TexasCHLforum.com

This morning I saw a protest where an illegal immigrant rights group was calling on state and local governments to defy any federal government orders for deportation of illegal aliens. Putting aside the irony that they are in agreement with sheriff Joe Arpaio that states should enforce immigration laws as they see fit, I am in agreement with the overall message that states and cities should stand-up to the over-reaching federal government and reassert state's rights.

I just wonder if they will be so quick to get behind a state's move to legalize the possession of automatic weapons, or suppressors, with no ATF regulation. Environmental regulations could also be tossed by the wayside.

All of this is the natural byproduct of people placing a higher value on their grievance identity than on their citizenship.......or on obtaining citizenship if they don't already have it. They are more interested in carving their own place in the world, than they are in being part of the greatest nation in world history.

Frankly, I'm not surprised, as there are also plenty of people on the social/political right who are beginning to feel the same way. And I think this emphasis on assigning a higher value to one's grievance identity rather than on citizenship is itself the natural byproduct of a leviathan fedgov't which has grown too large to either be responsive to the needs of the citizenry, or protective the rights of the citizenry.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:I just wonder if they will be so quick to get behind a state's move to legalize the possession of automatic weapons, or suppressors, with no ATF regulation. Environmental regulations could also be tossed by the wayside.

They wouldn't even touch it but we all have to be sensitive to every other civil rights groups out there.

Gun people need civil rights too.

The Annoyed Man wrote:All of this is the natural byproduct of people placing a higher value on their grievance identity than on their citizenship.......or on obtaining citizenship if they don't already have it. They are more interested in carving their own place in the world, than they are in being part of the greatest nation in world history.

Frankly, I'm not surprised, as there are also plenty of people on the social/political right who are beginning to feel the same way. And I think this emphasis on assigning a higher value to one's grievance identity rather than on citizenship is itself the natural byproduct of a leviathan fedgov't which has grown too large to either be responsive to the needs of the citizenry, or protective the rights of the citizenry.

A positive by-product of the discipline necessary to the success of any military organization is that we voluntarily surrender many of our freedoms in order to voluntarily place ourselves under that discipline. I call this a positive because we learn to make great sacrifices to be part of something larger than ourselves for the benefit of others besides ourselves.

Most Americans do not experience this and do not understand this. Those who participate in and perpetrate the anti-Trump protests we see on the news do not seem to me to understand the concept of suppressing one's desire for instant gratification to the principle of rule of law. Or maybe they are just bought and paid for by Democrat financiers.

In either case, it puts me in mind of MacBeth's protestations about life; a tale told by an idiot ... full of sound and fury, signifying nothing (Act V, Scene V).

Soccerdad1995 wrote:This morning I saw a protest where an illegal immigrant rights group was calling on state and local governments to defy any federal government orders for deportation of illegal aliens.

This is typical of the left. They embrace rule of law when it protects their ideology and shun it when it doesn't. They cheered on Obama's pen and phone, but will scream to high heaven about separation of powers if Trump tries to circumvent Congress with executive actions. To the Liberal, immigration laws are the responsibility of the Federal Government when local authorities question the citizenship of a detainee, but they will turn around establish sanctuary cities at every opportunity and proudly defy federal law at the same time. With the Left, everything is about ideology and the ends justify the means. That is why Liberals often beat up on Conservatives successfully. To the Conservative the law is primary, to the Liberal the ideology is primary. The Liberal will use the law to block and deflect the Conservative but the Liberal cannot be blocked or deflected by the law he doesn't respect in the first place.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:This morning I saw a protest where an illegal immigrant rights group was calling on state and local governments to defy any federal government orders for deportation of illegal aliens. Putting aside the irony that they are in agreement with sheriff Joe Arpaio that states should enforce immigration laws as they see fit, I am in agreement with the overall message that states and cities should stand-up to the over-reaching federal government and reassert state's rights.

I just wonder if they will be so quick to get behind a state's move to legalize the possession of automatic weapons, or suppressors, with no ATF regulation. Environmental regulations could also be tossed by the wayside.

I believe that states can regulate what is not already regulated by the feds. I don't want states to regulate immigration. I want the fed to regulate immigration. Look at what is happening though, sanctuary cities, marijuana laws being passed when it is federally illegal, free medical care for illegals, drivers licenses for illegals. If it is federally illegal it should be state illegal. If we want to change it it needs to be done at the federal level first, for example marijuana. I am not for legalizing it but if the states want to legalize it than it must be removed first from the federal laws making it illegal. All of those states that just voted marijuana in may be in for a surprise if the feds uphold the illegality of it, and they should. If it is illegal than it is illegal. Of course, the laws can be changed and then states can do what they want.

Cut off the Federal aid to the sanctuary cities.

The Dude wrote:Cut off the Federal aid to the sanctuary cities.

Not enough. Send in Federal law enforcement to enforce Federal law. ICE, FBI, whatever.

The Dude wrote:Cut off the Federal aid to the sanctuary cities.

Put the mayor and city council in prison for 3 years under current federal aiding and abetting / harboring law. I bet that crap would stop real quick and in a hurry.

I'm feeling a little this way today...



And I'd like to find one of these protest rallys so I can stand along the route and post this sign....

The Annoyed Man wrote:All of this is the natural byproduct of people placing a higher value on their grievance identity than on their citizenship.......or on obtaining citizenship if they don't already have it. They are more interested in carving their own place in the world, than they are in being part of the greatest nation in world history.

Frankly, I'm not surprised, as there are also plenty of people on the social/political right who are beginning to feel the same way. And I think this emphasis on assigning a higher value to one's grievance identity rather than on citizenship is itself the natural byproduct of a leviathan fedgov't which has grown too large to either be responsive to the needs of the citizenry, or protective the rights of the citizenry.

The Annoyed Man wrote:All of this is the natural byproduct of people placing a higher value on their grievance identity than on their citizenship.......or on obtaining citizenship if they don't already have it. They are more interested in carving their own place in the world, than they are in being part of the greatest nation in world history.

Frankly, I'm not surprised, as there are also plenty of people on the social/political right who are beginning to feel the same way. And I think this emphasis on assigning a higher value to one's grievance identity rather than on citizenship is itself the natural byproduct of a leviathan fedgov't which has grown too large to either be responsive to the needs of the citizenry, or protective the rights of the citizenry.

...and/or an entrenched political party that will do/say anything for votes.

Wow. I searched this on Youtube. Donald Trump SJW Protesters Cringe Compilation 2016 HD. AMAZING what these protesters say on camera. Worth watching if you can stomach it.

I do believe there are many in our ranks who agree on the open rebellion concept but it would not end like the special snowflakes are thinking.

Soccerdad1995 wrote:Putting aside the irony that they are in agreement with sheriff Joe Arpaio....

You mean ex-sheriff Joe Arpaio. Unfortunately, on Tuesday Sheriff Joe lost his bid for a seventh term in Maricopa County. He lost to Democrat Paul Penzone.

http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/loc ... /93534098/