Obama’s Change

With apologies to Lord Tennyson; I just couldn’t resist writing this

 

Obama’s Change

The Command is Forward !

Charge forward and onward !

Charge forward this Nation !

Into their valley of Death,

Into their valley of Hell,

Went this Nation so well,

Mad mania commanded Nation.

 

Were any dismayed?

Who then would turn away?

Was forward not a blunder?

The Nation not to reason why,

The Nation not to make reply,

The Nation but to do & die,

Mad mania commanded Nation.

 

All the World did wonder,

All the World saw blunder,

A commanded Nation ripped asunder,

There in its’ valley of Death,

There in its’ valley of Hell,

Reeling  shattered & sundered,

Strode not back the Nation.

 

Out from the mouth of Hell,

Came only the remnant few,

Out from the jaws of Death,

Came all that’s left of them,

Out from Commanded disaster,

Out came the last of them,

The remnant only of a Nation.

Blackstone’s Commentaries

An English law book once essentual to understand the nature of Law in general and part of all Law studies in the US and driven out of fashion about 1915 under Woodrow Wilson, a University Law instructor who made it to the Presidency in order to violate all his dictates on Constitutional law in the books he wrote during his teaching years.

Sir William Blackstone (1723-1780) 4 Volumes – 1st edition

Oxford-Printed at the Clarendon Press, 1765-1769

 

The RIGHTS OF PERSONS- BOOK I-Chapter 1

 

“THIS natural life being, as was before observed, the immediate donation of the great creator, cannot legally be disposed of or destroyed by any individual, neither by the person himself nor by any other of his fellow creatures, merely upon their own authority. Yet nevertheless it may, by the divine permission, be frequently forfeited for the breach of those laws of society, which are enforced by the sanction of capital punishments ; ……”

 AAAhhh wisdom….and abortion on a persons own whims a grant of “right” by a Court?  More by Blackstone below from the same section.

‘At present, I shall only observe, that whenever the constitution of a state vests in any man, or body of men, a power of destroying at pleasure, without the direction of laws, the lives or members of the subject, such constitution is in the highest degree tyrannical : and that whenever any laws direct such destruction for light and trivial causes, such laws are likewise tyrannical, though in an inferior degree ; because here the subject is aware of the danger he is exposed to, and may by prudent caution provide against it. “

 Tyranny??  What say you?  Infants in the womb cannot be “…aware of the danger he is exposed to, and may by prudent caution provide against it. “  No infant in utero ran from the educated assasine seeking his life.  More by Blackstone below.

 

“LIFE is the immediate gift of God, a right inherent by nature in every individual ; and it begins in contemplation of law as soon as an infant is able to stir in the mother’s womb. For if a woman is quick with child, and by a potion, or otherwise, killeth it in her womb ; or if any one beat her, whereby the child dieth in her body, and she is delivered of a dead child ; this, though not murder, was by the antient law homicide or manslaughter. But at present it is not looked upon in quite so atrocious a light, though it remains a very heinous misdemeanor. “

 

 

Why when the “….infant is able to stir in the mother’s womb” comment??  Because that was the best medical capability they had in their day.  Today we can see by ultra sound the infant before “stirring in the womb”.  We have better capabilites and more lawless infantacide.

“AN infant in ventre statute mere, or in the mother’s womb, is supposed in law to be born for many purposes. It is capable of having a legacy, or a surrender of a copyhold estate made to it. It may have a guardian assigned to it ; and it is enabled to have an estate limited to its’ use, and to take afterwards by such limitation, as if it were then actually born. And in this point the civil law agrees with ours.”

If you leave a legacy in your will to an infant in utero your will can be overturned as invalid since there are no living infants in the womb, only medical tissues known as “fetuses”.  No appointment of guardians is allowable as their are no living wards in the womb.

Blackstone comments on social duties from the time of Constitine (310 AD approximately)

 

“For the edicts of the emperor Constantine, commanding the public to maintain the children of those who were unable to provide for them, in order to prevent the murder and exposure of infants, an institution founded on the same principle as our founding hospitals……”

 

Now haven’t we “evolved” into nice progressive barbarians under “abortion rights”?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consequences

Its a rainy day heah n decided dat ah gots de time n should post one mo on Law Stuff.

Actions has consequences.  Ideas does too, specially when dey results in actions.  Now dis sounds pretty obvious but lotta folks dislikes de consequences a der actions.  Don’t know why as de consequences is often pretty plain ta see.  Fella downs a gallon a whiskey every day n dies a alcohol poisenin at 22.  Consequences a downin a gallon a whiskey every day fo years.  Fella planned on downin whiskey fo 100 years but de consequences gits him furst.  Seems obvious ya gonna kick off quick doin dat.  Fella robs a bank at loaded gun point n when leavin gits kilt by a police officer afore he kin shoot de officer.  Consequences a robbin banks at loaded gun point.  Fella figured no consequences gonna git him.  It did.  Pretty plain dat de consequences kin come right quick.  Gal takes addictive drugs heavy.  De human body makes a record internally a every drug dose she evah takes n deteriorates accordingly.  Gal dies at 26 a drug addiction and rapid aging.  Consequences a de body keepin a rapid detorioration record a addictive drug use.

So now what is de consequences a havin “legalized” abortion?  Well de furst thing is ya gotta promote it.  Ta do dat ya gotta convince women ta give up maternal instincts ta protect der young fo de joys a job advancement or whatevah or even ”do yo own thing”.  And acourse ya gotta convince folks dat all de “legalization” makes de act a “morally acceptable one”.  Dat morals come from Civil Guv’mint “legalizations”.  Next ya gotta exclude de gent involved.  Men gits no say in protectin de lives a der off-spring, after all, its become womans “legalized abortion rights”.

But worst a all, ya gotta convince de populace dat de “right” ta murder against a class a small people can be granted to another class, women.   In order ta do all dis since 1973 ya develops consequences.  De furst consequences is dat millions are murdered.  A course civil Guv’ment can proclaim dat der are no human beings present n hence dere ain’t no murders.  Define a class a little people outa de human species.  One a de consequences a keepin abortion goin.  Next is dat all de people born in de USA afer 1973 is not born because der lives wuz protected by de Civil Guv’mint, but only because der mothers decided not to murder dem.  Civil Guv’mint abdicated its protection in favor a promoting infant murders as “legalized” Law.

Now dats a nasty consequence.  By law der is an inter-reltionship between protection of life n allegiance.  Wuts allegiance??   Well dats de loyalty, or the obligation a loyalty dat a citizen owes to a nation.  National allegiance.  Cept fo one thing.  Allegiance ain’t one sided.  De nation has de duty to protect life, liberty n property a de citizen.  De citizen in turn has de duty of allegiance fo dis protection.  When de nation abdicates de protection part, de duty a allegiance is broken.  De citizen owes no allegiance.  Tyrannys a course demand allegiance in spite a any protection duties, but we is talkin here bout legal n lawful Guv’mints.  Dats Law for thousands a years.  Right to allegiance by de nation  wid a duty to protect life, liberty n property.  Right to protection a de citizen who exchanges allegiance to de nation fo it.

So if, since 1973, all de folks born in de USA wuz denied protection a life (n also could not inherit in utero property as dey could befo dat decision), do all dese folks owe de Federal Guv’mint any allegiance?  How bout de State Guvmints dat promote abortion?  Wut bout city Guv’mints dat would help fund killin em?  1973 means dat includes everybody under age a 35 or so.  Consequences a “abortion rights” wut nobody will talk bout.  Just suppress dis stuff.  Look up Blackstone, 1768 1st edition edition fo mo.  Its on de internet scanned books.

Stuff like dat wuz de cause a de American Revolution.  De King a England closed de American Courts and removed his protection a de colonists tryin to git anarchy goin so dey would capatulate n go wid his plans for protection to be returned.  King George III didn’t git de consequences a his actions figured out clear.  He abdicated Civil Guv’mint wid dat one n lost America as a consequence.

Mo Law Stuff

Decided der needs ta be some mo Law Stuff comments.  Ah liked readin old Law Books.  Gits ya inter troubles tho.  Folks don’t like ya much whin ya kin show dey is way off base.  History readin gots me inter it.  Wanted ter know how cum dis or dat is big stuff way back whin.  Lots a things made no sense.  Found out is wus presumed ya knew de Law, n dats whut gotsme readin old books to find out.

Dats whin ah sees sumpin modrin has been happenin.  Law books wid English definitions is quetly gettin re-written wid new meanin’s in em n chuckin out ol meanin’s wut been round fo say 1500 years or mo.  Give ya an example.

A lotta New Law books now say dat “legal” n “lawful” is synonyms, meanin dey means de same thing n is interchangable every whurs.  Ya go studies history stuff, say de American Revolution n folks is sayin “Dis is legal n lawful”.  Well dat don’t make no sense.  Why would folks say “Dis is legal n legal” or “Dis is lawful n lawful”.  Might as well say “Dis is legal n legal n legal n legal …..(etc)”.  Sumbody is stuck in de cart rut der.  So’s ah looks up in ol books “legal” n “lawful”.  “Legal” means dat sumpin went through de right n proper procedures ta become a Law.  Don’t say anythin bout de content a de Law, jus dat it went thru de right path correct n proper.  Congress, both houses, gotta agree n pass de same proposed Law.  President in right time period sign it.  De thing went through de right procedure.  Its declared to be “legalized”.  Nothin bein said bout de content a dat Statute cuz any content can be “Legalized” in a corrupt Guv’mint.  “Lawful” has ta do wid de moral content.  A Statute has to be “legal and lawful” to be a Law.  It has ta be gone through proper procedure n de moral content has ta be proper.  Good example follows.

De National Socialistic German Workers Party (de Nazi’s) took over control a Germany in de 1930’s n controlled all de Guv’mint Offices n functions under Adolf Hitler.  In 1936 de Nazi Supreme Court a Germany ruled officially dat Jews wus not human beings, but a sub-human species.  Since only human beings kin own property, all Jewish property cud be confiscated as abandoned property.  Since only human beings kin graduate frum Universities, all Jews were required ta return Degrees granted.  Since only human beings are protected by de murder statutes a de nation, Jews were outside de protection a de murder statutes.  Since only human beings kin be citizens of a nation, Jews were not, nor cud ever become German citizens.  Dis kinda stuff goes on n on n on.  Well de basic rulin was “Legal” but not “Lawful”, and without a tyranny cud nevah be considered as a binding law on anyone.

WWII got fought n Hitler n Friends looses it.  Horrendous brutal deaths were found ta have occurred ta Jewish folks (n others too later “Legally” proclaimed outside national protection).  Lotsa guys dat ordered dis stuff wuz caught.  De Nazi Leadership wut didn’t knock demselves off.  Dey gits tried at Neuremberg after de war is over by an International Tribunal (USA bein one a dem).  De Nazi Leaders is charged wid various crimes includin murder.  Der first defense “It was all Legalized in Berlin”  so dey wuz just followin orders n “de Law” wid de murderin (amongst de other stuff).  Dis was not an acceptable defense since de acts wuz “Un-Lawful” inspite a bein “Legalized” by de biggest Court in de land.  Most a dese fellas gits convicted n hung fo der actions.  Things gotta be “legal n lawful” since inny thing kin be legalized if ya got enuff rot in de system.

Dats when it struck me.  Folks rewritten de books is stackin de deck.  Consider “abortion rights”.  Go back n look up de 1871 AMA (American Medical Association) official statement on abortion sumtime.  Abortion doctors is called “enemies a de human family”, “educated assassins”…n lots mo names n is always kicked outa de profession since dey drags de profession inter de slime a murder.  Now in 1973 de US Supreme Court claims der is “abortion rights”, murderin babies is now OK since its in de US Constitution.  Sound familiar?  Folks hooplain dis thing says “Abortion is legalized”!!!  Lotta backup press fo it too.  Cept abortion ain’t “lawful”.  Gotta be “legal n lawful”.  Civil Guv’ment proclamations don’t make things “lawful”, unless ya believes dat civil Guvmints is de source a all moral obligations.  Nazi Supreme Court sho couldn’t do make stuff “lawful” by proclamation n Guv’mint Officials a Nazi Germany got hung fo believin dey cud.

So is abortion even “legalized”?  Can’t be since all de delegated powers dat kin be Legislated is ta be done by de Congress, wid no powers ta Legislate bein delegated to Courts.  Second, it ain’t in de Constitution n ain’t in any history a de Cosntitution Debates nor in any acts a Congress.  Ain’t legalalized n ain’t lawful neither.  Just proclaimed as such.  Abortion ain’t law at all, just tyranny in action.  But now ya gits some idea why Law books is gittin de once over.  Git rid a all de stuff ya don’t like whin ya kin in a tyranny.

An dis makes me wonder bout Obama who said dat he would support his daughter an help her if she wanted ta abort an unwanted baby in utero.  Killin yer own grand kids fo a daughters convenience makes me kinda shudder.  Not only dat but he gonna make “abortion rights” easy wid no restraints whin he gits de powers a Office.  Dats his pledge to de Nation.  Since der ain’t no such thing as “abortion rights” any mo den der is “Jew dismemberment rights” or “gun down de Republicans rights” , all a dese things bein “unlawful” acts,  why ah gits real worried bout dis guy.

Ain’t gonna make no friends wid dis one, but at least ya knows ah am honest bout dis.  Probably end up in a Re-education Camp fo sub-humans in Death Valley California wid no water fo dis postin.

Election Comments

Ah wonders if Americans even wants a Constitutional Guv’mint after watchin dis heah election.  Obama winnin, even aftah de pledges he publicly made a whut he gonna do aftah he gits elected is frightenin.  He pledged he gonna do things no President can legally do.  De US Constitution is one a restraints.  Only certain expressed things is delegated to de Federal Guv’mint.  Article I is wut’s delegated to de Congress, Article II is wut’s delegated to de Executive, n Article III is wut’s delegated to de Judicial Branch.  Ninth Amendment says all de stuff not delegated is reserved frum de Federal Guv’mint havin anythin to do wid it.

Obama has pledged to use de Presidential office to do things dat is illegal.  He can’t use none a de Presidential powers till aftah he takes de Oath a office, in which he pledges to support de Law n de Constitution.  Aftah he publicly (before 2 or more witnesses) does dat is he gonna do de stuff he just pledged not to do?  All Oaths given in de US is understood to be Oaths to God Hisself independent a whether de Oath says so or not.  Bible require 2 or more witness to all dese Oaths.  De Oath giver ain’t pledgin to dat wuts in de Oath to de witnesses, he pledgin to do de Oath duty to God n de witnesses is der so if he violates his Oath he kin be removed as a lawless Oath breaker.  Dats why all folks in Public Office, Federal or State or City or where evah has ta take de Oath a Office befo witnesses befo dey kin exercise de powers a de office.  Elected fella goes privately inter his closet n gives hisself de Oath a Office wid no body around n den tries ta  exercise de Powers a dat Office kin be ignored as a Office holder.  He ain’t got no Powers a de Office yet.  Witnesses is needed, 2 or mo.  Violation a Oath a Office is cause fo impeachment n removal frum office.  Law breakin usin de Office Powers also kin be cause fo prosecutin fo a crime n kin subject de convicted party to prison or worse.

So wut we got ta say bought sumbody wut promises to “bankrupt de coal industry”?  Ain’t no delegated power a Presidents.  Fact is, if twas den de Constitution be corrupted since de power to destroy industry cain’t be delegated by States or by a majority vote a de people.  No mo den a majority vote a de people amended de Constitution at Convention to legalize dat “de Moon is made a Green Cheese” is bindin on anybody.  Majority votin ain’t makin dat which cain’t legally n lawfully be made.  Moon ain’t gonna become “Green Cheese” even wid a 100% popular majority vote, 100% Congressional vote, a quick Presidential signin, n 100% Supreme Court agreement wid it.  Still gonna be Moon Stuff, not Green Cheese.  Now a corrupt Guv’mint kin start shootin anybody who says “Well de Moon still ain’t Green Cheese spite a de votin”.  Dats de sign of a tyranny.  Wuts a tyranny?? A tyranny is a arbitrary or unrestrained exercise a power.  It’s simply lawlessness run amuck.  A tyranny kin be by majority vote.  A tyranny kin be run by a Legislature.  A tyranny kin be run by a couple of fellas or just one.  When run by one he’s called a tyrant.

So what is a tyrant?  A tyrant is a absolute ruler who governs without restrictions.  N dats de gist a dis postin.  Obama campaignin pledged he gonna do things n ain’t gonna be restrained by de Constitutional restraints wut de Presidential Office contains.   Dey been folks like dat befo.  Lots of em. 

Sir Edward Coke was de top Judge in England, appointed by Queen Elizabeth I.  She dies n de new King James I (de King James Bible fame one) says he gonna do wut he wants evan aftah just takin de Oath a Kingly restraints n Kingly duties at his Coronation.  De King claimed he wus above de Law n Constitution a England since he wus “de King”.  Sir Edward Coke, Chief Justice a de Court a Common Pleas (1606-1616) ruled dat de common law wus de supreme law, even when de King (Crown) disagrees. King kicked him off de Bench fo dat.  Parliament voted a Remonstrance against de King n ordered it delivered to de King.  King commanded troops to break down de doors a Parliament n bring him de Parliament Journal.  He rips de pages outa de Journal Record bout de Remonstrance vote n says it ain’t der n never gonna be der.  Coke tells de King dat “Law made de King.  Wid out de Law der is no King”.  King ain’t liken Coke much n has de old gent imprisoned in a drafty prison tower durin Winter hopin pneumonia gonna knock de ol boy off.   Coke lives thru dat.  King has soldiers ransack his home lookin fo sumpin dey kin try Coke on, hopin ta be able ta try Coke fo Treason n kill de ol boy.  Coke charges de King wid violatin de English Constitution.  Coke, bein an old fella, but knowin mo den anybody in de Realm bought English law,  writes down everything he knows bout de English Constitution (called Cokes Institutes) n has de book hid since de King wants to burn it afta hearin bought dat.  Coke dies a old age (1634).  Parliament keeps de Institutes hid frum de new King afta King James I dies (1625) too a various venerial deseases n complications frum dem.  (King James I wus a sodomite).  Parliament publishes Cokes Institutes n James’ Son,  Charles de First, wants em burnt, but tries runnin an even tougher tyranny.  Finally Chuck 1 provokes de English Civil War.  De King looses dat one.  Divine Right a Kings ta be tyrants ain’t makin it.  Kings gotta follow de Law.

Now ya see wut happens whin tyrannies gits goin.  Folks gits kilt.  Obama gots me worried.