Republican candidate thinking about having a violent uprising

[Dr.Traveler]

So what was WRONG with what he said?

What's wrong with a violent uprising to overthrow democratically elected officials? Well, nothing if you live in Afghanistan.

Idiot.

Why do you think the founders wrote in that pesky little 'right to bear arms', Ravi? We not only have the right to overthrow our government, we have a duty to do so - should they overstep the authority WE grant to them.

It is worth noting though, that once you do raise arms you are breaking the law of the land and the consequences for that are on your own heads.

We're no where near the point of putting the "Second Ammendment Option" on the table. There's still the polling place, the courts, and the Constitutional Convention route that has yet to be tried. You still have your basic freedoms.

It's also worth noting: The "Second Ammendment Option" is an insane plan now. If Obama or Bush or any US President really and truly were a facist, they've legally got the power to monitor all of your electronic communications and they've got the most advanced military in the world at their disposal. Any rebellion in the USA versus a true despot would last 5 minutes thanks to the Patriot Act. If you think that Waco or Ruby Ridge was a show of brute force, a true despot would make you wish that was all that happened to you and your family.

People need to realize: You will not overthrow the US government with a bunch of shotguns and backwoods hunters. If a true power hungry despot gets in power, you'd best hope the military itself stops him. If he's backed by the military, you can bend over and kiss your @$$ good bye.

 

[Ravi]

That's four almost completely batshit crazy tea party candidates.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

That's four almost completely batshit crazy tea party candidates.

Most have never ran for public office, nor were they vetted for office in any meaningful way. The appeal of the Tea Party candidates has always been that they're not pawns of the GOP or DNC.

Folks need to realize: Party machinery exists for a reason. It's part of the way we root out true loonies at the ballot boxes.

 

[Stephanie]

No need for violence, the Republicans are going to overthrow this government the old fashion way...at the ballot box...as long as we can get the dead back in their graves between Halloween and Election day.

 

[Revere]

That's four almost completely batshit crazy tea party candidates.

Most have never ran for public office, nor were they vetted for office in any meaningful way. The appeal of the Tea Party candidates has always been that they're not pawns of the GOP or DNC.

Folks need to realize: Party machinery exists for a reason. It's part of the way we root out true loonies at the ballot boxes.

Then what's the point of voting in primaries?

Does Mike Castle deserve to run with his party's affiliation? Charlie Crist? Lisa Murkowski?

 

[shintao]

In a rambling exchange during a TV interview, Broden, a South Dallas pastor, said a violent uprising "is not the first option," but it is "on the table." That drew a quick denunciation from the head of the Dallas County GOP, who called the remarks "inappropriate."

I don't see this going anywhere. This nation of people are so docile it lets government steal their rights, and commit war crimes in their name. What is the chance they would revolt over a bad economy? LMAO!!

 

[Stephanie]

That's four almost completely batshit crazy tea party candidates.

Most have never ran for public office, nor were they vetted for office in any meaningful way. The appeal of the Tea Party candidates has always been that they're not pawns of the GOP or DNC.

Folks need to realize: Party machinery exists for a reason. It's part of the way we root out true loonies at the ballot boxes.

OMG.

 

[California Girl]

What's wrong with a violent uprising to overthrow democratically elected officials? Well, nothing if you live in Afghanistan.

Idiot.

Why do you think the founders wrote in that pesky little 'right to bear arms', Ravi? We not only have the right to overthrow our government, we have a duty to do so - should they overstep the authority WE grant to them.

It is worth noting though, that once you do raise arms you are breaking the law of the land and the consequences for that are on your own heads.

We're no where near the point of putting the "Second Ammendment Option" on the table. There's still the polling place, the courts, and the Constitutional Convention route that has yet to be tried. You still have your basic freedoms.

It's also worth noting: The "Second Ammendment Option" is an insane plan now. If Obama or Bush or any US President really and truly were a facist, they've legally got the power to monitor all of your electronic communications and they've got the most advanced military in the world at their disposal. Any rebellion in the USA versus a true despot would last 5 minutes thanks to the Patriot Act. If you think that Waco or Ruby Ridge was a show of brute force, a true despot would make you wish that was all that happened to you and your family.

People need to realize: You will not overthrow the US government with a bunch of shotguns and backwoods hunters. If a true power hungry despot gets in power, you'd best hope the military itself stops him. If he's backed by the military, you can bend over and kiss your @$$ good bye.

I'm not agreeing with it, I'm simply stating a fact. And, what the founders did was considered treason by the British. Worked out fine for them - cuz they won. The winner decides who broke what law.

My prediction would be that the Military would start it, not a bunch of 'backwood hunters'.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

That's four almost completely batshit crazy tea party candidates.

Most have never ran for public office, nor were they vetted for office in any meaningful way. The appeal of the Tea Party candidates has always been that they're not pawns of the GOP or DNC.

Folks need to realize: Party machinery exists for a reason. It's part of the way we root out true loonies at the ballot boxes.

Then what's the point of voting in primaries?

Does Mike Castle deserve to run with his party's affiliation? Charlie Crist? Lisa Murkowski?

Primaries exist for a very good reason: To give voters a voice in the process.

A lot of folks here are so upset at the party machinery though they forget why the machinery exists in the first place. A good general rule of thumb is before you toss something out the window, understand why it came to be in the first place. that's true of regulation, unpopular laws, tax codes, party machinery, etc.

What you're seeing here is that these Tea Party candidates weren't put through any kind of rigorous vetting. They showed up, said the right things, and got Tea Party backing over the GOP machinery's choice. That's what was disturbing here: these guys are turning into loons, but all it took to get support in the primary was saying the right sound bites.

Doesn't that sound crazy to you?

 

[shintao]

Like the US military wouldn't curb-stomp any pocket of armed resistance.

The government is looking for such an excuse to confiscate our weapons, so a revolt is a bad thingy. Better to admit you are a traitor and secede from the union.

 

[Missourian]

What's wrong with a violent uprising to overthrow democratically elected officials? Well, nothing if you live in Afghanistan.

Idiot.

Why do you think the founders wrote in that pesky little 'right to bear arms', Ravi? We not only have the right to overthrow our government, we have a duty to do so - should they overstep the authority WE grant to them.

It is worth noting though, that once you do raise arms you are breaking the law of the land and the consequences for that are on your own heads.

We're no where near the point of putting the "Second Ammendment Option" on the table. There's still the polling place, the courts, and the Constitutional Convention route that has yet to be tried. You still have your basic freedoms.

It's also worth noting: The "Second Ammendment Option" is an insane plan now. If Obama or Bush or any US President really and truly were a facist, they've legally got the power to monitor all of your electronic communications and they've got the most advanced military in the world at their disposal. Any rebellion in the USA versus a true despot would last 5 minutes thanks to the Patriot Act. If you think that Waco or Ruby Ridge was a show of brute force, a true despot would make you wish that was all that happened to you and your family.

People need to realize: You will not overthrow the US government with a bunch of shotguns and backwoods hunters. If a true power hungry despot gets in power, you'd best hope the military itself stops him. If he's backed by the military, you can bend over and kiss your @$$ good bye.

I really don't want to rehash this debate, but military power and force multipliers cannot control land...only troops can do that.

In a hypothetical conflict, (as I do not advocate any violent overthrow or combat with our own troops of which I was not long ago a member) it would be a war of attrition, and a war of attrition under current conditions would be a war that the government would lose.

 

[Sheldon]

A steady flow of flaccid, scattered guerrilla tactics masquerading as "revolution" would be the fastest way to accelerate our society into something seriously resembling 1984.

 

[Stephanie]

Now the left is worried about "vetting".

good gawd, have you seen some of the Democrat-Progressive-Commie congresscritters?

Nutty as a fruitcake..

 

[kiwiman127]

"good gawd, have you seen some of the Democrat-Progressive-Commie congresscritters?"
=======================
Ha! I always get a good laugh when people post stuff like the above! Very dramatic. My favorite is the "Commie" part!
Archie Bunker is alive!!!

 

[Missourian]

Most have never ran for public office, nor were they vetted for office in any meaningful way. The appeal of the Tea Party candidates has always been that they're not pawns of the GOP or DNC.

Folks need to realize: Party machinery exists for a reason. It's part of the way we root out true loonies at the ballot boxes.

Then what's the point of voting in primaries?

Does Mike Castle deserve to run with his party's affiliation? Charlie Crist? Lisa Murkowski?

Primaries exist for a very good reason: To give voters a voice in the process.

A lot of folks here are so upset at the party machinery though they forget why the machinery exists in the first place. A good general rule of thumb is before you toss something out the window, understand why it came to be in the first place. that's true of regulation, unpopular laws, tax codes, party machinery, etc.

What you're seeing here is that these Tea Party candidates weren't put through any kind of rigorous vetting. They showed up, said the right things, and got Tea Party backing over the GOP machinery's choice. That's what was disturbing here: these guys are turning into loons, but all it took to get support in the primary was saying the right sound bites.

Doesn't that sound crazy to you?

I don't agree with this either.

The reason the Tea Party Candidates have problem is because when they're asked a question...they answer it.

I listened to a Republican interviewed on Neil Cavuto's show the other day. (I forget who it was, someone running for a house seat, maybe in Georgia).

That guy dodged, ducked and danced around so much to keep from giving even one straight answer I was expecting Tom Bergeron to pop out from behind the curtain and ask the judges for their scores.

I'll vote for a candidate who answers questions honestly, even when I don't agree with all of their responses, before I'll vote for a tap dancer whose positions are a closely guarded secret.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

annot control land...only troops can do that.

In a hypothetical conflict, (as I do not advocate any violent overthrow or combat with our own troops of which I was not long ago a member) it would be a war of attrition, and a war of attrition under current conditions would be a war that the government would lose.

Only if you assume that they're limited by collateral damage. A true despot wouldn't be. We could win Afghanistan, Iraq, and Vietnam if we were willing to turn those countries into glass.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Now the left is worried about "vetting".

Only an idiot tosses something in the trash without at least giving some thought as to why it exists, and if it could be useful.

You've decided to toss aside the vetting process, so now you have candidates that look like looney toons when asked softball questions. Congratulations.

 

[Charles_Main]

So what was WRONG with what he said?

What's wrong with a violent uprising to overthrow democratically elected officials? Well, nothing if you live in Afghanistan.

Idiot.

Just because someone is Democratically Elected does not mean they can not become detrimental to the people. Hitler was Democratically elected you know.

Not that I think this Current Admin or Congress rises to this level.

 

[Stephanie]

"good gawd, have you seen some of the Democrat-Progressive-Commie congresscritters?"
=======================
Ha! I always get a good laugh when people post stuff like the above! Very dramatic. My favorite is the "Commie" part!
Archie Bunker is alive!!!

well as long as it blew your skirt up..
and I guess Archie Bunker is alive isn't dramatic? well ok, more like dumb, but used for dramatics.
sheesh

 

[Flopper]

So what was WRONG with what he said?

What's wrong with a violent uprising to overthrow democratically elected officials? Well, nothing if you live in Afghanistan.

Idiot.

Why do you think the founders wrote in that pesky little 'right to bear arms', Ravi? We not only have the right to overthrow our government, we have a duty to do so - should they overstep the authority WE grant to them.

Oh really. I must have missed that part of constitution that guarantees our right to overthrow the government. I suggest you check out 18 U.S.C. § 2385 : US Code - Section 2385: Advocating overthrow of Government. The penalty is 20 yrs in prison and/ or fine.

18 U.S.C. § 2385 : US Code - Section 2385: Advocating overthrow of Government