In Obamastan, the law is being used to enslave the people rather than serve them…

The fundamental transformation of America – is a political system wherein the people exist for and serve the state, rather than the state existing for and serving the people.


“A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

Why is Justice blindfolded?


Exclusive: Erik Rush compares level of despotism today to what founders faced in ’76

I am speaking of the allegorical Justice, also known as “Lady Justice.” She is usually represented holding a balance and sword, the former symbolizing fairness and the latter her power. Altogether, she represents the moral authority of law, or rather, that the law ought to observe morality.

She is also blindfolded. The blindfold represents the impartiality of Justice, that she is subject neither to prejudice nor influence. The second one – influence – is most significant in terms of our discussion.

It has been pointed out that the Boston Tea Party was carried out over confiscatory taxation on a scale far lower than that to which the average American is now obligated. Similarly, recent revelations concerning the egregious and illegal deeds of the Obama administration have given rise to the question of just how much our current situation parallels that of the men who founded this nation.

“But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.”

– The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America


Our founders were predominantly Englishmen, most of whom held a love for their country and their heritage, so the decision to risk their lives, property and the future of their progeny was not taken lightly. I believe that the most difficult question they had to consider concerning the impending struggle against the British crown was this:When? When is enough … enough? When, or at what point, was it appropriate in their estimation to seriously discuss revolution? There could be no ambivalence as to their moral right to engage in war with Britain.

While it is certainly true that the level of bureaucracy, corruption and overreach in our federal government has grown to intolerable proportions, and that both pre-eminent political parties share blame for this, it is the administration of one Barack Hussein Obama who has evinced a design to reduce the American people under absolute despotism.

We have two men, Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder, who have demonstrated absolutely no regard for the law nor the Constitution that enshrines that law. The irony of the fact that they both allegedly hold law degrees is only significant in this having provided them with the ability to more adroitly circumvent the law. Numerous individuals are complicit in their crimes, but Obama and Holder are the principals, along with Obama senior adviser Valerie Jarrett, possibly the most dangerous woman who has ever lived.

To America’s founders, the ultimate determination of when a people are no longer obliged to support their government rested here: When the law is being used to enslave the people rather than serve them.

While Obama’s political doctrine is Marxism, this label is almost moot. What is germane to the discussion and important to Americans in the practical sense is that the ideal – or the goal of their fundamental transformation of America – is a political system wherein the people exist for and serve the state, rather than the state existing for and serving the people.

Is this not an identical situation to that in which America’s founders found themselves – and which they became willing to fight to overcome?

As some of us predicted in 2010, it has now become evident that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) is nothing more than the framework for a totalitarian state. Implemented in its entirety, it will completely obscure the last vestiges of our constitutional republic. The Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Justice and the Environmental Protection Agency have been used as tools to tyrannize Obama’s political opponents. The administration has engaged in almost innumerable clandestine and illegal activities at home and abroad, many of which have yet to come fully to light.


“A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.”

– The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America

As always, in such systems as the emerging paradigm – whether monarchy, oligarchy, or a communist state – the elite ruling class is always above the law.

Hence, Justice’s blindfold, because no one is above the law.

Signals are being given to others that they, too, are above the law. While certain segments of our society are being actively targeted, marginalized and intimidated, other segments see their illegal and antisocial actions being ignored, condoned and even facilitated by those in power.

Here, I am speaking of the followers of Islam. While the administration and elements of the press continue to extol the virtues of peaceful, America-loving Muslims, these remain curiously scarce. At the same time, the vitriol and inflammatory rhetoric of anti-American Muslims is at an all-time high.

On May 30, the Obama Justice Department issued a public warning against the use of social media to articulate language considered inflammatory against Muslims, indicating that it could constitute a violation of their civil rights. This is clearly an overture to the curtailment of such speech, a clear violation of the First Amendment, yet Muslims know from experience that they can berate and threaten Christians, Jews and non-Muslims in general with impunity. We are told that we cannot even respond with harsh words.

Again, I ask: When?

Since Obama took office, the establishment press and the Obama administration have treated Muslims with the deference of a benevolent interplanetary species that just landed with the sole intent of enriching the lot of humankind, rather than viewing Islam as the retrograde cult of oppression and death that it is. As reported in WND, as part of Obama’s effort to accommodate Muslims and import as many Third World Islamic malefactors as he possibly can as soon as he can into the U.S., he is increasing “outreach” to Muslims internationally via a series of symposia.

It has already been established that there are jihadi training camps within our borders and that the Boston Marathon bombers Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were members of a radical mosque in Boston. Yet not only does this administration fail to put an end to such things, it empowers them through their insinuation into government and with deferential policies.

Are Muslims intended to be Obama’s cutthroat foot soldiers, those who will be mobilized to rise up, paralyze America with widespread terror attacks, and incite the chaos that will necessitate martial law and an end to our free society?


I have little doubt that the loyalty of patriotic Americans runs so deep that the very last thing they wish to contemplate is revolt, but I also know that it has crossed the minds of many. Some wonder what our military leaders are thinking, given their experience, knowledge of history and their proximity to the situation. If these dark developments are clear to an increasing number of Americans, how clear must the administration’s intentions be to them?

And if these intentions follow the path of so many before them in a world whose history is rife with elites, thugs and despots clutching power, where do “We the People” look for our salvation? Is it not to our neighbors who have over time proven themselves loyal patriots and warriors, and ultimately to ourselves who have studied the Founding Fathers and their wisdom and courage? Our nation is a book whose chapters are filled with the stuff of legend and direction for its people. I advise that we read it and resolve to keep it as it has been, inviolate before Almighty God, a sacred trust not to be sullied by the whims of a dictator.

The courage and sacrifice of those who went before us demands that we rise to the occasion and guard those liberties that have been purchased with so terrible a price.

“Take up the quarrel with the foe: To you from failing hands we pass the torch, Be yours to hold it high. If ye break faith with us who die, we shall not sleep, though poppies grow in Flanders fields.”

– Col. John McCrae, 1917


2 thoughts on “In Obamastan, the law is being used to enslave the people rather than serve them…”

  1. The worst idolatry (excuses, alibis for crimes) our society has indulged in, has been the “group rights” victimology scenarios so beloved of academics everywhere today.

    It’s almost a chicken versus egg philosophical difference – do groups (of individuals) “create” (and so, own) all individuals, as their subordinates, or are only individuals to enjoy the protections of rights, because all groups or extortionist gangs (of individuals) are still really only individuals, who should not be afforded any extra, might-made rights?

    Obviously, if groups have rights, then all individuals don’t, because all non-members of the mightiest groups are automatically discriminated against and so have less rights.

    I posit that the “group rights” stance is simply an excuse which all individuals realize is theirs for the taking, upon joining or formng a group (slanderously ‘for their own protection’):

    “I didn’t do it – ONLY The GROUP did it!”
    “In fact, none of us IN the group did it, either – ONLY the GROUP did it! Whee!”

    It’s only ever really an excuse, idolizing ‘the group’ (nation, whatever) for one’s own criminal desires to gain rights without responsibilities.

    All “leaders” really only do this (“WE must form a group to protect ME”) out of cold calulation (see any dictator) not because they were temporarily overcome by some sort of quasi- instinctive mob-rule insanity.

    The only principle any one ever need agree to, is of course the Golden Rule of Law which defines all situational morality as Do Not Attack First.

    From this agreement, we gain trust, progress, and civilization; this “social contract” means our only real right is to not be attacked first, and our only real responsibility is to not attack (therefore innocent) others first. Period.

    If it’s stated that plainly, it might be able to stop all extortion, because even small children already instinctively know this as the:

    “But Mom! THEY STARTED IT! Rule.”

    …and it’s also been the linch pin of all civilizations since Confucius first correctly phrased it in the negative so long ago (as “Do NOT Do Unto Others…”) it’s part of the doctor’s Hippocratic Oath (“First, Do No Harm”) the main part of the UN’s founding charter, which describes the #1 war crime as being “To be the aggresor in war,” and it’s even the basis of the liberal social engineer’s “Precautionary Principle” caveat.

    The rest are all symptoms, and all sub-sequent valid legislation depends on that Rule: Every law is an if/then warning which says, in effect: If and when you choose to attack first in this, that, or those ways, then this, that, and these punishments will apply to you.

    Bad laws are slanderously “pre-emptive” first attacks, like all gun control laws:

    “Since you DO own a gun, therefore you WILL use it to commit some crimes, SO
    we must now stop you by ‘defensively’ attacking you first – for your own good, of course!”

    There’s no if/then about them; they are all slanderously prejudicial attacks; and
    Guilty-Until-Never-Proven-Innocent threats, not valid warnings.

    Pretty much every MORE LAWS = ORDER! “law” any liberal ever passes, is some form of extortion like this.

    Other bad laws depend not on what your free-will choice of what you might DO might eventually be, but on their subjective yet objectifying definition of what you ARE: in islam’s prejudicially slanderous us-versus-them and might makes right sharia code, all weaker groups – foreign infidels, women, children, slaves – are openly and officially pre-discriminated against, encoded right into their system of criminal laws.

Comments are closed.