Revolution in the US?

[Sallow]

^^^^^

Me thinks you need to read the documents you speak of.

Your argument with this is what, exactly?

Well I would start by reminding you that this country was founded on a violent overthrow of our rulers. 2nd I would remind you that that is specificly why we have the right to bear arms. 3rd I would remind you that that is why we have the right to a militia.

With regards to Sewer Workers claims that states leaving the union is not in the constitution I would just point out that that is what a union is, a union of states. In fact our name for the nation is UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This idea that Federal power is what is important is WRONG. We were founded as a nation of STATES, not as a top down power structure where states are left with whatever federal doesnt want to do. Our Federal Government should kneel to the states, thats why the states have the right to reject any law federal government makes.

And for both of you. Constitution of the United States - Official

What I am asking is specifics, not a history lesson or some vague notion that the "right to bear arms" relates to insurrection. By the way..it doesn't. Militias are under direct federal control. Read the powers of congress.

There is also the Supremacy clause of the constitution. States have no right to reject federal laws. They do have a right to challenge them in court.

So specifically..where in the constitution is there a section, clause or amendment that allows states to leave the Union?

 

[whitehall]

Ayers anarchists tried for a revolution in the 60's. The violent overthrow of the government didn't work so they tried to work within the system to bring down the United States. Global warming and the intentional collapse of Fannie Mae under democrat control and the election of an anti-capitalist with a revolutionary agenda camouflaged in green doesn't seem to work either. So lefties are going back to basics and calling for the violent overthrow of the government again.

 

[WatertheTree]

Your argument with this is what, exactly?

Well I would start by reminding you that this country was founded on a violent overthrow of our rulers. 2nd I would remind you that that is specificly why we have the right to bear arms. 3rd I would remind you that that is why we have the right to a militia.

With regards to Sewer Workers claims that states leaving the union is not in the constitution I would just point out that that is what a union is, a union of states. In fact our name for the nation is UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This idea that Federal power is what is important is WRONG. We were founded as a nation of STATES, not as a top down power structure where states are left with whatever federal doesnt want to do. Our Federal Government should kneel to the states, thats why the states have the right to reject any law federal government makes.

And for both of you. Constitution of the United States - Official

Let's just start with none of what you state is true

States do not have the right to reject any law federal governments make. See the supremacy clause of the Constitution

States do not have a right to secede. The Union of States into one UNITED STATES is indisolvable. It has been supported by numerous court cases and one very nasty war.

If the founding fathers thought of the union as some kind of country club where you could join and quit at your whim, they would have provisions in the constitution for the process of dissolution and the distribution of assets and property. There are no such provisions

Is that why the states are systamitically rejecting obamacare???

Look, your dumb, and thick headed, and stuck in your ways. Im guessing you have done well for yourself in the mid 90's and your scared your going to lose your status quo. either way im done arguing semantics with you. Go pray to your neocon god, dick cheny, and start beating the war drum for Iran. Support more corporate welfare so your stock portfolio looks better. Continue to justify your views with more self worship and ignorance. Just try not to step on the toes of the unemployed and underemployed when they beg in the street.

 

[edjax1952]

I think that unless the American people are all facing in the same direction (and clearly they are not!) that you won't have a revolution, we'd have a civil war.

And it won't be anything like the civil war we had in 1861, it would be more like the civil wars we've seen in Somalia...i.e., a breakdown of all civil authority leading to a state of anarchy.

Now that strikes me as a truly bad outcome.

During the first revolution the American people were not all facing the same direction Not all Americans fought for it's independence they fought for the crown.

True..Liberals wanted to break with England, Conservatives wanted to stay with the crown.

This illustrates the definiton of liberal and conservative.

Liberals are open and receptive to changing the current staus quo, whatever it is and conservatives want this to remain the same or to a point in recent history.

This 'label' of conservative and liberal changes as the political circumstance changes.

Today liberals,basically, are open to changing the interpretation of the constitution and laws of the land to fit more social definitions and circumstances. Conservatives, basically, want to preserve a previously accepted interpretation of the constitutions and laws.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Violent revolution occurs when a group of people feel that their voices are not being heard and the government is unresponsive to their needs, i.e., the American Revolution, the American Civil War and the recent Eygptian Revolution. I am unhappy with the way things are going and I think that Barry's direction is completely misguided. But my voice IS HEARD., i.e., the mid-term elections in 2010. I joined the Tea Party because I felt that my values were being marginalized and I know that based upon what the Congressional Black Caucus and other Democrats are saying, I am not longer discounted. The Tea Party gives them nightmares, and it makes me very, very happy to do so. If the sole outcome of the Tea Party and the conservative resurgence is to stop them from doing anything, then again, I am very, very happy.

In the United States, political change comes like a change in the direction of the wind. In 1992, the pronouncement was made that the Democratic Party was dead. Clinton stood in the House of Representatives and declared that the "era of big government is over." Well, well, well... we all know how that turned out in 2008. Paul Krugman in the New York Times pronounced the death of conservative thought shortly thereafter. Look for another change in the direction of the wind in 2012 and another genius will pronouce the death of progressive thought (I wish). But it will not be so because given an amount of time, it will change again.

There will always be a small percentage of those in the United States who advocate violent change. Barry's friend Bill Ayers and his "wife" Bernadette are still beating that drum today. Reverand Wright has for many years predicted a violent uprising of the "disenfranchised." But as long as their is an avenue for escape from a bad economic and social situation and as long as the numbers of "disenfranchised" remain relative small, violent revolution will not gain a toe hold.

It is amazing that the founders, in their infinite wisdom, created a set of documents that provided every citizen with an avenue to have his voice heard. If I could tell them in person, I would: Damn good job Tom, George, Ben and the rest of you.

My friend that was a nice well thought out reply but I must say your voice is just a whisper compared to the lobbist in D.C. Is your voice being heard? Has anything really changed since 2010? Did the tea party vote to repeal the patriot act? So far the tea party has one strike against them in my book.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

As a conservative and member of the Tea Party, I have to finally address this one issue after reading some of the posts on this thread. This issue is RON PAUL.

I have to tell you that I have listened to this NUT JOB on each of the debates, and I just can't stop laughing everytime I hear him speak. He reminds me of a conservative DENNIS KUSINICH. Does he have a freaking CLUE about anything? The only thing that simply amazes me is the same thing that amazes me about Kusinich: How does this total nut job keep getting re-elected?

Just thought I'd bring that up.

 

[Londoner]

Given the current circumstances in the United States, it seems quite reasonable that the American people are upset with the government.

Government doesn't exist. It is a bogus holding of corporate America, designed to provide subsidies, bailouts, and military support for overseas supply chains.

Government officials are put in office by Big Money, supplied primarily by large corporate entities.

These same corporate entities pour money into pop media (talk radio, TV, blogosphere) for the purpose of channeling your anger toward government. Notice how you never blame the puppet masters who control government - only their lowly government servants.

Obama and Boehner are owned.

At some point you have to start blaming the corporate structure which owns government. You have to go to where the real power is located.

I'm begging you to question the narrative you have been handed by talk radio, TV, and the internet.

 

[rightwinger]

I also don't think that a revolution in this country would be an armed revolution

Martin Luther King lead a revolution without firing a shot. A revolution in this country would be a labor stoppage, refusal to pay taxes, blockage of commerce. An armed revolution is not only unnecessary but it would be futile

 

[bigrebnc1775]

During the first revolution the American people were not all facing the same direction Not all Americans fought for it's independence they fought for the crown.

True..Liberals wanted to break with England, Conservatives wanted to stay with the crown.

This illustrates the definiton of liberal and conservative.

Liberals are open and receptive to changing the current staus quo, whatever it is and conservatives want this to remain the same or to a point in recent history.

This 'label' of conservative and liberal changes as the political circumstance changes.

Today liberals,basically, are open to changing the interpretation of the constitution and laws of the land to fit more social definitions and circumstances. Conservatives, basically, want to preserve a previously accepted interpretation of the constitutions and laws.

This 'label' of conservative and liberal changes as the political circumstance changes.

HUM that would make me a liberal and Sallow a conservative

 

[rightwinger]

Well I would start by reminding you that this country was founded on a violent overthrow of our rulers. 2nd I would remind you that that is specificly why we have the right to bear arms. 3rd I would remind you that that is why we have the right to a militia.

With regards to Sewer Workers claims that states leaving the union is not in the constitution I would just point out that that is what a union is, a union of states. In fact our name for the nation is UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

This idea that Federal power is what is important is WRONG. We were founded as a nation of STATES, not as a top down power structure where states are left with whatever federal doesnt want to do. Our Federal Government should kneel to the states, thats why the states have the right to reject any law federal government makes.

And for both of you. Constitution of the United States - Official

Let's just start with none of what you state is true

States do not have the right to reject any law federal governments make. See the supremacy clause of the Constitution

States do not have a right to secede. The Union of States into one UNITED STATES is indisolvable. It has been supported by numerous court cases and one very nasty war.

If the founding fathers thought of the union as some kind of country club where you could join and quit at your whim, they would have provisions in the constitution for the process of dissolution and the distribution of assets and property. There are no such provisions

Is that why the states are systamitically rejecting obamacare???

Look, your dumb, and thick headed, and stuck in your ways. Im guessing you have done well for yourself in the mid 90's and your scared your going to lose your status quo. either way im done arguing semantics with you. Go pray to your neocon god, dick cheny, and start beating the war drum for Iran. Support more corporate welfare so your stock portfolio looks better. Continue to justify your views with more self worship and ignorance. Just try not to step on the toes of the unemployed and underemployed when they beg in the street.

I would retort...

But I have no idea what that rambling diatribe means

 

[Londoner]

Liberals are open and receptive to changing the current staus quo, whatever it is and conservatives want this to remain the same or to a point in recent history.

This is why the New Right is so radical - and hardly conservative, in the Burkean sense of respecting the current institutional framework. During the postwar years, America was controlled by the New Deal, which aimed at giving the working and middle class a higher living standard. This is when we saw Leave it to Beaver nation where everyone was in the middle class, the government wasn't controlled by big money, and the family could survive on the farther's wages/benefits, leaving the mother with time ti raise the kids.

Enter the Reagan Revolution. Big Business sent him to Washington to tear this entire structure down. Why? Cheap labor = higher profits. Capital no longer wanted to assume the high taxes, regulations, and labor costs associated with the New Deal institutions, which created a powerful middle class. So the revolution got rid of the New Deal. The resulting decreased wages/benefits meant that we had to put the middle class on credit cards and sub-primes in order to maintain consumption and standard of living. This eventually resulted in a meltdown because you cannot borrow forever.

The only positive to the Revolution is that we made a small group of Americans wealthy beyond their wildest dreams. But make no mistake -- the old Conservative party died when they were taken over by the Reagan Revolution, which replaced the New Deal Middle Class with a neoliberal dystopia.

Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Unkotare]

Given the current circumstances in the United States, it seems quite reasonable that the American people are upset with the government. With the country in extreme amounts of debt and a struggling market, things aren’t looking good. The world has given us examples of the next generation going out and overthrowing the government to institute a more just and helpful government for its people. What is to say that the young people of the United States couldn’t do the same? The task might not be easy, but neither was the first revolution of this great country. I would like to open it to debate. How do people feel about revolting from the current government and instituting a new one? Can it even be done with a country this size? Would we get invaded? Or would we succeed and be able to wipe away all our debts to the Chinese and finally have a stable growing country again. Its been a long time America, but now is your time.

An incredibly stupid question, revealing complete ignorance of the US and our form of government.

 

[Unkotare]

How do people feel about revolting from the current government and instituting a new one?

And we would replace our Constitutional Republic with what other form of government?

Yo Vern, while you were watching Oprah, our Constitutional government was replaced by a fascist welfare/warfare state.

.

Or maybe not. Take a deep breath and calm the fuck down.

 

[edjax1952]

Violent revolution occurs when a group of people feel that their voices are not being heard and the government is unresponsive to their needs, i.e., the American Revolution, the American Civil War and the recent Eygptian Revolution. I am unhappy with the way things are going and I think that Barry's direction is completely misguided. But my voice IS HEARD., i.e., the mid-term elections in 2010. I joined the Tea Party because I felt that my values were being marginalized and I know that based upon what the Congressional Black Caucus and other Democrats are saying, I am not longer discounted. The Tea Party gives them nightmares, and it makes me very, very happy to do so. If the sole outcome of the Tea Party and the conservative resurgence is to stop them from doing anything, then again, I am very, very happy.

In the United States, political change comes like a change in the direction of the wind. In 1992, the pronouncement was made that the Democratic Party was dead. Clinton stood in the House of Representatives and declared that the "era of big government is over." Well, well, well... we all know how that turned out in 2008. Paul Krugman in the New York Times pronounced the death of conservative thought shortly thereafter. Look for another change in the direction of the wind in 2012 and another genius will pronouce the death of progressive thought (I wish). But it will not be so because given an amount of time, it will change again.

There will always be a small percentage of those in the United States who advocate violent change. Barry's friend Bill Ayers and his "wife" Bernadette are still beating that drum today. Reverand Wright has for many years predicted a violent uprising of the "disenfranchised." But as long as their is an avenue for escape from a bad economic and social situation and as long as the numbers of "disenfranchised" remain relative small, violent revolution will not gain a toe hold.

It is amazing that the founders, in their infinite wisdom, created a set of documents that provided every citizen with an avenue to have his voice heard. If I could tell them in person, I would: Damn good job Tom, George, Ben and the rest of you.

The revolution you speak of was already smoldering when conservatives saw, in disbelief, the election of someone they percieved to be a socialist (or pretty cose to it) and caught a spark when The Health Care Bill was passed in spite of fierce opposition. This is when the Tea Party started really taking root. The result of the growth and influence can be seen in the recent debates over the budget/deficit situation.

 

[Unkotare]

FYI, what I advocate is electing Ron Paul and firing of the federal government. .

Oh, you're an irrelevant idiot? Got it.

 

[Unkotare]

Given the current circumstances in the United States, it seems quite reasonable that the American people are upset with the government.

Government doesn't exist. It is a bogus holding of corporate America, designed to provide subsidies, bailouts, and military support for overseas supply chains.

Government officials are put in office by Big Money, supplied primarily by large corporate entities.

These same corporate entities pour money into pop media (talk radio, TV, blogosphere) for the purpose of channeling your anger toward government. Notice how you never blame the puppet masters who control government - only their lowly government servants.

Obama and Boehner are owned.

At some point you have to start blaming the corporate structure which owns government. You have to go to where the real power is located.

I'm begging you to question the narrative you have been handed by talk radio, TV, and the internet.

Stop begging and STFU with your asinine, self-indulgent conspiracy bullshit.

 

[edjax1952]

True..Liberals wanted to break with England, Conservatives wanted to stay with the crown.

This illustrates the definiton of liberal and conservative.

Liberals are open and receptive to changing the current staus quo, whatever it is and conservatives want this to remain the same or to a point in recent history.

This 'label' of conservative and liberal changes as the political circumstance changes.

Today liberals,basically, are open to changing the interpretation of the constitution and laws of the land to fit more social definitions and circumstances. Conservatives, basically, want to preserve a previously accepted interpretation of the constitutions and laws.

This 'label' of conservative and liberal changes as the political circumstance changes.

HUM that would make me a liberal and Sallow a conservative

LOL .....If the shoe fits wear it. It it don't find another pair. <:^}

 

[Sallow]

Ayers anarchists tried for a revolution in the 60's. The violent overthrow of the government didn't work so they tried to work within the system to bring down the United States. Global warming and the intentional collapse of Fannie Mae under democrat control and the election of an anti-capitalist with a revolutionary agenda camouflaged in green doesn't seem to work either. So lefties are going back to basics and calling for the violent overthrow of the government again.

No they didn't.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I think that unless the American people are all facing in the same direction (and clearly they are not!) that you won't have a revolution, we'd have a civil war.

And it won't be anything like the civil war we had in 1861, it would be more like the civil wars we've seen in Somalia...i.e., a breakdown of all civil authority leading to a state of anarchy.

Now that strikes me as a truly bad outcome.

During the first revolution the American people were not all facing the same direction Not all Americans fought for it's independence they fought for the crown.

True..Liberals wanted to break with England, Conservatives wanted to stay with the crown.

Another fib from the puppy.


Liberals like the pup are so deathly afraid of being identified as what they actually are, they hide behind the appellation of 'classical liberals'....which they certainly are not.


.&#8220;The American intellectual class from the mid 19th century onward has disliked liberalism (which originally referred to individualism, private property, and limits on power) precisely because the liberal society has no overarching goal.&#8221;
War Is the Health of the State

So, let's review.
1. Classical liberals, are today's conservatives.

2. 'Liberals' are the left-overs (get the pun?) of the progressives and socialists.

 

[PoliticalChic]

In America, revolutions involve ballots, not bullets.