Ah, got it. And no argument there. 
Does anyone have any specifics about the “possible militia threat” to the Oregon State Capitol? The article only says:
What are the “certain threatened behaviors”? And how were the threats communicated? By whom?
There appear to be two schools of “thought” on the subject. Both hold that the Constitution was never ratified, making the current Federal system illegal; where they differ is that one holds that the Articles of Confederation are still in force, while the other holds that the Constitutional Convention voided them. In any event, what we have is a collection of “Sovereign States” which either are or are not loosely associated. So a Freeman on the Land is perfectly justified in claiming that he is a “citizen of [insert State name here] but not of the United States”.
What follows, at least to some of the more radical Militia types, is a paradox which requires an Orwellian level of doublethink to reconcile: that since the States are governed by constitutions patterned after the (nonexistent) Federal constitution, the States themselves do not really exist. Hence the idea that the county (parish/borough/township) is the highest government entity. And the headache.
(The above is based on my recollection of a well-lubricated, and occasionally heated, “discussion” in rural Flathead County, Montana, where the native population of whackadoodles had been augmented — if that’s the right word — by refugees from the Aryan Nations.)
(And apologies for perpetuating any highjack. But a little insight into the SovCit/Militia "mind"set may be helpful.)
Personally, I don’t think it’s about climate change.
Imagine if a black mayor was put in charge of a rural town in the deep south. No matter what he recommended, the people would oppose him because they don’t consider him fit to lead.
The gop in Oregon were threatening to leave over vaccination bills and gun control bills before leaving over a climate change bill. The bill in question isn’t the issue, the issue is that they consider anyone who isn’t them unqualified to lead and they view their authority as invalid.
If it weren’t a climate change bill it would’ve been something else.
ETA: my response is dealing solely with the"nothing off" by the senator, not the capitol closing.
If the two black males in question threatened to shoot the old lady if she looked at them funny, yeah.
The senator said if police came after him, send heavily armed bachelors. Go ahead and tell a cop that. Walk up to him, tell him hey I’m going home now, and if you follow me, you best come heavily armed!
Report back.
Fine, the Oregon state district attorney should look into filing charges of making terroristic threats. But until something actually happens my money is on it being hot air.
Democrats caved.
As usual, A. R. Moxon has a pretty insightful take on this.
We need to stop pretending this is okay. But nobody with power seems to have the balls to actually do something about it. It’s really fucked up.
They didn’t “cave”; they didn’t have the votes.
I hope they reintroduce the bill the moment the GOP comes back. Make them do it again, and again. Force them to shut down services. See how long everyone else in the state tolerates it – not long, I’d imagine.
The idea that a governor can send out goons to capture legislators is All-Cool-Democracy, but resisting said goons is not to be applauded is a bit backwards for me.* That said, I’d rather these idiots squabble like this than join together to bilk the hapless taxpayer. I wonder what the response would be if say the governor of Alabama send out his goons to round up Dem legislators for a vote on abortion.
*yes I understand it is in the law to allow governor goon squads. Believe it or not people disagree with old laws allowing goon squads sometimes.
What about when governors threaten to kidnap legislators?
You left off a bit in the bolded part: “with threats of deadly violence”. Your phrase should be “but resisting said goons with threats of deadly violence is not to be applauded is a bit backwards for me”, although I’m curious when duly-appointed law enforcement officers carrying out their lawful duty turned into “goons”, exactly? What happened to “just do what they say and sort it all out in court”? Isn’t that the GOP-preffered strategy that they tell others to use when dealing with disagreeable police officers? If not, what other people would you encourage to resist the police with deadly violence?
I wasn’t aware that law enforcement doing things they were empowered to do was “kidnapping”; do you have a cite? I mean, think of all the people that police have “arrested” over the years; those people were actually being kidnapped!
:rolleyes:
Coppers have been goons for some time. When they behave like goons, they’re goons. Nothing magical about a title. I don’t know or care what the GOP strategy is. I don’t encourage anyone to tangle with the state and martyr themselves, but I acknowledge their right to resist, even if it is not advisable.
Yes.
Credible threats against law enforcement officers need to be prosecuted, no matter who makes them.
This 1840s incident might be of interest: Dorr Rebellion - Wikipedia
Dorr and his followers actually had a point: under the old system only “the propertied” (land owners) could vote; therefore the elected government represented landowners and others were neglected. The main point is that the system would never have spontaneously reformed because the legislature had no institutional incentive to change. Dorr and his followers had as strong a case as the revolutionaries back in 1776 had. In any event, the Dorr Rebellion was technically a failure: the Dorrites disbanded rather than attempt to fight a bloody revolution, and Dorr first fled the state and later was convicted and imprisoned. But it did have the effect of convincing the state government that reform was needed to prevent a resurgence, and the state constitution was changed to broaden the voting franchise.
The 2019 session will be over at the end of this month. The state constitution sets limits on how long they can be in session–160 days in odd numbered years and 35 in even numbered years. So nobody will be in the legislature until about February next year and they’ll be gone again in March of '20 until January '21. So there’s no practical way to treat these shitbirds like the children refusing to eat their dinners they so closely resemble. Most of them will be up for reelection next year so there’s that I guess.
This is impacting Reddit. Reddit's The_Donald Quarantine Causes Subreddit Drama and Ban Fear
Does the Oregon constitution allow for the legislative session to be ended early but then re-started before the end of the year? So the total number of days in session would still be within the limits, but they’re not all contiguous? It seems to me like that would be the best solution: Close the legislature now, but then re-open it as soon as they can drag some of the spoiled children back.
I think you might have to have a quorum to do that and, well…
I think that when people mention a “second civil war” this is the kind of shit they’re referring to: white Christian nationalists in various corners of fly-over country engaging in judicial nullification and insurrection. The Bundy Clan episode was our warning, and it’s escalating into a kind of neo-confederate movement. And as much as I wish I could be optimistic about the whole thing, I’m not. Today’s Republican party has the same mentality to politics that Southern Democrats had in the 1870s, and that was a pretty nasty period in American history.