David Clarke: government is the “common enemy”

Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke is an absolute disgrace…

After discussing the low odds of being killed by terrorists and the various scandals in President Barack Obama’s administration, Clarke then said: “Yeah, you know what, on an everyday basis to me, federal government is a bigger threat.”


Related Articles

2 thoughts on “David Clarke: government is the “common enemy”

  1. The Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association hosting speakers favoring nullification? Nullification, a concept not only unconstitutional, but anti-constitutional. A concept described by Madison as anarchical.

    Not to put too fine a point on it, but Clarke and his ilk peddle nothing more than ignorant perversions antithetical to, and with the potential of, entirely demolishing the Constitution and every principle on which it stands – as horrifying, though, while putting their communities at a safety risk in the process.

    He might do well to remember Madison’s retort in Federalist Paper #41 to those who held views like Clarke and the CSPOA:

    “It cannot have escaped those who have attended with candor to the arguments employed against the extensive powers of the government, that the authors of them have very little considered how far these powers were necessary means of attaining a necessary end. They have chosen rather to dwell on the inconveniences which must be unavoidably blended with all political advantages; and on the possible abuses which must be incident to every power or trust, of which a beneficial use can be made. This method of handling the subject cannot impose on the good sense of the people of America. It may display the subtlety of the writer; it may open a boundless field for rhetoric and declamation; it may inflame the passion of the unthinking, and may confirm the prejudices of the misthinking; but cool and candid people will at once reflect, that the purest of human blessings must have a portion of alloy in them; that the choice must always be made, if not the lesser evil, at least the greater, not the perfect good; and that in every political institution, a power to advance the public happiness involves a discretion which may be misapplied and abused. They will see, therefore, that in all cases where power is to be conferred, the point first to be decided is, whether such a power to be necessary to the public good; as the next will be, in the case of an affirmative decision, to guard as effectually as possible against a perversion of the power to public detriment.”

    Clark and his CSPOA tribe should remember also this sentiment from Madison from the same treatise:

    “Every man who loves peace, every man who loves his country, every man who loves liberty, ought to have it ever before his eyes, that he may cherish in his heart a due attachment to the Union of America, and be able to set a due value on the means of preserving it.”

    As important, however, is citizen attention paid to Clarke and the CSPOA. Situating the government as “the common enemy,” effectively stating that he is an enemy of the federal government while at the same time earning a Master’s Degree in Homeland Security should raise the eyebrows of every thinking individual. Clarke’s idea that in the face of shrinking law enforcement resources, armed citizens should take crisis situations into their own hands implies a position that I’m fairly confident doesn’t accord with Homeland Security guidelines. For example, here is Homeland Security’s synopsis for handling an active shooter in the workplace: http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/active_shooter_booklet.pdf. Subduing the shooter is a last resort and near as I can tell Homeland Security hasn’t advised armed individuals to shoot into a crowd in attempt to take the shooter down. Clarke’s advice, however, clearly advocates vigilantism. Clarke’s advice is ill-advised and irresponsible.

    So, For an Anti-Government subverter to position himself squarely within that “enemy government” (as Clarke seems to be doing with Homeland Security) calls into serious question his competence and judgement in faithfully performing his duties as public servant. Let’s remember that the Constitution shifted the status of “public” (a society of individuals) from state to Federal, in other words, to the National Government. Meaning citizens were no longer firstly citizens of states, but citizens of the United States.

    Clarke and CSPOA members are subservient to the Federal Government as public servants even when the jurisdiction of their positions lie within an individual state. And therein lies the problem. Power-hunger tyrants like Clarke and the CSPOA clearly do not want their jurisdiction (their power sphere) encroached upon. What the CSPOA seeks, if you look at their website, is to undo the object of the Constitution, that object being to federalize and thereby limit the authority of the states, especially with respect to security, but overall with state encroachment into the lives of individuals. That the CSPOA has adopted (and arguably initiated) Scalia’s shamefully perverted reading of the 10th Amendment to mean that “states are not subject to federal direction” and were, in fact, sovereign when, in fact, they’re not, should be a wake-up call. States were sovereign under the Articles of the Confederation. The Constitution ended, eliminated, and abolished state sovereignty.

    Clarke and his CSPOA represent exactly the position that Madison refuted in Federalist Paper #41. Clarke and his CSPOA represent nothing less than Constitutional perversion. It is they who represent the greatest hazard this nation faces.

    Given the most recent shift in terrorist activity abroad, all should be more than mighty frightened by Clarke and his ilk. For they represent a position that the Framers never intended with respect to security; they represent a position that defies adequate safety and security response to public safety and security threats. All public confidence in Clarke’s ability to seriously manage any form of security or law enforcement function should, and must, rate at less than zero.

Comments are closed.