A western Nevada County Fourth of July weekend

Locals “flying the flag” on Mill Street!

(Source: Facebook)

Author: jeffpelline

Jeff Pelline is a veteran editor and award-winning journalist - in print and online. He is publisher of Sierra FoodWineArt magazine and its website SierraCulture.com. Jeff covered business and technology for The San Francisco Chronicle for years, was a founding editor and Editor of CNET News, and was Editor of The Union, a 145-year-old newspaper in Grass Valley. Jeff has a bachelor's degree from UC Berkeley and a master's from Northwestern University. His hobbies include sailing and trout fishing.

23 thoughts on “A western Nevada County Fourth of July weekend”

  1. Ideally, we should use the 4th of July weekend as a time to reflect on the work of the Founders in creating our great experiment, and how we may help carry it forward through civic engagement.

    Some on the other hand, like those State of Jefferson folks on Mill Street pictured above, use this occasion to indulge in their sense of betrayal: the double-cross on the gold pan in their insignia reminds them of how they’ve been double-crossed/abandoned by both the Oregon and California governments.

    The gold pan itself, I suppose, expresses a kind of ironic forward-looking hope to return to the past by building a state based on … mineral extraction? (The modern world and the survival of mankind is certainly headed in a different direction).

  2. If I want to live in Mississippi or Alabama, then I’ll move to Mississippi or Alabama. SOJ, what a joke.

  3. One glance at that picture should tell people all they need to know about the jeffersons. Yes, I want monster truck rednecks to determine my future and guide us. You know, people who may or may not have graduated from the 8th grade and married their cousins. They are more than qualified to discern the complexities of modern government as is painfully obvious. The larger question is who put those kids up to this? l doubt if they could think it up on their own.

  4. I love the T-Shirt:

    “When freedom is outlawed only outlaws will be free.”

    Nice twist on. When guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns.”

    That just has such a fun ring to it. I get to be an outlaw because I don’t believe the state has granted me significant enough freedom…and if I get to be an outlaw I get to act like and outlaw.

    Yep, these are the same people who contend that the core of American democracy and rights are the rule of law…the very same law that defines those freedoms for all Americans….but to even have a SOJ they need to reject the law that decided that geography doesn’t vote people do, that our government was created to represent the people not the geography…or they reject the law that defined voting rights….they deny the public trust doctrine, a legal theory not only ensconced in American jurisprudence but in the common law it was based on….the list could go on.

    1. Reynolds V Sims could be overturned and the States could regain their rights to determine their representation within their state. So we see why people get upset with courts when they decide to make laws rather than the Legislature.

      1. The legislature did make the law that determined Reynolds v. Sims, it was the 14th amendment of the United States Constitution and its Equal Protection Clause, approved by a 2/3 majority of both houses of Congress and approved by 3/5 of the states.

        The role of the Court is to interpret the law and that is what the court did by an 8-1majority in 1964.

      2. I am a fan of the same laws that allow each state to have two Senators and apply it to the states.

      3. You may be a fan of the Connecticut Compromise but that was put in place for Federal Representation; state representation was left up to the states until the 14th amendment whereupon many of them failed to redistrict for several decennial censuses and Reynolds v. Sims confirmed the intent of equal protection. It is simply the law. You can change the law by amending the Constitution if you want to.

      4. “Reynolds V Sims could be overturned and the States could regain their rights to determine their representation within their state.”

        Of course the other way it could be done would be for the SCOTUS to overturn it but since you are against judicial review as established under Marbury v. Madison it would be inconsistent with your beliefs.

      5. Judicial Review is fine, legislating from the bench is not. And now we are going to see a initiative in California to apportion the Congressional Districts regarding the Presidential elections. How sweet that would be. No democrat would ever win nationally again!

      6. But Todd, on several other channels, including both The Union and Rebane’s, you have come out against judicial review and for overturning Marbury v. Madison, as recently as the end of last week. You have not countered the case that Reynolds v. Sims was decided based on a legislative principle approved by Congress in the 14th amendment and ratified by 3/5 ths of the states, leaving the reader to wonder, which is it? Do you support judicial review as you state here or do you oppose it as you stated previously, and isn’t this just a case where you support it if it upholds your closely held beliefs and oppose it if it is contrary to them?

        Like many conservatives who tout an originalist view of the Constitution your definition of ‘legislating from the bench’ seems to track your beliefs….for example…I remember you cheering for the SCOTUS overturning the ACA, only to critique Roberts when he cast the vote upholding it. Would you have preferred Roberts legislate from the bench?

  5. The image doesn’t surprise me at all, but the next time the Sacramento/Roseville soccer mom/little league dad with the kids want to go somewhere for the day, they might have second thoughts about coming this way.
    Maybe there should be a sign on Hwy 49 down by the Bear River heading back to Auburn, “Y’all come back now, Y’ HEAR?”.

  6. I’ve been curious about the principles that SOJ endorses and have been told “lower government and less taxes”. So when I ask these supporters about other issues like water, forestry, MJ, environment, etc I get a deer in the headlights look with no response. How am I supposed to throw my support behind them when they are clueless to my questions?

    1. And speaking of forestry related issues, I wonder how many of them have any idea how much wildland firefighting costs? In this area the Feds pick up a lot of the costs, but even with that CalFire is heavily involved and the State has it’s share of costs. In a big fire season that can add up to some serious money.

      1. So true Steve. I wonder how the “less gov’t/less taxes” will fund these unfortunate events. I think about the south Nevada County fire tax proposal that was voted down. Property insurance has escalated in many areas there if a company that will insure them.

    2. Another thought, imagine if we were stuck with SOJ prior to the Oroville Dam failing. Would they have the resources to rebuild it?

  7. Considering the average age of the pickups I see with SOJ logos on their doors, I doubt if most SOJ advocates pay much in taxes in the first place; probably receive Medi-Cal; possibly receive food stamps but don’t understand that it is taxes that makes those thing possible. SOJ would probably declare bankruptcy within a week or after the first mudslide from abnormal rainfall due to climate change, whichever happens first.

    1. Maybe thpse people are filthy rich but don’t want you to know. Let’s see your spreadsheet and compare it to Lowell Robinson’s from before he passed away. He had 22 companies and made over twenty million a year here. Yet drove a crummy truck and dressed like a cowboy, a poor one.

  8. I didn’t recall that Lowell was a big SOJ proponent.
    Here are the facts, as reported in NYT article:
    Despite a go-it-alone ethos, residents of the 13 counties in the northern bloc (who voted for Trump) are much more likely to receive government medical assistance than those in the Bay Area. In the north, 31 percent take part in Medi-Cal, while the Bay Area rate is 19 percent and California’s overall figure is 28 percent.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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