[1-25] of 8806

Posts from Mike, Norwalk

Mike, NorwalkMike, Norwalk
Mike, Norwalk

Maybe, could be on occassion? ? ? not as a rule

Mike, Norwalk

Defining "right" here, would be the point of demarcation. By example: if right includes "truth" truth is an absolute; only views, interpretations, perspectives, etc. thereof change (being accurate is not always the absolute truth). If we be "truth", we will also be right. What of "love's" inclusion into "right's" definition? If "liberty" is right, then compelled compliance, government licenses, victimless crimes, larceny with impunity (2nd plank of the communist manifesto, Social Security, police state confiscations, etc.) AND, denial of individual sovereignty and inalienable rights is/are VERY WRONG. My declaration, I stand with "right"! ! !

Mike, Norwalk

Waffler, though your here comments are close to accurate, it has been your constant erroneous illusions of what a democracy is, how the 2nd plank of the communist manifesto has done anything but enslaved a once noble people and the immoralities of a carnal socialism have enhanced virtue that your comment has received all the thumbs down.

Mike, Norwalk

Logan, I would here mark a thumb's up on your comment except for the sadness attributed to the reality stated. So few understand what a perfected allodium in property is while accepting a mere "title" (a carnal god's granted privilege) to property.

Mike, Norwalk

The religious foundation of the of the quote's stated reality is: each and every of We The People is/are "joint heirs with Christ" each and every of We The People are royal sovereigns of our Eternal Patriarch, our atemporal King. ! ! !

Mike, Norwalk

The CCP’s criminal puppet illicitly gaining the office of “President” actively commits crimes with impunity by using the vast powers and perquisites of his office to cover up. The patriarch of the Biden crime syndicate with impunity, grows corruption and the abuse of individual sovereignty, inalienable rights, liberty and the constitutional law of the land ("the laws of nature and nature's God" {Declaration of Independence})

Mike, Norwalk

WOW! ! ! that I could rate this with innumerable stars countless of times. We hold this truth to be self evident ! ! !  A great example of the quote's accuracy is the present day's woke progressives exponentially expanding efforts to redefine words and concepts.

Mike, Norwalk

Who is defining "right". The de jure jurisprudence that was to be the foundation / the absolute premise of law and justice within the representative republic that anticipated being a body politic of States united was stipulated within the Declaration of Independence's first paragraph: "the laws of nature and of nature's God". The current occupying statist theocracy infesting this land is absolutely antithetical to the ethics, rights, liberty and law there associated. Power is touted as goodness if it is destructive to ethics, rights, liberty and natural law. A fallacious fabrication of law does now replace any concept of justice.

Mike, Norwalk

ABSOLUTELY ! ! !  extremely well said.

Mike, Norwalk

JoW, which "god" are you referencing or alluding to? All socialist gods are corrupt. No term "god" developed in the original Hebrew language but rather, was adapted by translation and interpretation from external forces (Egypt, Babylon, etc.). I do like your slight alteration.

Mike, Norwalk

Jim, simply adding to your alphabet soup the CDC dosn't even profess to be close to a government entity. The CDC is only a 501(c)(3) and is dictating the destruction of the nation. The occupying statist theocracy infesting this land doesn't need Constitutional authority or warrant to activate its local corporate policing entities.

Mike, Norwalk

Without honesty, all of the world's wealth diminishes, making a loaf of bread invisible and non-attainable. Economic dishonesty is exemplified by the number of loaves available in Cuba and Venezuela.

Mike, Norwalk

To the "A" from Reston, after reading the Constitution and especially the 9th and 10th Amendments, please enlighten us as to the specific cite  written in the Constitution, where it actually states your premise. 

Mike, Norwalk

“Law” has a broad nomenclature that divides into multiple political philosophies, many temporal images, diverse understandings, scores of mental aberrations, and an exponentially expanding difference of systems / exercises / administrations. Law's attributed source, helps define subsequent philosophical applications as well as the applied system of law and justice. – By example:

     1) “the laws of nature and of nature’s God” (Declaration of Independence {a limiting static recognition of natural law, subject nomenclature animating an umbrella of that which is eternal and absolute in nature} natural law – the intended jurisprudence of the de jure States united) Infinite and unwavering rules of nature are categorically understood through assessable proficiencies such as gravity, physics, math, life, liberty and property (an Iroquois Federation measure, the constitutional law of the land).

     2) Legal Positivism; Legal Positivism is arbitrary, “An arbitrary law is one made by the legislator simply because he wills it, and is not founded in the nature of things;” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary) – Legal Positivism is most often “used in opposition to natural law” (Bouvier’s Law Dictionary).

     3) Legal Realism; Legal Realism is arbitrary and habitually time/situation fleeting, instituted by any source, at any time regardless of natural law or legal positivism (executive, judicial, personal, etc.).

     4) etc.

     Differences that identify a body politic that recognizes “the laws of nature and of nature's God” (a limited administration of natural law or nature's law) from a government that utilizes Legal Positivism, Legal Realism or otherwise is: at natural law administrations, tools such as codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc. are detailed to define the law that already exists. At other than administrations of nature's law, such tools are considered and acted upon as though they were the laws themselves – the legislators, as gods, have the ability to create law.

     One example of applied difference is movement or transporting oneself as an inalienable right. Each individual has an inalienable right to travel. Each person has a right to travel from point “A” to point “B” or point “B” to point “A”. If everyone tried to travel at the same time – A to B or B to A, injury would occur and rights would be violated. At natural law, a “Rule of Order” would be established through a given tool (code, statute, etc.) to have all individuals travel either on the right or the left. Natural Law's Rule of Order then enhances inalienable right and liberty. At other than natural law, the temporal gods establish law (codes, statutes, etc. becomes law – conducting one's self would be made illegal without the gods' privilege). Said laws' mandates would also contain threats of punishment (beyond natural law cause and effect) for violating its compelled compliance. If traveling on the right or left were a natural law issue, either all those in the U.S.A or U.K would be dead.

     A stop sign can be utilized as a rule of order at natural law or an arbitrary tyrannous tenant. Helots, serfs, slaves, theocratical dupes and those mental midgets such as Waffler do not / can not understand the difference. If there are multiple parties arriving at an intersection where "stop signs" are present, a set "rule of order" would establish a procedure that would best serve the inalienable rights of each and every involved. If the situation held that there was only one party in the vicinity of the stop sign laden intersection, the same "rule of order" would not be applicable. At arbitrary tyranny, the so called "law" (corporate bylaw or other despotic mandate for owned chattel) would dictate an entirely different understanding than would be explained by nature's law.

Mike, Norwalk

As to its focused attention  YES! ! !

Mike, Norwalk

The "A" from Reston, Jack and Waffler, next time I go to court maybe one of you will be able to help me. I've tried to subpoena John Q. Public, John Doe and many others that are represented to be the government's driving force and responsible party. This John somebody's extension that lives to serve the common needs for the benefit of all — where does he get his finances to pay for all his charitable endeavors? As you have determined or rationalized this John lives — can you give me the specific domicile so that I would have the chance to subpoena in the future?

Mike, Norwalk

Buttercup712, you should probably check contemporary legal dictionaries of the day and not rely on socialist's continuing to redefine words to explain an immediate need (such as "snopes" or other socialistic propaganda outlets like fact-check). Socialism is simply, any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of property, religion - the means of production and distribution of goods. As coined by Mussolini, fascism administers socialism through corporations and other third party entities as well as in its/their own name (like communism). By way of legal positivism's reality, corporations are extensions of the State as legal persons. One reason Hitler hated communism was its inefficiencies.

Mike, Norwalk

Buttercup712, you should probably check contemporary legal dictionaries of the day and not rely on socialist's continuing to redefine words to explain an immediate need. Socialism is simply, any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of property, religion - the means of production and distribution of goods. As coined by Mussolini, fascism administers socialism through corporations and other third party entities as well as in its/their own name (like communism). By way of legal positivism's reality, corporations are extensions of the State as legal persons. One reason Hitler hated communism was its inefficiencies.

Mike, Norwalk

Buttercup712, you should probably check contemporary legal dictionaries of the day and not rely on socialist's continuing to redefine words to explain an immediate need. Socialism is simply, any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of property, religion - the means of production and distribution of goods. As coined by Mussolini, fascism administers socialism through corporations and other third party entities as well as in its/their own name (like communism). By way of legal positivism's reality, corporations are extensions of the State as legal persons. One reason Hitler hated communism was its inefficiencies.

Mike, Norwalk

ABSOLUTELY ! ! !  We hold this truth to be self evident. AND; no man's rights, life, liberty or property is/are (individually, in concert or an extension thereof) safe while the executive branch is out and about enforcing the legislator's / judiciary's whim.

Mike, Norwalk

(-; I like it a lot ! ! ! ;-)    I'm with Logan

Mike, Norwalk

Billy, welcome to Amerika quickly becoming your decadent and deteriorating godless / socialist utopia where compelled compliance is rapidly becoming the tyranny of choice.

Mike, Norwalk

"Dissent" from what? Disloyal to What? The occupying statist theocracy that now infests this land deserves great dissent with little to no loyalty. The founding principles and laws of individual sovereignty, inalienable rights and liberty warrant little to no dissent with great loyalty.

Get a Quote-a-Day!

Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box daily.