When This Was A Nation Of Laws

[PoliticalChic]

To summarize the motivation behind the Leftists: They desire to destroy all tradition, values, and attitudes, beginning with morality, and the family, and build their imagined Utopia here on earth.

And that extends to every institution that makes/made America great.
Including the law.


At its core, our heritage is based on due process.

The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate within the law ("legality") and provide fair procedures.

due process

www.law.cornell.edu

Democrats don't answer to the Constitution.....they answer to the mob.
Hence, they freed all of the rioters arrested, they refused to confront the domestic terrorists, and they charged Garret Rolfe with capital murder for doing his job...before even an investigation had been held.


Take a quiz: who has been given due process, and who has not:

Garrett Rolfe
John Brennan
The police
Hussein Obama
Donald Trump
James Comey
Brett Kavanaugh
Joe Biden
General Flynn
Lois Lerner
George Papadopoulos
James Clapper
Nick Sandmann
Hillary Clinton
Carter Page

 

[alang1216]

To summarize the motivation behind the Leftists: They desire to destroy all tradition, values, and attitudes, beginning with morality, and the family, and build their imagined Utopia here on earth.

And that extends to every institution that makes/made America great.
Including the law.


At its core, our heritage is based on due process.

The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate within the law ("legality") and provide fair procedures.

due process

www.law.cornell.edu

Democrats don't answer to the Constitution.....they answer to the mob.
Hence, they freed all of the rioters arrested, they refused to confront the domestic terrorists, and they charged Garret Rolfe with capital murder for doing his job...before even an investigation had been held.


Take a quiz: who has been given due process, and who has not:

Garrett Rolfe
John Brennan
The police
Hussein Obama
Donald Trump
James Comey
Brett Kavanaugh
Joe Biden
General Flynn
Lois Lerner
George Papadopoulos
James Clapper
Nick Sandmann
Hillary Clinton
Carter Page

When were we a nation of laws?

In Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation was sovereign. According to the decision rendered by Chief Justice John Marshall, this meant that Georgia had no rights to enforce state laws in its territory.[34]​

​

President Andrew Jackson decided not to uphold the ruling of this case, and directed the expulsion of the Cherokee nation. U.S. Army forces were used in some cases to round them up. Their expulsion and subsequent route is called "The Trail of Tears." Of the 15,000 who left, 4,000 died on the journey to "Indian Territory" in the present-day U.S. state of Oklahoma.[35]​

 

[PoliticalChic]

When were we a nation of laws?

In Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation was sovereign. According to the decision rendered by Chief Justice John Marshall, this meant that Georgia had no rights to enforce state laws in its territory.[34]​

​

President Andrew Jackson decided not to uphold the ruling of this case, and directed the expulsion of the Cherokee nation. U.S. Army forces were used in some cases to round them up. Their expulsion and subsequent route is called "The Trail of Tears." Of the 15,000 who left, 4,000 died on the journey to "Indian Territory" in the present-day U.S. state of Oklahoma.[35]​

Thomas Paine > Quotes > Quotable Quote

“Let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarcy, that in America the law is King. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”

― Thomas Paine

 

[PoliticalChic]

 

[Sun Devil 92]

When were we a nation of laws?

In Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. 515 (1832), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Cherokee Nation was sovereign. According to the decision rendered by Chief Justice John Marshall, this meant that Georgia had no rights to enforce state laws in its territory.[34]​

​

President Andrew Jackson decided not to uphold the ruling of this case, and directed the expulsion of the Cherokee nation. U.S. Army forces were used in some cases to round them up. Their expulsion and subsequent route is called "The Trail of Tears." Of the 15,000 who left, 4,000 died on the journey to "Indian Territory" in the present-day U.S. state of Oklahoma.[35]​

We are still screwing Native Americans.

 

[the other mike]

To summarize the motivation behind the Leftists: They desire to destroy all tradition, values, and attitudes, beginning with morality, and the family, and build their imagined Utopia here on earth.

And that extends to every institution that makes/made America great.
Including the law.


At its core, our heritage is based on due process.

So, when the Europeans came over to create "America", did they extend these
traditional moral values toward the native tribes ?

Or are we supposed to forget the ugly parts of our brief history
as if they never happened ?

 

[Sun Devil 92]

To summarize the motivation behind the Leftists: They desire to destroy all tradition, values, and attitudes, beginning with morality, and the family, and build their imagined Utopia here on earth.

And that extends to every institution that makes/made America great.
Including the law.


At its core, our heritage is based on due process.

The Constitution states only one command twice. The Fifth Amendment says to the federal government that no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law." The Fourteenth Amendment, ratified in 1868, uses the same eleven words, called the Due Process Clause, to describe a legal obligation of all states. These words have as their central promise an assurance that all levels of American government must operate within the law ("legality") and provide fair procedures.

due process

www.law.cornell.edu

Democrats don't answer to the Constitution.....they answer to the mob.
Hence, they freed all of the rioters arrested, they refused to confront the domestic terrorists, and they charged Garret Rolfe with capital murder for doing his job...before even an investigation had been held.


Take a quiz: who has been given due process, and who has not:

Garrett Rolfe
John Brennan
The police
Hussein Obama
Donald Trump
James Comey
Brett Kavanaugh
Joe Biden
General Flynn
Lois Lerner
George Papadopoulos
James Clapper
Nick Sandmann
Hillary Clinton
Carter Page

Good questions.

We pretty much live and die by social media.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So, when the Europeans came over to create "America", did they extend these
traditional moral values toward the native tribes ?

Or are we supposed to forget the ugly parts of our brief history
as if they never happened ?

Be specific so I can correct you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Good questions.

We pretty much live and die by social media.

Here's why:


"MARXISTS AND EXTREME RADICALS SEEK TO TAKE OVER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY


DNC chairman Tom Perez said Democratic Socialists of America member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “represents the future of our party.”

• DSA chapter chairs have agreed that “communism is good.”
• One DSA caucus calls its members “revolutionary Marxists.”

A far-left group behind rising Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is rife with Marxists and other far-left radicals.
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which includes Ocasio-Cortez, is creeping its way into the mainstream of American politics.

What Perez didn’t mention is that the group behind “the future” of the Democratic Party is teeming with radicals openly dedicated to dismantling and overturning the economic and social foundations of the United States."
Marxists And Extreme Radicals Seek To Take Over The Democratic Party

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Here's why:


"MARXISTS AND EXTREME RADICALS SEEK TO TAKE OVER THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY


DNC chairman Tom Perez said Democratic Socialists of America member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez “represents the future of our party.”

• DSA chapter chairs have agreed that “communism is good.”
• One DSA caucus calls its members “revolutionary Marxists.”

A far-left group behind rising Democratic star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is rife with Marxists and other far-left radicals.
The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA), which includes Ocasio-Cortez, is creeping its way into the mainstream of American politics.

What Perez didn’t mention is that the group behind “the future” of the Democratic Party is teeming with radicals openly dedicated to dismantling and overturning the economic and social foundations of the United States."
Marxists And Extreme Radicals Seek To Take Over The Democratic Party

That was going to be my next post.

It's all about the marketing.

Only in this case, it is also about silencing your competition.

 

[the other mike]

Be specific so I can correct you.

I was.
You preach from your self-proclaimed moral high ground about a group you generally disagree with...these evil leftist progressives who are destroying America .

Your intent is good, but you're attacking the wrong people. 90% of us - we're on the same side--we all want to drain the swamp-- the question is , which one ? A lot of them are saying Trump is the swamp...you and I know that's a lie, but is this kind of divisiveness convincing anyone they're wrong ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

That was going to be my next post.

It's all about the marketing.

Only in this case, it is also about silencing your competition.

Before Marxist's took over the major party, wasn't the competition of ideas the basis for voting one way or the other?

It may have been before my time, but I've read about Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Democrats who were pro-America.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I was.
You preach from your self-proclaimed moral high ground about a group you generally disagree with...these evil leftist progressives who are destroying America .

Your intent is good, but you're attacking the wrong people. 90% of us - we're on the same side--we all want to drain the swamp-- the question is , which one ? A lot of them are saying Trump is the swamp...you and I know that's a lie, but is this kind of divisiveness convincing anyone they're wrong ?

I asked you to be specific, and, no....you weren't.

In what ways did European settlers keep 'moral values' from the stone age savages that they found here?

 

[alang1216]

Thomas Paine > Quotes > Quotable Quote

“Let a crown be placed thereon, by which the world may know, that so far as we approve of monarcy, that in America the law is King. For as in absolute governments the King is law, so in free countries the law ought to be King; and there ought to be no other.”

― Thomas Paine

Noble words, unfortunately no one told the President, so tyrannical actions followed that resulted in genocide.

 

[alang1216]

We are still screwing Native Americans.

And Blacks. And Latinos. And Jews. And Muslims. And gays.

 

[the other mike]

In what ways did European settlers keep 'moral values' from the stone age savages that they found here?

"Hi, I'm from Europe. The bad news is me and my friends are going to kill half of you and steal all your land and resources. The good news is you won't be savages anymore."

 

[PoliticalChic]

In what ways did European settlers keep 'moral values' from the stone age savages that they found here?

"Hi, I'm from Europe. The bad news is me and my friends are going to kill half of you and steal all your land and resources. The good news is you won't be savages anymore."

1. The Indians didn't have land, and had no concept of ownership of same.
Case in point: prior to the arrival of the colonials, American's prior colonists, the Indians had no concept of private property, and it's meaning in advancing the liberty of all.


1. But didn't the colonists steal THEIR land?

"The implications for the Indian question are straightforward. Namely: In the extremely unlikely event that any particular Indian can show that he personally is the rightful heir of a particular Indian who was wrongfully dispossessed of a particular piece of property, the current occupants should hand him the keys to his birthright and vacate the premises. Otherwise the current occupants have the morally strongest claim to their property,and the status quo should continue.

Anything more isjust the doctrine of collective guiltmasquerading as a defense of property rights."
Do Indians Rightfully Own America Bryan Caplan EconLog Library of Economics and Liberty




2. "One popular history of Manhattan notes that the Canarsie Indians "dwelt on Long Island, merely trading on Manhattan, and their trickery [in selling what they didn't possess to the Dutch] made it necessary for the white man to buy part of the island over again from the tribes living near Washington Heights. Still more crafty were the Raritans of [Staten Island], for therecords show that Staten Island was sold by these Indians no less than six times."
The Straight Dope How much would the 24 paid for Manhattan be worth in today s money


1626 Peter Minuit purchased the island of Manhattan from the Canarsee Native Americans on May 24, 1626. However, the Canarsee were actually native to Brooklyn, while Manhattan was home instead to the Weckquaesgeek,(Wappnai) who were not pleased by the exchange and later battled the Dutch in Kieft's War. Peter Minuit (1589-1638)

 

[the other mike]

In what ways did European settlers keep 'moral values' from the stone age savages that they found here?

"Hi, I'm from Europe. The bad news is me and my friends are going to kill half of you and steal all your land and resources. The good news is you won't be savages anymore."

1. The Indians didn't have land, and had no concept of ownership of same.
Case in point: prior to the arrival of the colonials, American's prior colonists, the Indians had no concept of private property, and it's meaning in advancing the liberty of all.


1. But didn't the colonists steal THEIR land?

"The implications for the Indian question are straightforward. Namely: In the extremely unlikely event that any particular Indian can show that he personally is the rightful heir of a particular Indian who was wrongfully dispossessed of a particular piece of property, the current occupants should hand him the keys to his birthright and vacate the premises. Otherwise the current occupants have the morally strongest claim to their property,and the status quo should continue.

Anything more isjust the doctrine of collective guiltmasquerading as a defense of property rights."
Do Indians Rightfully Own America Bryan Caplan EconLog Library of Economics and Liberty




2. "One popular history of Manhattan notes that the Canarsie Indians "dwelt on Long Island, merely trading on Manhattan, and their trickery [in selling what they didn't possess to the Dutch] made it necessary for the white man to buy part of the island over again from the tribes living near Washington Heights. Still more crafty were the Raritans of [Staten Island], for therecords show that Staten Island was sold by these Indians no less than six times."
The Straight Dope How much would the 24 paid for Manhattan be worth in today s money


1626 Peter Minuit purchased the island of Manhattan from the Canarsee Native Americans on May 24, 1626. However, the Canarsee were actually native to Brooklyn, while Manhattan was home instead to the Weckquaesgeek,(Wappnai) who were not pleased by the exchange and later battled the Dutch in Kieft's War. Peter Minuit (1589-1638)

You're still talking ?

 

[PoliticalChic]

In what ways did European settlers keep 'moral values' from the stone age savages that they found here?

"Hi, I'm from Europe. The bad news is me and my friends are going to kill half of you and steal all your land and resources. The good news is you won't be savages anymore."

2. "...me and my friends are going to kill half of you and steal..."

Have you ever read a book????

1. Attacks by French-allied Indians hit Pennsylvania in October 1755. Sixty to one hundred arrived beyond the settlements, and divided into smaller groups, which went into different valleys to reconnoiter. Each spy ”lay[ing] about a House some days & nights, watching like a wolf” to see ”the situation of the Houses, the number of people at Each House, the places the People most frequent, & to observe at each House where there is most men, or women.” The individual farmsteads they chose a targets were at last attacked in parallel by still smaller groups, each only big enough to kill or capture the number of people it was likely to meet. Col. James Burd, “Pennsylvania Archives,” 199-104
   1. The brunt of these attacks fell on people who were outside doing field work. The attacks were manufactured to instill paralyzing fear- and they did.
   2. In 1756,William Fleming gave an unrivaled account of life in one of these little attack groups. Delawares stormed the house of Fleming’s neighbor, a farmer named Hicks, and took one of the Hicks boys as prisoner. The Indians then went on to instill fear by having Fleming witness the Hicks boys’ murder: they bludgeoned the boy to the ground with a tomahawk, split open his head- pausing at this point, in “Sport…to imitate his expiring Agonies” – and scalped him, and continued “all over besmared with [Hicks’s] blood.”
   3. Fleming wrote of watching while a youth from a neighboring family was taken by Indians while inside were “numerous Family of able young Men” and despite his “scream[ing] in a most piteous Manner for help,” his brothers made no attempt to help. A narrative of the sufferings and surprizing deliverances of William and Elizabeth Fleming [electron... | National Library of Australia
   4. Northampton County, Pennsylvania, 1778. Four men, two with wives and eight children, were attacked by Indians. [T]his occaion’d our men to flee as fast as they could,…before they were out of sight of the wagon they saw the Indians attacking the women & Children with their Tomahawks.” The net day, the three men came back to the scene for the corpses, which include the stabbed and scalped bodies of Smith’s wife, and of “a Little girl kill’d & sclped, [and] a boy the same.” Pa. Arch. 1:6:591
2. The essential fact about Indian-European warfare in the middle colonies was that the Europeans almost always did very badly. Though the American Revolution brought about a glorified, misleading view of frontier fighters and riflemen, during the eighteenth century country people practically never managed to mount even faintly convincing defenses against Indian attacks….The only thing that worked was leaving. (p.53)
3. Although the original diversity to the European colonies was the cause of much abrasive relationships, once public debate centered on the suffering of ordinary country people who had been dismissed in the cities as worse than Indians were reshaped into grander figures, defined by their hardships more than their religion, their nationality, or any of their own troublesome actions. And, increasingly, they made useful symbols for the country as a whole.
   1. Scalped and mutilated bodies were regularly brought into towns to document Indian barbarity. One strain of the rhetoric simply displayed abuses to the human body before and after death, especially scalping, as well as incineration, nonburial, and dismemberment.
4. It is more than interesting to consider the impressions of Capt. Joseph Shippen, of the Pennsylvania regiment, in 1755, considering frontier calamities: “To me, such tragical Scenes re sometime truly pleasing. Not that I rejoice…my Heart melts within me with Pity & Compassion for the unhappy Object….Yet as the softer passions of the Breast inflame the Soul with a Disposition, to do its utmost Efforts for its relief, I enjoy in that Respect a secret pleasure…”
   1. To make sense of this, we must begin with the aesthetics of the sublime. The pre-Romantic literature of sensibility , which rose during the 18th century to dominate poetry, drama, and especially the new genre of the novel, was the first body of writing in English to exploit the aesthetic value of emotion. At the heart of this was the fascination with sublime sensation: the felling of being awed, struck with wonder-or horror- at something outside oneself.
   2. The discourse on the sublime was shifting from “an ethico-aesthetic enquiry into a psychology of the individual” at about the time the mid-Atlantics scenes of Indian war became available. DeBolla, “The Discourse of the Sublime: Readings in History, Aesthetics and the Subject,”p.42 This writing of the ‘pathetic sublime’ overwhelmed the reader with emotion at the sight of the suffering.
   3. Edmund Burke (in “A Philosophical Enquiry into the Origin of Our Ideas of the Sublime and Beautiful” in 1757) was the first to observe that terror and horror were the sublime emotions par excellence. The Beautiful, according to Burke, is what is well-formed and aesthetically pleasing, whereas the Sublime is what has the power to compel and destroy us. The preference for the Sublime over the Beautiful was to mark the transition from the Neoclassical to the Romantic era. Thus, the sight of physical pain and suffering was the wellspring of the strongest emotions we could feel. [p.84]

 

[PoliticalChic]

In what ways did European settlers keep 'moral values' from the stone age savages that they found here?

"Hi, I'm from Europe. The bad news is me and my friends are going to kill half of you and steal all your land and resources. The good news is you won't be savages anymore."

3. " The good news is you won't be savages anymore."


You appear quite a moron.

These were stone age savages, who had the sensibilities of savages.

They were 3 thousand years behind the civilization of the settlers.
These were stone age peoples, thousands of years behind the advancement of the settlers. They moved from one locale to another, using up resources, burning down entire forests, and slaughtering species to the point of extinction.....and each other.

Now….about the Indians being stone age savages, with no concept of private property, or ownership of land….it is simply the condition of throw-back societies.



They were thousands of years behind the development of the Europeans…..

Here…..simply proof of this statement.




While they did have fire, probably due to a confluence of natural events, they never developed even the simplest implements of mechanical advantage. The rest of the world did, thousands of years prior.


That simplest of ‘tools’???? The wheel.

“The invention of the wheel falls into the late Neolithic, and may be seen in conjunction with other technological advances that gave rise to the early Bronze Age. This implies the passage of several wheel-less millennia even after the invention of agriculture and of pottery, dtheuring the Aceramic Neolithic.

Two types of early Neolithic European wheel and axle are known; a circumalpine type of wagon construction (the wheel and axle rotate together, as in Ljubljana Marshes Wheel), and that of the Baden culture in Hungary (axle does not rotate). They both are dated to c. 3200–3000 BCE.””
Wheel - Wikipedia

See any wheels in this picture?

Any books?