Tea Party Plans To Form Armed Militia

Man, is there anything that Tea Party isn't doing.

Everybody better run and HIDE they're now forming:eek: , militias.

Like there hasn't been militias around BEFORE.:lol:

it's an attempt to paint them like the nutjobs the FEDS cracked down upon a couple weeks ago.

It's nothing new. It's just more foaming at the mouth ignorance from the usual suspects.

Thats how they painted themselves, who stated they wanted to organize themselves into militias?
 
Ever see the movie "Southland Tales"?

If states have militias, that movie could be a reality.

If anyone takes up arms to oppose the government they need to be dealt with, I said before and I'll say it again, these compost Tea Bags are extremists, they are not oppressed people seeking equality or liberation thus no justification exists for them to take up weapons "to defend their rights," they're just trying to intimidate and their actions are just like the secessionists prior to the Civil War who wanted to "defend" the southern way of life.

For one thing, to take up arms against the United States Government is treason, pursuant to Article III of the Constitution. It's intriguing, however, that so many of these TP members use the Constitution as a crutch to justify their activities.
 
Man, is there anything that Tea Party isn't doing.

Everybody better run and HIDE they're now forming:eek: , militias.

Like there hasn't been militias around BEFORE.:lol:

A few toothless mountainmen or a bunch of redneck yahoos riding around in pickups doesn't count.
 
What is forming a militia going to achieve other than a group of angry, confederate flag waving Repub jockeys?

A poor showing for the Republicans in the midterm elections
 
OMG
We sure don't want to see a bunch of angry, flag waving people.
shit, we had to watch eight years of flag burning, banshee yelling anti-war protesters protesting against a duly elected President, but hey, I suppose that was then and we didn't have a Democrat boy-king sitting as President like today.

At least those protesters ALL knew what they were protesting. I'd wager half the people that show up for the tea party rallies go just for the free beer they can mooch. From the looks of their signs, many were protesting just to be protesting.

slide_6063_81445_small.jpg


slide_6063_81416_small.jpg


slide_6063_81396_small.jpg


slide_6063_81209_small.jpg
 
Where was the outrage about this ?


YouTube - Obama Civilian Security
Obama civilian military(just as powerful, just as strong,just as well funded)

My sympathies for the apparent serious case of gullible-itis within your fact-free zone.

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?

Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.
 
OPINION: The GOP’s Neo-Confederate Problem, Rewriting The Civil War | News One

Indeed, the compost Tea Baggers are sick, the author made a great point when he said:

Can you imagine if states in Germany began showing off the Nazi flag? What if a state in Germany declared Nazi history month or people began bringing Nazi flags to protests supported by a political party like Tea Party protesters use Confederate flags. The confederate flag has been used as symbol for racism both before and after the Civil War and to African Americans, shares the same connotations as the Swastika.

HOLY FUCK!!!

I just realized that it is the Bass that started this thread and is doing a pretty good job of posting. Good job Charles.

Back to the discussion..........I digress.............

My question to you Charles, is what would happen in Germany TODAY, if during elections, certain "grass roots" movements showed up with the candidate being shown as a Nazi, much like the tea baggers have done today.

What would happen, hmmm?:eusa_whistle:
 
YouTube - Liberal Media Hypocrisy Test

Couple of points here:

1. When the far-left protesters who held up those signs did that, the Right-wing media was ALL OVER IT. And now they say nothing about the current protester craziness.

2. I fail to see any footage of any major media source calling bush a Stalinist and a Nazi, like the right-wing media has been doing. Perhaps you'd like to explain that.

Now, I didn't like the way the left-wing media treated Bush during his presidency. The man made a hell of a lot of really stupid decisions, but MSNBC commentators would attack him about every little tiny thing, which was clearly uncalled for.

HOWEVER, disliking all talking heads as much as I do, I will have to say that this batch of right-wing blowhards that are currently screaming at the top of their lungs about Obama is the worst in biased medias since the McKinley assassination.
 
HOLY FUCK!!!

I just realized that it is the Bass that started this thread and is doing a pretty good job of posting. Good job Charles.

Back to the discussion..........I digress.............

My question to you Charles, is what would happen in Germany TODAY, if during elections, certain "grass roots" movements showed up with the candidate being shown as a Nazi, much like the tea baggers have done today.

What would happen, hmmm?:eusa_whistle:

If I can channel Glenn Beck here for a moment, only a left-wing version:

The Nazis started out as an anti-establishment "Grassroots Movement" too, and didn't they form a "militia"? Called the "Brownshirts"?

Now, I'm not saying the Tea Partiers are Nazis, I'm just asking some questions here...
 
Last edited:
Where was the outrage about this ?


YouTube - Obama Civilian Security
Obama civilian military(just as powerful, just as strong,just as well funded)

My sympathies for the apparent serious case of gullible-itis within your fact-free zone.

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?

Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.

Fact check this bootlicker...

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.

We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.


JUST AS POWERFUL
JUST AS STRONG
JUST AS WELL-FUNDED
(as our military)


A peace corp as strong as our military?
Peace corps my ass....
 
Last edited:
Fact check this bootlicker...

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.

We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.


JUST AS POWERFUL
JUST AS STRONG
JUST AS WELL-FUNDED
(as our military)


A peace corp as strong as our military?
Peace corps my ass....

Funny you should mention "Fact Check"...

Now, pull your nose from between Sean Hannity's buttcheeks for a moment and read:

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?
 
If anyone takes up arms to oppose the government they need to be dealt with

I didn't realize America was the government.

Oh, and President Thomas Jefferson would disagree with you.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."
 
Fact check this bootlicker...

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.

We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.


JUST AS POWERFUL
JUST AS STRONG
JUST AS WELL-FUNDED
(as our military)


A peace corp as strong as our military?
Peace corps my ass....

Funny you should mention "Fact Check"...

Now, pull your nose from between Sean Hannity's buttcheeks for a moment and read:

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?

Thats exactly where my information comes from bootlicker....
your link to factcheck, and not Hannity....

Your head needs to be removed from your very own asshole....learn to read and use what little brains you have instead of relying on what factcheck tells you....
Obama said what he said, plain and easy to understand for even you.
 
These w lines follow one another in Obama speech...

"We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded."

Just because "factcheck" presents them as two seperate paragraphs shouldn't fool anyone.
 
Fact check this bootlicker...

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.

We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.


JUST AS POWERFUL
JUST AS STRONG
JUST AS WELL-FUNDED
(as our military)


A peace corp as strong as our military?
Peace corps my ass....

Funny you should mention "Fact Check"...

Now, pull your nose from between Sean Hannity's buttcheeks for a moment and read:

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?

Thats exactly where my information comes from bootlicker....
your link to factcheck, and not Hannity....

Your head needs to be removed from your very own asshole....learn to read and use what little brains you have instead of relying on what factcheck tells you....
Obama said what he said, plain and easy to understand for even you.

Helps when you actually read the article.......

Q:

Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?
I read a quote from Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia which stated that Obama wants to set up a civilian national security force that was similar to the "Gestapo" or the Nazi Brownshirts.

What is the truth behind Obama's statements that he wants to create a "civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded [as the military]"?
A:

This false claim is a badly distorted version of Obama's call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.
This question stems from an interview that Republican Rep. Broun of Georgia gave to The Associated Press Nov. 10. The story carried a headline, "Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship." It said that Broun "fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship." And it quoted him this way:

Rep. Paul Broun, Nov. 10: It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's [Obama's] the one who proposed this national security force. ... That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did.

Similar claims have been circulating in right-leaning blogs and conservative Web sites ever since July, when Obama made a single reference to a "civilian national security force" in a campaign speech in Colorado. Obama's detractors make much of his expansive (and exaggerated) description of such a force as being "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the U.S. military. They also ignore the context.

Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.

Here is the relevant portion of what Obama actually said, with the sentences quoted selectively by Broun and others in bold.

Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.

We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.


This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.

Does that sound like a force that could kick down your door in the middle of the night and haul you off to a Gulag or concentration camp? You decide.

-Brooks Jackson

Wrong answer fart sniffer, it's for a Peace Corps.

What's more.........he's right.
 
Well, what were we to expect of the Teabaggers. Obviously they have offended most of the electorate with their idiocy. So the only thing left is to try to scare that electorate into submission.

Except that won't work, either. But it will definately impress the electorate. Not at all favorably.
 
Funny you should mention "Fact Check"...

Now, pull your nose from between Sean Hannity's buttcheeks for a moment and read:

FactCheck.org: Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?

Thats exactly where my information comes from bootlicker....
your link to factcheck, and not Hannity....

Your head needs to be removed from your very own asshole....learn to read and use what little brains you have instead of relying on what factcheck tells you....
Obama said what he said, plain and easy to understand for even you.

Helps when you actually read the article.......

Q:

Is Obama planning a Gestapo-like "civilian national security force"?
I read a quote from Rep. Paul Broun from Georgia which stated that Obama wants to set up a civilian national security force that was similar to the "Gestapo" or the Nazi Brownshirts.

What is the truth behind Obama's statements that he wants to create a "civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded [as the military]"?
A:

This false claim is a badly distorted version of Obama's call for doubling the Peace Corps, creating volunteer networks and increasing the size of the Foreign Service.
This question stems from an interview that Republican Rep. Broun of Georgia gave to The Associated Press Nov. 10. The story carried a headline, "Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship." It said that Broun "fears that President-elect Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship." And it quoted him this way:

Rep. Paul Broun, Nov. 10: It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he's [Obama's] the one who proposed this national security force. ... That's exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it's exactly what the Soviet Union did.

Similar claims have been circulating in right-leaning blogs and conservative Web sites ever since July, when Obama made a single reference to a "civilian national security force" in a campaign speech in Colorado. Obama's detractors make much of his expansive (and exaggerated) description of such a force as being "just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded" as the U.S. military. They also ignore the context.

Obama was not talking about a "security force" with guns or police powers. He was talking specifically about expanding AmeriCorps and the Peace Corps and the USA Freedom Corps, which is the volunteer initiative launched by the Bush administration after the attacks of 9/11, and about increasing the number of trained Foreign Service officers who populate U.S. embassies overseas.

Here is the relevant portion of what Obama actually said, with the sentences quoted selectively by Broun and others in bold.

Obama, July 2, Colorado Springs, CO: [As] president I will expand AmeriCorps to 250,000 slots [from 75,000] and make that increased service a vehicle to meet national goals, like providing health care and education, saving our planet and restoring our standing in the world, so that citizens see their effort connected to a common purpose.

People of all ages, stations and skills will be asked to serve. Because when it comes to the challenges we face, the American people are not the problem – they are the answer. So we are going to send more college graduates to teach and mentor our young people. We'll call on Americans to join an energy corps, to conduct renewable energy and environmental clean-up projects in their neighborhoods all across the country.

We will enlist our veterans to find jobs and support for other vets, and to be there for our military families. And we're going to grow our Foreign Service, open consulates that have been shuttered and double the size of the Peace Corps by 2011 to renew our diplomacy. We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set.

We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded. We need to use technology to connect people to service. We'll expand USA Freedom Corps to create online networks where American can browse opportunities to volunteer. You'll be able to search by category, time commitment and skill sets. You'll be able to rate service opportunities, build service networks, and create your own service pages to track your hours and activities.

This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up.

Does that sound like a force that could kick down your door in the middle of the night and haul you off to a Gulag or concentration camp? You decide.

-Brooks Jackson

Wrong answer fart sniffer, it's for a Peace Corps.

What's more.........he's right.

Brooks Jackson is an AP Hack.
 
If anyone takes up arms to oppose the government they need to be dealt with

I didn't realize America was the government.

Oh, and President Thomas Jefferson would disagree with you.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...
And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure."

So you think that Jefferson intended the constitutional government he helped form to be eventually, inevitably overthrown by force of arms? And that he welcomed the prospect of that?
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top