Iowa Republican ready to take up arms against her country

[rightwinger]

Rightwingy...ponder for a moment or two, "...should they decide that my rights are no longer imporant."

So someone who is prepared to enter the United States Senate believes that if the Government violates her rights that armed rebellion is her best option

Did she miss the Civil rights movement? Was anyone in histories rights violated more than southern blacks? Did they resort to armed rebellion or did they use their Constitutional freedoms to enact change?

Americans have regress if they think Government is violating their rights. They have free speech, they have a free press to take up their case, they have the right to assemble and to protest...most importantly, they have a VOTE

That is the way Americans have handled a repressive Government for generations WITHOUT resorting to guns

Lincoln should have staged protests to end slavery.

You prefer John Brown?

 

[Rotagilla]

Rightwingy...ponder for a moment or two, "...should they decide that my rights are no longer imporant."

So someone who is prepared to enter the United States Senate believes that if the Government violates her rights that armed rebellion is her best option

Did she miss the Civil rights movement? Was anyone in histories rights violated more than southern blacks? Did they resort to armed rebellion or did they use their Constitutional freedoms to enact change?

Americans have regress if they think Government is violating their rights. They have free speech, they have a free press to take up their case, they have the right to assemble and to protest...most importantly, they have a VOTE

That is the way Americans have handled a repressive Government for generations WITHOUT resorting to guns

Lincoln should have staged protests to end slavery.

Lincoln couldn't have cared less about the slaves or slavery. He said so.

 

[Rotagilla]

desperation and semantic distortion

no. she made an unclear statement. she said she would use her guns if the government decided that her rights were no longer important. what is her threshold for that? it's a question she should answer.

When the Constitution is no longer the law of the land.
Clear enough?

no. who decides that? some people claim that public accommodation laws violate their first amendment rights. should they take up arms against the government?

How about when your Government is set to allow millions of immigrants into the country in order to flood your country with a certain type of voter that will make our fucked up job situation even worse?
Reason enough?

You really believe that crap about allowing immigrants only because they will all be Democrats don't you? I guess that once you give up your reasoning ability, rush can make you believe anything.......sad.

Why is the border open?

 

[Avorysuds]

RW... I don't see any problem with her statements. Over analyzing a little, aren't we? She is definitely a patriot.

Civil rights protestors were Patriots and they did not resort to guns
She is just pandering to TeaTards and Gun Nuts....that is not Patriotism

She is using the powers given to her per the US constitution you numb nuts. Why do you hate the constitution so much? Oh I know, because if it were followed you would be out of a job.

 

[Dan Daly]

The second amendment does not provide legal cover to fire upon police, sheriffs or military personnel no matter how you read it.

Correct...that right is a basic human right. Being from the government is not an affirmative defense for oppression.

 

[ogibillm]

the question really is under what circumstances she sees that happening. if the government condemns and buys her land and sells it to someone else, as they are allowed to do, will she shoot anyone trying to remove her? if she travels to an area that does not allow concealed fire arms, will she fire if someone tries to stop her from carrying?

what are her standards?

desperation and semantic distortion

no. she made an unclear statement. she said she would use her guns if the government decided that her rights were no longer important. what is her threshold for that? it's a question she should answer.

When the Constitution is no longer the law of the land.
Clear enough?

no. who decides that? some people claim that public accommodation laws violate their first amendment rights. should they take up arms against the government?

How about when your Government is set to allow millions of immigrants into the country in order to flood your country with a certain type of voter that will make our fucked up job situation even worse?
Reason enough?

there you go. if you think that's the government curtailing your right, the would-be senator believes you should be shooting.

 

[Rotagilla]

Rightwingy...ponder for a moment or two, "...should they decide that my rights are no longer imporant."

So someone who is prepared to enter the United States Senate believes that if the Government violates her rights that armed rebellion is her best option

Did she miss the Civil rights movement? Was anyone in histories rights violated more than southern blacks? Did they resort to armed rebellion or did they use their Constitutional freedoms to enact change?

Americans have regress if they think Government is violating their rights. They have free speech, they have a free press to take up their case, they have the right to assemble and to protest...most importantly, they have a VOTE

That is the way Americans have handled a repressive Government for generations WITHOUT resorting to guns

Lincoln should have staged protests to end slavery.

You prefer John Brown?

Ok with me. Any time you're ready.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

desperation and semantic distortion

no. she made an unclear statement. she said she would use her guns if the government decided that her rights were no longer important. what is her threshold for that? it's a question she should answer.

When the Constitution is no longer the law of the land.
Clear enough?

no. who decides that? some people claim that public accommodation laws violate their first amendment rights. should they take up arms against the government?

How about when your Government is set to allow millions of immigrants into the country in order to flood your country with a certain type of voter that will make our fucked up job situation even worse?
Reason enough?

You really believe that crap about allowing immigrants only because they will all be Democrats don't you? I guess that once you give up your reasoning ability, rush can make you believe anything.......sad.

So whats your hypothesis?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Candidate s gun remarks should scare us all Opinion - CNN.com

Joni Ernst, the Iowa candidate who has vaulted to within an inch of United States Senate due to her boasting of hog castration in this year's most inventive political ad, was speaking to the National Rifle Association in 2012.

"I do believe in the right to carry, and I believe in the right to defend myself and my family -- whether it's from an intruder, or whether it's from the government, should they decide that my rights are no longer important."

Bravo for her!!

 

[Avorysuds]

Leave it to RW to clearly make the case that he fully supports an oppressive Government...

Where did I say that?

I said I advocate citizens using their Constitutional freedoms to fight an oppressive Government. That is something I would expect a Senator to advocate

You want her to use speech because you know it gets nothing done these days. You want a single person to have the same protesting power as millions of people back in the civil rights. You're just making an ass of yourself. It's two entirely different situations.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The second amendment does not provide legal cover to fire upon police, sheriffs or military personnel no matter how you read it.

"We're from the government, we're here to help"

 

[Avorysuds]

Rightwingy...ponder for a moment or two, "...should they decide that my rights are no longer imporant."

So someone who is prepared to enter the United States Senate believes that if the Government violates her rights that armed rebellion is her best option

Did she miss the Civil rights movement? Was anyone in histories rights violated more than southern blacks? Did they resort to armed rebellion or did they use their Constitutional freedoms to enact change?

Americans have regress if they think Government is violating their rights. They have free speech, they have a free press to take up their case, they have the right to assemble and to protest...most importantly, they have a VOTE

That is the way Americans have handled a repressive Government for generations WITHOUT resorting to guns

Lincoln should have staged protests to end slavery.

You prefer John Brown?

Didn't say that. Simply pointed out that your easily proven a moron.

What about what she said was wrong RW, be incredibly specific.

 

[Dan Daly]

The way to reform government is at the ballot box.

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

I agree with you, but there is a point where the ballot box becomes a sham. If that time comes to this country, it will be time to heed the words of our founding document.

 

[ogibillm]

Leave it to RW to clearly make the case that he fully supports an oppressive Government...

Where did I say that?

I said I advocate citizens using their Constitutional freedoms to fight an oppressive Government. That is something I would expect a Senator to advocate

You want her to use speech because you know it gets nothing done these days. You want a single person to have the same protesting power as millions of people back in the civil rights. You're just making an ass of yourself. It's two entirely different situations.

so again, what are the circumstances that she would fire on government officials? imminent domain foreclosure? being 'forced' to accomodate a gay marriage? not being allowed to carry a gun into a courtroom? having to have health insurance? being relegated to a 'free speech zone?'

where's the line?

 

[Rotagilla]

Leave it to RW to clearly make the case that he fully supports an oppressive Government...

Where did I say that?

I said I advocate citizens using their Constitutional freedoms to fight an oppressive Government. That is something I would expect a Senator to advocate

You want her to use speech because you know it gets nothing done these days. You want a single person to have the same protesting power as millions of people back in the civil rights. You're just making an ass of yourself. It's two entirely different situations.

so again, what are the circumstances that she would fire on government officials? imminent domain foreclosure? being 'forced' to accomodate a gay marriage? not being allowed to carry a gun into a courtroom? having to have health insurance? being relegated to a 'free speech zone?'

where's the line?

saying ridiculous things doesn't really make you look smarter.
email her and ask her...or continue seeking attention and exposing your insecurity here.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Leave it to RW to clearly make the case that he fully supports an oppressive Government...

Where did I say that?

I said I advocate citizens using their Constitutional freedoms to fight an oppressive Government. That is something I would expect a Senator to advocate

You want her to use speech because you know it gets nothing done these days. You want a single person to have the same protesting power as millions of people back in the civil rights. You're just making an ass of yourself. It's two entirely different situations.

so again, what are the circumstances that she would fire on government officials? imminent domain foreclosure? being 'forced' to accomodate a gay marriage? not being allowed to carry a gun into a courtroom? having to have health insurance? being relegated to a 'free speech zone?'

where's the line?

Not sure....but keep pushing if you want to find out.

 

[Avorysuds]

Leave it to RW to clearly make the case that he fully supports an oppressive Government...

Where did I say that?

I said I advocate citizens using their Constitutional freedoms to fight an oppressive Government. That is something I would expect a Senator to advocate

You want her to use speech because you know it gets nothing done these days. You want a single person to have the same protesting power as millions of people back in the civil rights. You're just making an ass of yourself. It's two entirely different situations.

so again, what are the circumstances that she would fire on government officials? imminent domain foreclosure? being 'forced' to accomodate a gay marriage? not being allowed to carry a gun into a courtroom? having to have health insurance? being relegated to a 'free speech zone?'

where's the line?

Who said she had to fire the weapon? Showing you have defense is defense in itself. And I dono, with Obama spying on everyone, assassinating American citizens openly and being the most secretive Government the US has ever had from it's people... Seems like we have a lot to protect ourselves from. Fuck man, Obama uses the IRS to destroy people he does not like.

 

[Dan Daly]

The way to reform government is at the ballot box.

The south tried that in 1861...the north wanted war instead.

Ahhh, the old "War of Northern Aggression" gambit.

Pretty funny. That's about all I need to know about you Mr. "Moderate".

the south tried to legally and peacefully withdraw from the union. The north started a war over it.

To be fair, the South fired the first shot. Granted, they may have been provoked into doing so and the resulting invasion and destruction may have been way overkill, but the fact remains that they could have negotiated further over the status of federal forts like Sumter rather than firing that first shot.

 

[rightwinger]

RW... I don't see any problem with her statements. Over analyzing a little, aren't we? She is definitely a patriot.

Civil rights protestors were Patriots and they did not resort to guns
She is just pandering to TeaTards and Gun Nuts....that is not Patriotism

She is using the powers given to her per the US constitution you numb nuts. Why do you hate the constitution so much? Oh I know, because if it were followed you would be out of a job.

Agree

The Constitution gives you the right to act like a rightwing government hating nutjob

 

[BULLDOG]

no. she made an unclear statement. she said she would use her guns if the government decided that her rights were no longer important. what is her threshold for that? it's a question she should answer.

When the Constitution is no longer the law of the land.
Clear enough?

no. who decides that? some people claim that public accommodation laws violate their first amendment rights. should they take up arms against the government?

How about when your Government is set to allow millions of immigrants into the country in order to flood your country with a certain type of voter that will make our fucked up job situation even worse?
Reason enough?

You really believe that crap about allowing immigrants only because they will all be Democrats don't you? I guess that once you give up your reasoning ability, rush can make you believe anything.......sad.

Why is the border open?

Because big business wants the cheap labor. Transient workers who cost little more than slave wages are what makes companies like Archer Daniels Midland and Cargill multibillion dollar companies.