Independent American Party: Sheriffs are the Last Line of Defense – Bundy Ranch & Land Ownership

From the Independent American Party website:

January’s 10,000 faxes & 6,000 emails to:

Forward this to YOUR reps! STATE or FEDERAL

The Bundy Ranch dilemma was on the Hannity Show a few days ago. See YouTube video at http://goo.gl/fKRY8p

There’s a lot of talk between our government’s separation of powers. When this buzz-word is mentioned most think of the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of the federal government as separated and independent in their authorized functions…which they are.

But that only describes the horizontal Separation of Powers. MUCH more important in describing government abuses of today is the vertical Separation of Powers. Our government does NOT work like a military chain of command. The STATES created and ratified the federal government’s authority and itemized a list of its “few and defined” powers. State’s powers, on the other hand are “numerous and indefinite.” (Madison, Federalist Papers #45, also see 10th Amendment)

According to the Constitution—which is the “supreme law of the land” (Supremacy Clause), federal government ownership and legislation of land would need to be 1) “by the consent of the legislature of the state” and 2) “for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful buildings.” (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17)

So why does the federal government own almost a million square miles in Nevada, Utah, Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Wyoming, California, Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Montana, and Washington? Those are some pretty big buildings! The solution IS NOT for the states to go to federal court. Rather States should NULLIFY this AND ALL unlawful decrees of the federal government, and adhere strictly to the Constitution. It is the burden of the federal government to prove ownership based on the supreme law of the land, NOT the States’.

Sheriff: When states do not adhere to the Constitution YOU are the last line of defense in upholding it, and nullifying federal government encroachment, including ownership of land.

Dave Terry January 14, 2015

Let’s try this againlllllllll

FEDERAL FOREST FUNDS LIKE GIVING DOG A BONE
Some years ago, a huntcr and his dog where lost in the forest in a
dreadful snowstorm. There was no game to be found and both hunter and
dog were famished. Finally, in desperation, the hunter pulled out his
knife, cut off his dog’s tail and p|rt it in a lnt to boil. When it was
cooked, the hunter devoured the meat and toss€d the bone to the
whimpering dog; who licked his hand in gratitude.

That dog’s name is Yamhill County or Polk County or any one of
hundreds of other counties whose elect€d representatives must supplicate
to our federal landlords to beg for a pittance from the land that is
rightfully ours in the first place.

As informative as the article by Mike Pipes, (Counties, schools need
timber funds) wax it ignores the central problem. As he correctly alludes
to, private land and its subsequent development is virtually nonexistent
in many counties and thus the tax base on which public services depends
fail to materialize. It is ironic that those counties that cut down their
forests years ago do not suffer from this shortfall, but rural counties who
have been good stewards of the land are now squeezed into ghettos of
private land, as though they are islands in a federal sea”

When one considers that 92.5 percent of all federal lands are located in
the 11 western states and Alaska one can begin to see the gravity of this
federal imperialism. The entire state of Texas could fit into the federally
owned land in Alaska. All six states of New England would tit into
California and still have room for New Jersey. And all of North Carolina
would easily slip into that portion of Oregon that is owned by th€ federal
government.

The simple truth is the federal government controls far too much of our
land and manages it in a wasteful manner.When one also considers that
there is no provision or authority in the Constitution of the United States
for the federal government to OWN land, except for military installations
and postal roads (interstate highways), one can clearly see that the U.S.
government has no authority to dictate to the states or the counties,what
this land can be used for, much less control the revenue derived from it.

So long as the citizens continue to elect to Congress members whose
loyalty is first to Congress. the national government and their national
political parties instead of their constituents, this subservient relationship
will continue.
.
The intentions of all of those politicians that Mr. xxx mentioned, not
withstanding, I do not feel gratitude. I feel degraded and humiliated. And
ANGRY!

It is not appropriate that any man should hide his tail between his legs.

David T. Terry.
Secretary.
Libertarian Party of Oregon

2 Comments

Dave Terry January 14, 2015
Let’s try this againlllllllll
FEDERAL FOREST FUNDS LIKE GIVING DOG A BONE
Some years ago, a huntcr and his dog where lost in the forest in a
dreadful snowstorm. There was no game to be found and both hunter and
dog were famished. Finally, in desperation, the hunter pulled out his
knife, cut off his dog’s tail and p|rt it in a lnt to boil. When it was
cooked, the hunter devoured the meat and toss€d the bone to the
whimpering dog; who licked his hand in gratitude.
That dog’s name is Yamhill County or Polk County or any one of
hundreds of other counties whose elect€d representatives must supplicate
to our federal landlords to beg for a pittance from the land that is
rightfully ours in the first place.
As informative as the article by Mike Pipes, (Counties, schools need
timber funds) wax it ignores the central problem. As he correctly alludes
to, private land and its subsequent development is virtually nonexistent
in many counties and thus the tax base on which public services depends
fail to materialize. It is ironic that those counties that cut down their
forests years ago do not suffer from this shortfall, but rural counties who
have been good stewards of the land are now squeezed into ghettos of
private land, as though they are islands in a federal sea”
When one considers that 92.5 percent of all federal lands are located in
the 11 western states and Alaska one can begin to see the gravity of this
federal imperialism. The entire state of Texas could fit into the federally
owned land in Alaska. All six states of New England would tit into
California and still have room for New Jersey. And all of North Carolina
would easily slip into that portion of Oregon that is owned by th€ federal
government.
The simple truth is the federal government controls far too much of our
land and manages it in a wasteful manner.When one also considers that
there is no provision or authority in the Constitution of the United States
for the federal government to OWN land, except for military installations
and postal roads (interstate highways), one can clearly see that the U.S.
government has no authority to dictate to the states or the counties,what
this land can be used for, much less control the revenue derived from it.
So long as the citizens continue to elect to Congress members whose
loyalty is first to Congress. the national government and their national
political parties instead of their constituents, this subservient relationship
will continue.
.
The intentions of all of those politicians that Mr. xxx mentioned, not
withstanding, I do not feel gratitude. I feel degraded and humiliated. And
ANGRY!
It is not appropriate that any man should hide his tail between his legs.
David T. Terry.
Secretary.
Libertarian Party of Oregon
Dave Terry January 14, 2015
Ironically, I wrote a article for a local paper here in Oregon, over 14 years ago, which begs the same question and (may I say) offers an answer;
file:///C:/Users/Admin0121/Downloads/File0028.PDF

Comments are closed.