"The mission of "We The Hoosiers" is to restore and adhere to
the Constitution of the United States to its original intent,
 re-establish  God given individual rights and freedoms, and
 protect the sovereignty of the Republic through citizen
 involvement in education and support of
 Constitutional Candidates."

 
      HOME         EVENTS       CONTACT US      ABOUT US       HISTORY  CONSTITUTION
THE SHERIFF - MORE POWER THAN THE PRESIDENT
by Alan Stang March 20, 2009
NewsWithViews.com
For many years, the people’s attention in the Battle for America has been
directed toward the federal government and its offices. Candidates stand for the
House and the Senate. Patriotic groups publish voting records of incumbents.
Considerable time, effort and money are expended in support of candidates for
President. After decades of such commendable activity, the record shows it is an
utter failure. The danger to the nation is worse than it ever was.

For many of those years, Republicrud bosses whined that if the people would
only give them control of the federal government, they would undo Democrud
damage and restore Free Enterprise. Finally, the people gave it to them.
Remember? The Republicruds controlled the House, the Senate and the Oval
Office long enough to turn the country around. What happened? The
Republicruds made our problems much worse. Their spending made the
profligate drunken sailor look like Scrooge. They deserved it when the people
kicked them out. They lost all credibility.

Yes, there is Dr. Ron Paul. But Dr. No is a political aberration. Time and again,
he stands alone. He has neither men’s room problems nor woman problems. He
doesn’t take congressional retirement. He actually returns “money” (computer
entries) to the federal treasury. He proposes abolishing the Fed and the income
tax and replacing them with nothing. In foreign affairs he suggests that we mind
our own business. Imagine! But, again, he is an aberration.

Why? Certainly one reason has to be that we ship the successful congressional
candidate off to the District of Corruption. However good the new congressman
may have been when he or she boarded the plane to the District; he is subjected
to intoxicating blandishments when he arrives in the enemy camp.
Soon, he succumbs to the blandishments, maybe even making himself
blackmailable, and begins to vote as the party boss says, without even reading
the bills. Instead of representing the people of his congressional district in the
District of Criminals, he represents the D.C. to the C.D. He or she now is one of
the boys or the girls. It has happened hundreds of times.
So, if the long, heroic effort to elect federal legislators has failed, does there
remain any governmental Horatius who can stand in the gap; who can lead the
Battle for America and restore the Constitution? There is. Lock and load, mount
up and prepare for the return of the sheriff.

My guess is that in the minds of many Americans the sheriff is an antiquated
figure who lives in the movies. In the older movies he is the hero; he is Gary
Cooper in “High Noon,” awaiting the train that will bring killer Frank Miller back
to town. In the new ones, he is the southern sheriff, even bigger than Rosie
O’Donnell, sneering, sadistic, racist, violent, etc. He has no modern relevance.
But now here comes Sheriff Richard Mack, elected and re-elected in Graham
County, Arizona, where he served for eight years. During his tenure, three
federal agents came to a meeting of Arizona sheriffs and told them in certain
terms how they would be dragooned as unpaid federal bureaucrats and
administer the new, federal Brady gun registration law.

The law was named of course for Ronald Reagan’s press secretary, who was
severely wounded in the immensely suspicious attempt to assassinate the
President. Since then, Mrs. Brady has become a leader of the campaign for Nazi
gun confiscation. I don’t know whether she was as crazy before the shootings as
she is now. Just one more increment of lunacy and they would have to lock her
up.

Richard Mack and the other Arizona sheriffs at the meeting rebelled. Sheriff
Richard says the language he heard – in which he did not participate – could not
be repeated in the presence of genteel Christian ladies, so we can’t tell you here
what the sheriffs said. But Sheriff Mack did take the government to court. He
sued the United States, and Sheriff Jay Printz of Montana joined him as plaintiff.
On June 27th, 1997, the sheriffs won; in Printz v. U.S. (521 U.S. 898) the U.S.
Supreme Court struck Brady down. Associate Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the
ruling for the Court, in which he explained our system of government at length.
The justly revered system of checks and balances is the key:

“. . . The great innovation of this design was that ‘our citizens would have two
political capacities, one state and one federal, each protected from incursion by
the other’” – “a legal system unprecedented in form and design, establishing two
orders of government, each with its own direct relationship, its own privity, its
own set of mutual rights and obligations to the people who sustain it and are
governed by it.” (P. 920)
Scalia quotes President James Madison, “father” of the Constitution: “[T]he local
or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy,
no more subject, within their respective spheres, to the general authority than
the general authority is subject to them, within its own sphere.” The Federalist,
No. 39 at 245.

Again and again, Justice Scalia pounds the point home (page 921): “This
separation of the two spheres is one of the Constitution’s structural protections
of liberty: ‘Just as the separation and independence of the coordinate branches
of the Federal Government serve to prevent the accumulation of excessive power
in any one branch, a healthy balance of power between the States and the
Federal Government will reduce the risk of tyranny and abuse from either
front.’. . .” Gregory, 501 U.S. at 458.

He quotes President Madison again: “In the compound republic of America, the
power surrendered by the people is first divided between two distinct
governments, and then the portion allotted to each subdivided among distinct
and separate departments. Hence a double security arises to the rights of the
people. The different governments will control each other, at the same time that
each will be controlled by itself.” (P. 922)

No one could make this any clearer. The primary purpose of the Fathers was to
prevent someone from grabbing all the power. When that happens, they knew,
the result is arbitrary, confiscatory, government, the kind Tom Jefferson
described in the Declaration of Independence. We would call it totalitarian.
Madison explains: “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and
judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether
hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very
definition of tyranny.” Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788.

To prevent that from happening, they divided the power. First, they divided the
federal power into three parts: the executive, the legislative and the judicial.
They would bicker among themselves, so that no one of them could seize all the
power the Constitution grants to the federal government.

The Founders divided the power even more. They set the limited power the
Constitution grants the “general authority,” Madison’s term for the federal
government, against the vast residual powers of the states. Each sphere of
government, state and federal, would be supreme in its own sphere. Neither
could control the other. Each protects itself from intervention by the other. Each
has its own laws and rules.
Madison says this: “Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans
possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of
subordinate governments, to which the people are attached and by which the
militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition,
more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can
admit of.” Loc. Cit.
What does all this mean today in the Battle for America? Sheriff Mack says it
proves that the sheriff is the highest governmental authority in his county. Within
that jurisdiction – inside his county – the sheriff has more power than the
governor of his state. Indeed, the sheriff has more power in his county than the
President of the United States. In his county, he can overrule the President and
kick his people out. Remember, the President has few and limited powers.
What? The sheriff can do that? He’s not just a character in a movie? That’s right.
Not only can the sheriff do that; sheriffs have already done that, more than once.
Most Americans are not aware of that because lying, conspiracy scumbags like
Rush Humbug, Shallow Sean Hannitwerp and Hugh Blewitt (a lawyer) etc.,
haven’t told them.
Remember, the office of sheriff has a pedigree so long, we are not positive about
when it was created. We think it was in the Ninth Century in England. We do
know that each land district, or “shire,” was governed by a “reeve.” The sheriff
of Nottingham became famous. At first, the king appointed them. With few
exceptions, our American shire reeves are elected by the people.

In 1997, in Nye County, Nevada, federal agents arrived to seize cattle that
belonged to rancher Wayne Hage. The sheriff gave them a choice: skedaddle or
be arrested. They skedaddled. The cows stayed where they were. Wyoming
sheriffs have told federal agencies they must check with the respective sheriff
before they serve any papers, make any arrests or confiscate any property.
In Idaho, a 74-year-old rancher shot an endangered gray wolf which had killed
one of his calves. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service sent three armed agents to
serve a warrant. Lemhi County Sheriff Brett Barslou said that was “inappropriate,
heavy-handed and dangerously close to excessive force.” More than 500 people
turned out for a rally in the small towns of Challis and Salmon to support the
sheriff and the rancher and to tell the federal government to back off.

While Richard Mack was sheriff of Graham County, Arizona, a bridge washed out.
Parents had to drive twenty six miles to get their kids to school half a mile across
the river. But the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wouldn’t fix it. First they had to
do an “environmental impact study,” to replace a bridge already there. They
were in no hurry. The study would take a mere ten years.

The people’s suffering reached the board of supervisors. The board voted to
dredge the river and fix the bridge. The feds warned that they would be fined
$50,000 per day if they tried. The supervisors hesitated. Sheriff Mack promised
them and the workers protection and pledged to call out a posse for the purpose
if necessary. They built the bridge and the Corps of Engineers faded. The board
never paid a dime.
So the long dormant spirit of America is reviving. The states are beginning to
adopt Tenth Amendment resolutions, using powers they have always had. The
people are restoring our long unbalanced constitutional system. There is
something “blowin’ in the wind,” but it isn’t what Bob Dylan thought it was.
Recently, Sheriff Mack addressed 570 people in Fredericksburg, Texas. He
reports that the reception was “beyond fantastic.”

What can you do? For once we are not just complaining. There is a plan. I do
not argue that you should forget about Congress. Not at all; if you see an
opportunity there, take it. Always remember that right now it is run by people
like Barney the Bugger of Taxachusetts, who will be elected by moronth in hith
dithtrict until he dieth of AIDS.
Most of the time, when you approach your congressman, you come to complain.
In the new crusade, you will approach your sheriff and tell him that he is not
only handsome, charming and overwhelmingly masculine, but also that he has
powers he may not be aware of. You have come to tell him what they are and to
back him up. My guess is, when you tell him that, he will not kick you out.
Tell him you expect him to return the courtesy when the Nazis come from the
District of Criminals to get the guns. Tell him you are ready in a minute to serve
under his direction in a posse. He will not move to Washington and be corrupted.
He will stay there with you. Show him the ten orders the Oath Keepers will not
obey. The Oath Keepers are retired and active duty military and police. Their
web site is oath-keepers.blogspot.com. The first order they promise to disobey is
an order to disarm you.
Put him together with Sheriff Mack. You will find him at sheriffmack.com. His
telephone numbers are 928 792-4340 and 928 792-3888. Bring the sheriff to
your town to speak. He will explain all this. Invite your own sheriff. At the
meeting I attended, the local sheriff and chief of police were there and loved
what they heard. No one dislikes hearing how important he is.

What if your sheriff is stupid or a federal factotum? That is what you will find in
many big cities. I once interviewed Los Angeles County Sheriff Peter Pitchess,
who said no one should have a hand gun. I asked him how a five foot lady alone
in bed could defend herself from a rapist. Realizing he was perilously close to
making himself look even dumber than he did usually, Pitchess conceded she
could have a long gun.
I brightened. A street sweeper isn’t really the best weapon for close quarters,
but it would give the lady a chance. Unfortunately, Pitchess added the word,
“unloaded.” I asked him what that five foot lady with an unloaded shotgun could
do against a six foot rapist. A police captain sat beside Pitchess during the
interview. His job was to extricate Peter from the jams he persisted on getting
himself into. The police captain extruded a barrage of miasma. It was effective. I
did not get an answer.
In such cases, says Sheriff Mack, move to a county where the sheriff is receptive.
Many more will be. For instance, in Texas there are 254 counties. Each has a
sheriff. If it is feasible to do so, run for sheriff yourself. Even your wife will be
impressed when she sees you with a hog leg on your hip and a star on your vest.
Imagine the intense joy of meeting IRS Communists or BATFE Nazis at the
county line and denying them admission.

The Battle for America will be decided in your county at your front door. If you
act now, later you will not need to “fill your hand.”

[Announcement: Alan Stang's radio show, The Sting of Stang, airs from 11
a.m. to 1 p.m. Central, M-F, via Republic Broadcasting Network. Call him on the
air at (800) 313-9443. To listen, go to republicbroadcasting.org and click on
Listen Live. If you can't listen at that time, do so via the archives. I'll be talking
about the various manifestations of the conspiracy for world government, its
tactics, such as the illegal alien invasion, its purposes and its players, from Jorge
W. Boosh on down.]
Alan Stang was one of Mike Wallace’s original writers at Channel 13 in New
York, where he wrote some of the scripts that sent Mike to CBS. Stang has been
a radio talk show host himself. In Los Angeles, he went head to head nightly
with Larry King, and, according to Arbitron, had almost twice as many
listeners. He has been a foreign correspondent. He has written hundreds of
feature magazine articles in national magazines and some fifteen books, for
which he has won many awards, including a citation from the Pennsylvania
House of Representatives for journalistic excellence. One of Stang’s exposés
stopped a criminal attempt to seize control of New Mexico, where a gang seized
a court house, held a judge hostage and killed a deputy. The scheme was close to
success before Stang intervened. Another Stang exposé inspired major reforms
in federal labor legislation.
His first book, It’s Very Simple: The True Story of Civil Rights, was an instant
best-seller. His first novel, The Highest Virtue, set in the Russian Revolution,
won smashing reviews and five stars, top rating, from the West Coast Review of
Books, which gave five stars in only one per cent of its reviews.

Stang has lectured in every American state and around the world and has
guested on many top shows, including CNN’s Cross Fire. Because he and his
wife had the most kids in Santo Domingo, the Dominican Republic, where they
lived at the time, the entire family was chosen to be actors in “Havana,” directed
by Sydney Pollack and starring Robert Redford, the most expensive movie ever
made (at the time). Alan Stang is the man in the ridiculous Harry Truman shirt
with the pasted-down hair. He says they made him do it.
 
 
 
 

 
Copyright © 2009 We the Hoosiers. All Rights Reserved.