If Congress Can Make Its Own Rules… Why Can’t We?

Mandeville, LA – Exclusive Transcript – Why can’t we revert back to old rules?  We don’t have to follow them.  By their own admission, they tell us we must not follow them.  By the Supreme Court’s own admission, they tell us we are not beholden to what it is that they decree.  They’re the ones that keep saying it is the will of the people, the will of the majority that must be done.  Well, if a majority say I’m not paying your taxes anymore and I’m not letting you run any more debt up in my kid’s name, then a majority ought to rule, shouldn’t it?  Check out the rest in today’s transcript…

 

Begin Mike Church Show Transcript

Mike:  A couple things I didn’t hit on in my welcome back to sanity and to reality, which is to say that all the things that are transpiring that are national news today are going to transpire exactly as they are.  There is no force on Earth that can alter them, save from you withdrawing your participation in these things.  Of course, we’re not at that point yet.  I keep hearing, [mocking] “Mike, people aren’t ready to do that yet.  They haven’t given up on Boehner and company.  They haven’t given up on their federal edifice.”  Why not?  Under what authority is it currently organized and under what set of rules does it currently operate, the ones they can make as they go along?  If that’s the way it’s going to be, if they can make their own rules up, then why do I keep hearing that we can’t make our own rules up?  Mike, you can’t rethink the American union, you can’t secede, you can’t do this, you can’t do that, you can’t nullify, you can’t interpose, you can’t intercede.  Why not?  If this generation can make its own rules up to govern itself by as they do in our legislature, why can’t we make our own rules up?

Here’s an even better question: why can’t we revert back to old rules?  We don’t have to follow them.  By their own admission, they tell us we must not follow them.  By the Supreme Court’s own admission, they tell us we are not beholden to what it is that they decree.  They’re the ones that keep saying it is the will of the people, the will of the majority that must be done.  Well, if a majority say I’m not paying your taxes anymore and I’m not letting you run any more debt up in my kid’s name, the a majority ought to rule, shouldn’t it?

But not in our — I have a new term that I’ve coined for you to use freely in your daily discussions.  It’s called FEMA Warcare or FEMA Welfare.  They’re interchangeable.  Now that the general leviathan in its perversion has made it an entitlement to live in dangerous areas where natural disasters can destroy life, limb and property, that means that people that don’t live in areas where life, limb and property is not threatened or imperiled must subsidize those that do.  That’s what FEMA does.  FEMA forces those that are responsible, that live in places where there are nothing short of acts of God chances of life, limb and property being destroyed by acts of God, to subsidize those that live in dangerous places like here in Louisiana.

The admission ought to be that we know we live near the Gulf of Mexico.  We know that we live in a place where hurricanes tend to wreak massive destruction on a 30-, 40- or 100-year cycle.  We know that we are prone to living in areas that are prone to flooding.  We should prepare for that.  We should prepare for the eventuality of hurricanes, prepare for the eventuality of rivers cresting and flooding.  Don’t live near them, and if you do, elevate yourself so that you’re not caught up in the flood.  If you live in an area where a hurricane can strike, you either ought to insure yourself against said hurricane strike, or you ought to make it so that your dwelling is hurricane-proof.  Of course, if you live next to the Atlantic Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico, there’s probably nothing you can do to build a home or any kind of a dwelling that’s going to sustain a hurricane.

I listened to Chris Christie yesterday.  I listened to the Governor of New Jersey droning on endlessly and with great passion and force about how — AG, do you have the audio of this — that only one party responsible for the continued misery of people in New Jersey?  That’s the Congress.  Well, Governor, that depends on, number one, how you define continued misery, and number two, how is it that people that live in areas that can — you live near an ocean, for God’s sake!  I’m told all the time and I was told after Hurricane Katrina, and I agreed with people: You dummies live near the Gulf of Mexico, stupid.  You didn’t figure out that it was going to flood?  You didn’t figure that a hurricane could come in and wipe out everything and this and that and the other?  Yeah, many of us did.  Some of us actually did the foolish thing of insuring ourselves.  Imagine that.  Why would you do such a silly thing when you can get the federal government to do it for you?

AG:  I’ve got the clip here for you.

Mike:  Governor Christie is droning on that these people are innocent.  They’re not innocent.  I’m not innocent living in a hurricane strike zone.  I know that.  People aren’t innocent that live on the Atlantic Ocean.  I’m not trying to pour salt in your wound.  Please do not misunderstand.  Also, knowing that Uncle Sam is now an insurance company and bailer out of first resort, not only for AIG and big corporate concerns, but bailer out of first resort for the American sheeple when they make irrational, irresponsible, and reckless decisions, that no one is actually responsible for their life and property any longer, this is the responsibility of Congress.  Anytime anything dire happens, Congress has to swoop in.

Again, those that aren’t in the area that are hit by storms and what have you will subsidize those that are.  You can say [mocking] “What do we have a government for if it’s not to bail people out?”  I would think the government ought to secure the liberty of people to be able to volunteer to bail people out, or volunteer to help, or secure the liberty of people to sell and vend products like insurance policies that could help people.  Also, if you have a government that does not hold out the promise of never-ending benefits for whatever natural or manmade disaster that may come along, maybe people would take more pains to try to avert them.  That doesn’t mean that they would be perfect in their execution of this, but it does mean that you would minimize at least some of the risks.  Have you seen the movie War Horse?

AG:  I have not seen that one.

Mike:  It’s a good movie.  You probably would like it.  There’s a scene in the beginning of the movie where the Irish farmer kid, he lives on the farm with his mother and father and the war horse.  They planted a wonderful crop of turnips.  All is going swimmingly until over a series of days, there are torrential downpours which wash the earth away from where the turnips were buried and they’re going to lose all their turnip crop.  They have no choice but to sell the horse.  They did have an out.  I’m just giving you an example of a natural disaster and how it would have played out back in the days when people were responsible for themselves.  That family had to figure out a way how they were going to make ends meet and they did it is my point.  It’s not an impossibility.  Of course, we’re told today that it’s an impossibility.

End Mike Church Show Transcript