Saturday Matinee – Laws and Statutes: Words Have Meaning.


John Mayall, 1970. Yeah, John, I agree, up until the point where the SCOTUS decides to rewrite them by fiat, then all bets are off and you’re left to figure out what happened. No more Room To Move.

Terry Gilliam‘s 1985 movie Brazil was prescient. It was originally promoted as farce, but too much of it has come true. It’s a must see IMO, especially in light of the recent judgments handed down by the presumed last bastion of logic, The United State Supreme Court. Once the Supreme Court fails to uphold Constitutional Law (as it did again this past week) the whole system of law collapses.

When the very people we elected to office to combat the corruption and cronyism refuse to do so and participate in the same, we are lost.

When the clear and precise words of The U.S. Constitution may be interpreted with alternative and convoluted meanings that have no foundation in the English Language by appointed (and supposed apolitical) jurists, we have no more recourse.

The majority of U.S. news outlets have become the equivalent of PRAVDA, and Washington D.C. might as well be renamed Obamagrad.

I pity you younger folks who have been indoctrinated into accepting this insidious propaganda and for the precedents that have been set. I hope that, as you grow older and wiser, you read history (real history, with all its warts, moles, lesions and scabs, and not the rewritten kind) and understand what’s coming down on you, your children and grandchildren, and try to repair the damage before those of us who know what’s happening are all gone. If you don’t figure it out soon, it’ll be too late, and I guarantee you’ll regret it.

For those of you who know what’s coming down, find a safe place to hide your reference books and eyeglasses, learn something about farming so you have a cover occupation, and remember that government-sponsored atrocities also happen in modern times.

Bunk Strutts


Tags: , , , , , ,

4 Responses to “Saturday Matinee – Laws and Statutes: Words Have Meaning.”

  1. hopewellframeshop Says:

    I say this with utmost sincerity and, I may be in agreement with you, and perhaps I haven’t had enough coffee, but I didn’t understand today’s post. could you give me the distillation of your thoughts? gotta get more coffee. thanks. big fan, here in new jersey!

  2. Bunk Strutts Says:


    Yeah, I was on a bit of a crank & ramblng a tad, but here’s the gist.

    Words mean things, especially in law, and the vast majority of laws are precise in the the way they are written. When the Supreme Court decides that intent supersedes the common accepted (and legal) definitions of words, we’re in dangerous territory, and the words of law no longer have precise meanings.

    If a law is poorly written with imprecise language, then it should be rejected, rewritten or otherwise amended, and resubmitted for review and approval by jurisdiction.

    This is not what the Supreme Court has done. The majority of jurors ruled that they can determine intent, regardless of what the words in any particular statute mean, and the separation between the three branches of the U.S. government has been blurred.

    Say you’re driving at 65mph on a freeway where the posted speed limit is 65mph and you get pulled over for speeding. The officer hands you a citation, and you decide to fight the ticket in court. A judge says that the law was intended to mean 55mph, therefore you’re in violation of the law despite what it says.

    The law says your child must be vaccinated prior to entering public school and you comply. Then a judge determines that the definition of the word “vaccination” also includes a mandated tattoo of your child’s social security number on his/her right forearm…

    Patterico has a good piece here.


    • hopewellframeshop Says:

      I get it. I totally agree. don’t really care who marries whom. but words *do* have meaning. thanks for ‘splainin’ this to me 🙂

      when I was a waitress, back in my youth, a customer gave me her whole order for a tuna salad sandwich. I repeated it back to her. when I brought the sandwich over, she was unhappy and said that wasn’t what she ordered. I said that this was precisely what she told me. she said “well, when I say tuna, a mean chicken.” not making this up. happened at st. peter’s hospital coffee shop, summer ’69.

      great stuff.

  3. Bunk Strutts Says:


    This isn’t about gay rights at all. It’s about violation of the 1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”
    If you want to get nit-picky Congress didn’t do it, they booted it to the Supreme Court who did exactly that, when the SCOTUS has no Constitutional authority to write and enact law. They did the same with Obamacare. Twice.

    I worked in restaurants and hotels, too. Not much fun, but you learn a lot about people. Your sandwich story reminds me of this classic:

    …and he didn’t get his wheat toast.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: