9. Gregory Avatar

    Regarding bureaucrats writing laws, I recall one where they just made them up. A Rude Center employee, asked circa 2000 about the yard sales in unincorporated areas of Nevada County, said ‘Technically, they’re illegal because we don’t issue permits for yard sales’.
    I hope they were bitch-slapped by their superiors for that one, but I doubt it happened.

    Like

  10. fish Avatar
    fish

    Selective enforcement may be PRACTICED but it is not legal…as found by the SCOTUS and backed by force if necessary. If a state legislature passes a law banning assault weapons, and the courts uphold it, the Sheriffs have to follow it, no matter whether they BELIEVE it is un-Constitutional or not, just like a school board or a governor has to follow a de-segregation order, or they will go to jail…and all your [and Greg’s] exhortations that you think you know better don’t mean crap.
    Probably wouldn’t go to jail….might be removed from office. Still if a sheriff had the stones it would be a welcome change from the useless tits that seem to predominate now.
    Not to worry Steve….there will always be somebody above you to direct you and order your daily existence. I’m sure that will come as a great relief.

    Like

  11. Gregory Avatar

    Steve, you keep proving my point. Brown v. Education was (and remains) a valid equal protection case and the Feds acted appropriately with rogue local officials harming children, while your rabid defense of so-called Assault Weapons bans is not. What you want is a prior restraint on my and everyone else’s rights over a weapon that is, at best, used in 4% of violent crime (the number for rifles of all kinds).
    The latest, on Governor Brown’s desk (or on its way) redefines Assault Weapon as any semi-automatic rifle with a detachable magazine. All the pretenses of it being a military weapon on the streets is now stripped away, thanks to a California State Legislature Gone Wild. We shall see if Brown is “feeling lucky” or has one eye on the Colorado recalls.

    Like

  12. Paul Emery Avatar

    George
    Supervisors do encourage legislation based on what they perceive is the needs of their constituents by directing staff to propose solutions to present to the whole board. This one appears to be dead in the water as written but we’ll see what happens.

    Like

  13. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Seems Keith Royal is not the bad guy for trying to bust up back yard weddings. Paul (who is abreast of these kind of things) is probably correct that he runs a well disciplined force. I am not privy to know for sure since my dealing with law enforcement is limited to an occasion traffic stop, which is growing less frequent through the years since I stopped driving $400.00 cranksta gangsta cars with red tape for taillights. And I intend to keep it that way. Amerika has been berry berry good to me.
    Wasn’t it President Andrew Jackson that said (some say he didn’t say it) of a Supreme Court ruling he disagreed with: “They have made their decision, now let them enforce it.” On the last day of the presidency, Jackson admitted that he had but two regrets, that he “had been unable to shoot Henry Clay or to hang John C. Calhoun.” His supporters later formed the Democrat Party.
    Digression over: We are talking roles of local lawmen. We are not talking about breaking existing laws, but rather enforcing/not enforcing laws deemed unconstitutional. Those who are old enough can remember when Pat Brown closed all the Houses of Ill Repute in CA. Whether a local lawman here or there gave the blind eye for such places and didn’t shutter the doors may have happened. Either way, they got closed in due time. Pragmatic people understand that you just don’t snap your fingers and it is done tomorrow. Even that no smoking in bars was not complied with overnight.
    Sheriff Mack’s beef apparently was with the Federal Government, not local or State laws. When the people’s rights are infringed upon, anyone can address their grievances through our 3rd Branch of Government, which Mr. Mack did. He did it for you and me, the little people.

    Like

  14. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Greg, only you are making this about guns, I merely used it as an example..frankly a better example would be child sodomy laws. NAMBLA actually has made the case that it is violation of constitutional rights. My point is that a Sheriff does not make the laws, they enforce them. Pure and simple.

    Like

  15. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    I wonder what happened to our outdoor rock concert rules from the 80’s when big names came to Boreal and other laces.

    Like

  16. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Good recall Todd. Deadheads showed up here in troves for a little drugs, sex, and rock and roll (or so I was told). Can’t remember, hahah.

    Like

  17. Gregory Avatar

    “Greg, only you are making this about guns, I merely used it as an example” -Frisch 4:29PM today
    “I can see it now….Nevada County citizens killed by deranged gunman who the Sheriff refused to do a background check on or enforce gun control laws on…who do you think is going to pay for that?”
    -Frisch 8:49AM yesterday
    You were the first to bring up guns on this thread, Steve. Your disingenuousness is again showing.
    The constitutional sheriff types have made it clear its substantially about guns, as have the people who are supporting them. This all started gaining momentum with the alarm about huge ammunition buys by the Feds and the push in Congress to dip hands in the blood of Newtown children to again try to ban more guns. Period.
    Tozer, Local Poe-leeese in various California venues were remarkably cool with what went on at Grateful Dead concerts. A long history of peaceful crowds who didn’t drink till puking or weren’t taking drugs recklessly had a lot to do with it. I recall a concert venue first aid provider, the Haight-Ashbury Free Clinic, chatting with a reporter… Grateful Dead concerts were a non issue, the occasional old hippie wandering in when they realized their dose was more than they wanted to handle outside of a safe place, but Led Zeppelin concerts were referred to as “pukefests”, kids just downing anything that was handed to them.

    Like

  18. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    It is an example you frigging buffoon…..the other points I made used other examples…..you Greg are a complete ass. If you support nullification on guns you set the precedent to support it on pedophilia….lets just have law enforcement pick all their own pet laws to ignore…

    Like

  19. Gerry Fedor Avatar
    Gerry Fedor

    Mike L – I laughed at the calculations that were made as they forgot one inportant thing….
    Our system is on the top of a hillside and we have sun from 15 minutes after sunrise until 15 minutes until after sunset. The calculations that you were referencing and I was disputing were for (if I remember right) for 6 hours of sunlight exposure, while we get (on June 15th) exposure from 5:30am until @8:00pm – This is one of the longest days, but we were getting @17 1/2 hours of exposure.
    I know that today we had (directly from the read out on the front of our inverter) 54.4 KWHr and at @5:50pm we are still generating @3945 watts.
    This system has been extremely efficient, but again we have excellent sun and the tracking system helps too!

    Like

  20. Gerry Fedor Avatar
    Gerry Fedor

    Opps, I meant 15 minutes before sunset…..

    Like

  21. Gregory Avatar

    Buffoons are as buffoons do. Frisch, your buffoonery is showing.
    The difference between the 2nd Amendment crowd and NAMBLA is that the gun nuts have a SCOTUS ruling that the 2nd really does confer an individual right to own and carry guns, while even in Frisco, NAMBLA hasn’t convinced anyone who isn’t interested in buggery themselves.
    Hint: if you want to screw boys under 18, run for Congress and play with the congressional pages… the age of consent in D.C. is 16, and at least one Democrat congresscritter was celebrated in death despite all the pages he banged. Go for it, just not in Nevada County, where at least one former County politico is said to have been caught in flagrante delicto with a young boy and given the choice of either staying out of local politics forever, or going to jail.

    Like

  22. Gregory Avatar

    One sentence in my 6:09PM should have read “NAMBLA hasn’t convinced anyone who isn’t interested in child buggery themselves.”

    Like

  23. rlcrabb Avatar

    Don’t know about Boreal, but the Dead concert at the fairgrounds in 1984 made quite an impression on Grass Valley. Local officials, from the city council to the Board of Supes, were horrified by the freaks who showed up. It was the beginning of the end for the big shows at the fairgrounds. Not long afterward, the Supes tried to stop a concert by Crosby, Stills and Nash because of David Crosby’s high profile drugs and weapons bust in Texas. They weren’t successful, but it was one of the last rock shows in GV.
    Crosby later went straight after he needed a liver transplant. He looked pretty good when I saw him at the Vet’s Hall last year. Don’t know if he’s still into handguns.

    Like

  24. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Mr. Gregory and Mr. Crabb: Not that it matters much, but I did not mean to say Deadheads were a bunch out of control drug crazed freakazoids like one would see at an AC-DC venue. Not even close. Or even like moi.
    Although I never followed the Dead, I met many a groupie that would follow them everywhere. Like it was a full time job or something. You could blow them over with a deep breath they were so mellow. Also, those groupie chicks taught me a thing or two when I would run across them on occasion on life’s journeys.
    Once I was at a Boy Big Boy’s restaurant in Toluca Lake one late evening and fine younger lady I was with said “Don’t look now, but Jerry Garcia just sat down right behind us!” I turned at saw a fat white bearded dude sitting back to back to my booth and asked “Who is Jerry Garcia?” I was looking around for somebody famous, not that old hippie dude shoving a Big Boy into his mouth behind me, lol. Boy o boy, my date sure was pissed at me for asking “Who is Jerry Garcia?” Guess when she said the Dead, I must have been thinking the Dead Kennedys, who were fun to slam dance with her while drunk the week before. Was it something I said? She thought I was out of touch. Imagine that. Moi?

    Like

  25. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Concerning Sheriff Mack: “One man of courage is a majority” Andrew Jackson

    Like

  26. Paul Emery Avatar

    Following up on this weeks Supes meeting with a reminder that the public gathering ordinance proposed was far more encompassing that just rock concerts. It reads that “”The proposed Ordinance would expand the definition of
    an “Outdoor Festival”to include any outdoor gathering of 100 people or more for the purpose of attending a “commercial, recreational, civic or social function”
    It also includes extensive background checks on all “applicants” and police clearance before a license is issued. Makes me wonder where our local “property rights” advocates were and how they let this slip by.

    Like

  27. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 113pm – excellent point about CABPRO. I will ask Chuck Shea.

    Like

  28. Paul Emery Avatar

    Just to let you know in advance I’ll be interviewing Sheriff Mack probably the week before he speaks in Nevada County. I’ll let you know the exact date and time.

    Like

  29. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    Paul, be sure to ask “Sheriff” Mack if he is willing to go to jail in support of his civil disobedience.

    Like

  30. Gerry Fedor Avatar
    Gerry Fedor

    Gregory – you sure seem to have a real “fix” with Buggery and MAMBLA
    Telling?

    Like

  31. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    I think yhlou mean Frisch and MichaelA. Gregory is a nice famiy man.

    Like

  32. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    I merely mentioned NAMBLA as an example of an aberrant sub-culture claiming constitutional rights. Now personally I don’t claim any particular moral superiority, as you do, nor do I judge other adults personal sexual mores. But seeing your behavior here Todd, I doubt you have much of a leg to stand on when defining a ‘family man’.

    Like

  33. Todd Juvinall Avatar
    Todd Juvinall

    k,SteveF, I unlike you have raised a very nice family. You know nothinbg about family that is why you use things like NAMBLA as an example. So sorry to burst your bubble but I am the normal one here SteveF.

    Like

  34. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    “He who is without sin amongst you, let him cast the first stone…” John 8:7
    The correct response to Greg Fedor would have been that it is unfair to cast such an aspersion on Gregory, not continue the practice yourself Todd. I am frankly shocked that your stated values and your behavior are so divergent.

    Like

  35. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    I do however think we should just stop this side thread and get back to the point of the comments…the contention that an elected Sheriff has standing to defy the law and not enforce the laws of the nation he is sword to uphold.

    Like

  36. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    I never cast the first stone SteveF, you seem to do that all the time.
    Regarding the laws. I think your pal Obama is disregarding the laws all the time and has set an example for all to follow. ICE overlooks and Arizona has to pass a law to enforce Federal laws that the Holder and O refuse to enforce. There are more. I would suggest the Sheriff is the Patriot here.

    Like

  37. Todd Juvinall Avatar

    h and Fedor is a simpl minded chump with no scruples about lying as to his solar income. Too funny. On to the airport. Adios CCE.

    Like

  38. Gregory Avatar

    “I merely mentioned NAMBLA as an example of an aberrant sub-culture claiming constitutional rights.”
    And the fallacy of that was, of course, that you were trying to use it to draw a parallel to gun groups, which you obviously think is also an aberrant sub-culture despite gun owning households to be the rule not the exception in the county in which you have chosem to live and work, and they not only claim constitutional rights but those rights have been upheld by the SCOTUS.
    In fact, unlike many of the most sacred rights of the hard left, this particular right is even found stated plainly. In the first 10 fixes to the Constitution no less.
    Frisch, a sheriff who does not enforce a particular law, especially if they believe a successful court challenge is likely, is not defying it. Defying that law would be doing it themselves.
    Is Obama “defying” the Affordable Care Act by not applying certain clauses to groups he favors?

    Like

  39. Michael Anderson Avatar
    Michael Anderson

    “On to the airport.”
    Ick. So Todd, when you’re in the stall, tell us how that whole hand-waving thing works.

    Like

  40. George Rebane Avatar

    Just a note that no liberal here has picked up on the observation (see 18sep13 update) that POTUS and Moonbeam are national champions in selecting which laws to enforce, sidestep, ignore, and regulate around. Only crickets.

    Like

  41. George Rebane Avatar

    MichaelA 1006am – Behave yourself Michael.

    Like

  42. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    “I merely mentioned NAMBLA as an example of an aberrant sub-culture claiming constitutional rights.”
    If you are so interested in NAMBLA, become a CA public school teacher. A free flowing exchange of ideas is the foundation of education, is it not. That’s what I was told. Part of the self discovery thing. Conservatives and other closed minded bigots not welcome.
    http://granitegrok.com/blog/2013/07/california-democrats-on-track-to-pass-public-school-pedophile-protection-act

    Like

  43. Gregory Avatar

    Tozer, say what you want about pedophiles, but at least they drive slowly in school zones and near parks.

    Like

  44. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Oh Mr. Gregory, excellent reply. Two thumbs up. From the Balls of Montezuma to the shores of West Berkeley.

    Like

  45. stevenfrisch Avatar
    stevenfrisch

    Posted by: Gregory | 21 September 2013 at 09:57 AM
    No Gregory, I mentioned gun laws because the Constitutional Sheriffs sent letters to the federal government stating that they would not enforce new gun laws if they were passed.

    Like

  46. Paul Emery Avatar

    Stephen
    I wounder if they also won’t enforce Civil Rights laws because they also might feel they are a violation of States Rights.
    “Today I have stood where Jefferson Davis stood and took an oath to my people. It is very appropriate then that from this Cradle of the Confederacy, this very heart of the great Anglo-Saxon Southland, that today we sound the drum for freedom. . . . In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny. And I say, Segregation now! Segregation tomorrow! Segregation forever!”
    George Wallace, 1962 Governor’s Inaugural Address

    Like

  47. Gregory Avatar

    “Greg, only you are making this about guns, I merely used it as an example” -Frisch at the top of the thread
    “No Gregory, I mentioned gun laws because the Constitutional Sheriffs sent letters to the federal government stating that they would not enforce new gun laws if they were passed.” -Frisch now
    Make up your mind.

    Like

  48. George Rebane Avatar

    PaulE 1145am – And your point? (also see my 18sep13 poem)

    Like

  49. Bill Tozer Avatar
    Bill Tozer

    Paul, you are really going out on a limb here. But I do enjoy artist license and hyperbole. Why don’t you pull up Thomas Jefferson talking about the need to subdue “savages eating acorns” while you are at it.
    Paul, the 2nd thing our First Congress did was pass a Whiskey Tax. Not popular and led to the Whiskey Rebellion. George Washington sent troops in to squash the uprising like a bug. Or is that squash it like a pumpkin tossed over the Old Tunnel Overpass? I like hyperbole.
    The Feds sent troops down to Little Rock to force desegregation as well. The Feds sent troops, poison gas, and tanks to Waco and snipers to Ruby Ridge, but I digress.
    Ok, States and the Feds have tangled. Think the big one was called The War Between the States. Or, States vs the Feds and had something to do with Gettysburg or Robert E Lee, but I could me mistaken.
    A group of elected Sheriffs announced in advance they will not enforce a Federal Law IF passed. NOT talking about States vs Feds here.
    So, let’s stay focused. It is OK for municipalities across the fruited plain to tell local law enforcement DO NOT arrest illegals on immigration violations. These rogue municipalities are usually found in urban centers. Some even go as far as to prohibit local law enforcement to even tell the Feds (ICE) that they have a illegal resident in custody. Absolutely a big no-no to forward information to Federal law enforcement in this commonly found example.
    This is how I see it. The shock and gasping for air here is because a city council or Mayor or County can tell law enforcement to disregard public safety and Federal Law, so that is fine. Peachy. All is well, nothing to see here. But if a local elected law enforcement dude or dudette says they will not enforce a federal law IF passed then the sky is falling.
    Must be nice to have your cake and eat it too.

    Like

Leave a comment