---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Date: Friday, March 25, 2011
Subject: [DailyKos] As the Tea Partiers run wild in Montana, the folks with
common sense start to...
To: [email protected]




Crooks and Liars

Thursday March 24, 2011 03:00 pm

As the Tea Partiers run wild in Montana, the folks with common sense start
to turn away

By David Neiwert

[media id="20094" embed="true" image="true" download="true"]

Douglas Kennedy eagerly filed this report from the wilds of Montana this
morning for Fox News, describing the exploits of a Montana Tea Party
Republican legislator named Greg Hinkle, from Thompson Falls -- just
coincidentally the home of the Militia of Montana ...

Hinkle is a Republican state senator from Thomson Falls, and he recently
proposed a law, likely the first of its kind, asking federal law enforcement
to first seek approval of county sheriffs before any federal intervention in
the state of Montana. He calls it “The Sheriffs First Bill.”

“I believe that before any federal agency does any action within a county,”
he explained, “they should cooperate with the sheriff, coordinate with the
sheriff and go to him and say this is what we need to do in this county.”

For instance, Hinkle would want the FBI to first notify a Montana sheriff
before executing a search warrant or making an arrest in the state of
Montana.

At one point he allowed for arrest of any federal agent who didn’t comply,
but has since taken out that language. He also reluctantly added a line that
allows for federal agents to notify sheriffs “after the fact,” in order to
get the bill through the Montana House of Representatives.

Nonetheless, legal observers still call Hinkle’s bill “a clear violation of
the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution.”

“The federal government does not have to ask or even inform local law
enforcement about what they are doing,” said James Cohen, a constitutional
law professor at Fordham Law School in New York. “Sometimes they do because
it’s convenient, but they do not have to.”

Hinkle points out that the bill has already passed the Montana State Senate
(with the original language) and is expected to pass the House in the next
couple of weeks.

He also says there’s a lot of support in Montana, a state which he says well
remembers the deadly federal raids at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco,
Texas, in 1993.

Funny that a parachuting reporter would forget this, but in reality,
Montanans remember even better the longest armed standoff with federal
agents in history: the 81-day FBI standoff in Jordan with the Montana
Freemen. (Yes, yours truly was there.) As Jim Lopach, a professor of
constitutional law at the University of Montana, put it in a retrospective
piece:

Lopach said the real legacy of the standoff could be that it gave people a
reason to consider how far and how deep devotion to political individualism
should go.

"It might be a moderating thing," he said. "It might be that they saw the
dangers of extremism."

In reality, Hinkle's bill is one we've known about for awhile. It was one of
a package of bills that Montana Patriot-movement leader Gary Marbut
announced last September in Hamilton at a gathering I covered. (You can
watch the video of Marbut describing it here.)

Tonight Marbut wants to talk about a new piece of sovereignty legislation he
plans to promote in the state legislature, something he calls Sheriffs
First. The bill would make it a crime in Montana for a federal officer to
arrest, search or seize without advance written permission from the county
sheriff, Marbut explains, to enthusiastic applause.

"How that will work is, the federal officers might come to your local
sheriff and say, 'OK, here's our probable cause, we believe there's people
at this location in your county who have a meth lab …and we wanna bust
'em,'" Marbut says. "The sheriff might look it over and say, 'Gosh, I'm glad
you brought this to me, here's your advance written permission, and I will
send a couple deputies to help you.'

"Or the federal officers might come to the sheriff and say, 'Here's our
probable cause, it leads us to believe there's somebody in your county at
this location who's manufacturing firearms without a federal license. And we
want to go bust them.' The sheriff might say, 'Sorry, we have a state law in
Montana that authorizes that activity, it's perfectly legal here, you may
not go bust them, you do not have permission, and if you do, we can put you
in Deer Lodge. We can put you behind bars in Montana for doing that.'" That
brings out whoops alongside the applause.

Kennedy's fawning coverage at Fox concluded thus:

“They can’t do it,” [Fordham law professor James Cohen] said. “They can't
pass a law that says the federal government, the FBI, the [Drug Enforcement
Agency], whatever federal law enforcement agency, must contact the sheriff
before engaging in law enforcement activities. It simply can't be done."

Of course it can, said Hinkle.

“How on earth could the states not challenge federal law?” he asked. “That's
the way our system of government works.”

“The states are what created the federal government,” he added, “so the
states should actually have more authority than the federal government."

This is one of the more breathtaking aspects of this legislation: It so
clearly flies in the face of the Constitution as to be absurd, and yet its
proponents are some of the loudest proponents of their version of so-called
"constitutionalism."

These are the Tea Partiers who swept to power in Montana in the last
election, and boy, are they making their mark. But it may not be the one
they long for.

Longtime Montanans are well acquainted with these kooks, and the more they
rant and rage and embarrass the state, they more they turn people off. An AP
story from a few weeks back pointed this out:

HELENA, Mont. – With each bill, newly elected tea party lawmakers are
offering Montanans a vision of the future.

Their state would be a place where officials can ignore U.S. laws, force FBI
agents to get a sheriff's OK before arresting anyone, ban abortions, limit
sex education in schools and create armed citizen militias.

It's the tea party world. But not everyone is buying their vision.

Some residents, Democratic Gov. Brian Schweitzer and even some Republican
lawmakers say the bills are making Montana into a laughingstock. And, they
say, the push to nullify federal laws could be dangerous.

"We are the United States of America," said Schweitzer. "This talk of
nullifying is pretty toxic talk. That led to the Civil War."

A tea party lawmaker said raising the specter of a civil war is plain old
malarkey.

"Nullification is not about splitting this union apart," freshman Rep. Derek
Skees said. "Nullification is just one more way for us to tell the federal
government: 'That is not right."

There's been a substantial influx of these extremists into the state from
elsewhere in the past decade, many of them drawn by cheap land and their own
internalized mythology of the Western landscape what Montanans are like
(think "rugged individualism"). Perhaps no one symbolizes this influx better
than Chuck Baldwin, the erstwhile presidential candidate of the Constitution
Party, who recently moved to the Flathead Valley from Florida.

Baldwin held a shindig in Kalispell, where he was feted by local white
supremacists and other supporters. He all but announced that he was planning
to run for governor, in hopes of displacing Schweitzer. And he voiced the
view of a lot of these newcomers:

Baldwin went on to state that being born in Montana does not necessarily
make one a Montanan.

“There are a lot of people that were born in Montana but are not Montanans,”
Baldwin said. “And there are a lot of people, like me, who were not born in
Montana but we have been Montanans our whole lives.” (Baldwin arrived in the
Flathead in October.)

“Real Montanans love freedom,” he said. “Real Montanans will fight and die
for the principles of truth, honor and freedom.”

Here's hoping he and his fellow Montana Tea Partiers run on that kind of
platform. Sounds like a surefire winner with all the lifelong Montanans I
know.

__._,_.___
Reply to sender | Reply to group | Reply via web post | Start a New Topic
Messages in this topic (1)
Recent Activity:

New Members 1

Visit Your Group
[DailyKos]
A group for readers of DailyKos and other progressive sites.
Group Email Addresses
Post message:       [email protected]
Subscribe:       [email protected]
Unsubscribe:       [email protected]
List owner:       [email protected]
<http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/yg/logo/us.gif>
Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
.
<
http://geo.yahoo.com/serv?s=97359714/grpId=16894117/grpspId=1705083764/msgId=39959/stime=1301082250/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3
>
__,_._,___

-- 
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Reply via email to