GOP Broden: Violent Revolution Is "On the Table"

[Sallow]

Sorry but we had overwhelming numbers of Thunderbolts, Mustangs and Lightnings which the Yak was no match for. We would have prevailed.

Yeah..like every other army that's gone up against the Russians..

On their home turf.

Oh wait.

Your forgetting that Hitler whipped the Soviets but he had a logistic problem with Winter (as his Field Marshals warned) as well as fighting the British. The US wouldn't have had that problem.

Um..sure they would have. Every other army that has tried..does the same thing. They beat the crap out of the Russians..who draw them further into country. Then winter settles in.

 

[HUGGY]

Previous posts have been right spot on. If the Russian winter had been less severe and the krouts prevailed ..the world would be a much different place. Hitler would have still been a madman and there is no doubt in my mind that we would have had to nuke him as well as we did the Japs. That would have left the English out of the loop post war strategy wise with the good ol USA the ONLY remaining super power left standing. Instead of a threeway split Truman would have called ALL of the shots and we would have ended up with all of the chips. We would have ended up owning all of the mideast oil and any resources we chose by way of liberating the planet from the Axis. Israel would have never existed. We would have just repatriated the Jews as our overlord representatives back where they came from. The Arabs without the Jews bothering them would have had no reason or money to arm themselves as we would have treated them similar to our own native americans and "allowed" them reservations to live on as long as it wasn't on top of any of our oil.

 

[code1211]

The first line says it all.

No it doesn't. That's why there are more lines. If Jefferson meant to stop thinking where you did, he would have stopped writing.

I would sooner trust my lot to the framers

Which one? Is it that you don't realize that the framers had completely different views on how America should develop or is it that you don't care?

The framers were a group that arrived at an agreement. By isolating the thoughts of one at some point in their life outside of the considerations which led to the documents of our laws, we only depart form that time of agreement.

When reading articles like the Federalist Papers to find what was being considered and how at the time of the framing, we can access the inner workings of their thoughts.

The fact that they had completely different views and goals and yet found agreement is what created the genius of our documents. They were all wounded by their recent pasts, all suspiscious of the agendas of those with whom they worked, all chosen by their peers to represent their hopes and all hopeful that they could produce something better that could work in that day and in the coming days.

The ideals of Jeffereson are made possible by the systems of Hamilton even though they hated each other, they needed each other other or both would have failed.

I doubt that Jefferson ever stopped thinking. I doubt that most of the framers ever stopped thinking. When I cite the framers, I'm not endorsing what they preferred for breakfast. I am citing the work that they produced. When I cite the time in which the Memorial was erected, it is because the decision that you imply came from Jefferson did not. It was the product of the FDR Administration.

Jefferson wrote prodigeously. I would think that any thought one might want could be culled from his writings to support anything one might want supported. This might require some creative editing. The fact that Jefferson held many opinions throughout his life speaks not to the genius of each of those thoughts, but to the openess of his mind and the curiosity of imagination.

The work that resonates down through the ages is the Declaration and it is from that work that his fame demands his other writings to be reviewed. Even that document, though is not purely the work of Jefferson. It was edited by others, most notably Fraklin, to arrive at the precise form we know today.

If Jefferson had only written that inscription to which you refer, there would be no Memorial.

If the Declaration was his only work, we would still know him and revere that document.

As an aside, why do you assume that you are the only person with access to historical information? People of good will can disagree and have legitimate reasons for that disagreement. Ignorance or malice are not the only motivators for not agreeing with your opinions.

 

[code1211]

Beck, who had Broden on his show numerous times, is distancing himself.

GOP Candidate Stephen Broden: Violent Revolution Is 'On The Table'

A Tea Party-backed congressional candidate in Texas is doing Sharron Angle's suggestive talk of "Second Amendment remedies" one better: he says violent overthrow of the government is "on the table."

"Our nation was founded on violence," Stephen Broden, a pastor running against Democratic Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson in Texas's 30th Congressional District, said in a recent interview with Dallas's WFAA-TV. "The option is on the table. I don't think that we should ever remove anything from the table as it relates to our liberties and our freedoms."
<more>

This is a FOX norm. Insinuate the sensational. Make statements on the edge of violence. Pander to the malitias that are out there plotting the overthrow of America. All this from a station owner that became a citizen for convenience sake. FOX is NOT a news station. It has unabashedly become a GOP marketing arm.

Unfortunately, MSNBC seems to be pushing to the left. Unbiased news it becoming harder and harder to find.

Seems to be? As in water seems to be a little bit wet or fire seems to be a little bit hot?

If you never noticed the bias of MSNBC, you have no ability to notice bias.

 

[RadiomanATL]

As an aside, why do you assume that you are the only person with access to historical information?

Well, it seems that he should access it a bit more. He's already been blatantly wrong on one historical point.

 

[code1211]

Have you looked at your army lately?

They aren't very white ya know.

Are we attributing political preferance based only on skin color. What is the word I'm searching for... ?

 

[code1211]

The states of New York and Illinios are thumbing their nose at your beloved Federal government and not sending ballots.

And your source for this is what? rightwingersRus.com?

Is The Army Times a source you might trust?

Ballots mailed out late for overseas troops - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times

WASHINGTON — With less than three weeks to go before the midterm election, a growing number of states are coming under pressure from the Justice Department for missing a new deadline to mail ballots to troops and overseas voters.

Election officials in New York, New Mexico and Nevada have been sued by the federal government in the past week or reached agreements to give military personnel and other Americans living abroad more time to return ballots for this year's election.

 

[code1211]

King George had a similar sentiment.

King George III lived in the musket age and was 3000 miles away.

If bombs and aircraft and tanks could quell an insurgency we would have won both wars in 6 months not a decade

If the Commander in Chief hadn't been a blithering idiot, there would have been no insurgencies.

When was the last time you were in the sandbox mate? What the hell do you really know about war?

Weren't here insurgencies in progress in Afghanistan in the 70's? When did they ever end? Seems like they would have had to have ended in order for them to start again during the Bush administration.

 

[LiberalNut]

The framers were a group that arrived at an agreement.

And that agreement was a mis-mash of compromise that in the end was little more than the barest skeleton of an outline for a Republican form of government. All knew that the nuts and bolts of how the thing would operate would be dictated by the people who actually held the offices of power created in the document.

Federalist Papers

These should be viewed as what they are, essentially rhetoric (propaganda even) attempting to sell the document to the States. Madison's words in particular should be looked at askance with all the lofty talk about limited federal power when of course he acted quite the opposite way when in power.

hopeful that they could produce something better

Better than what? The Articles of Confederation, yes? The entire exercise was one of creating a stronger central government, yes? A government that specifically would be powerful enough to respond quickly to uprisings like Shays' Rebellion, right? A government rich enough to raise a Navy to combat the Barbary Pirates and so on and so forth.

even though they hated each other

This is a bit strong. They had different visions of how America should develop. Madison won this debate, in spades. Look around at this nation. Is it Madison's vision or is it Jefferson's? Jefferson's ideology is a mere veneer over the structure that Madison envisioned.

I doubt that Jefferson ever stopped thinking.

Or writing or contradicting himself. Jefferson was a radical thinker and a prolific writer but there's no way to pin down some concrete notion of how the nation should operate based on his writings. Indeed, it would seem that many of his actions while president ran contrary to his radical writings, most notably the Louisiana Purchase. While it is not a mistake to admire and be inspired by Jefferson's writings, it is obvious blunder to think that they represent some sort of scripture or a blueprint for modern action.

why do you assume that you are the only person with access to historical information?

I don't. What I think is that there is a battle for history going on in the United States between those who would wipe out the real founders and replace them with some quasi-deity fictions and those who would urge a less doctrinaire approach to some very different men. The former group sees the founders' writings as some form of scripture, to be used in proof-texting exercises and that we should all,in the nuclear age, be beholden to some ficticious, consistent, "holy" wisdom for all time tht is contained therein. The latter group of which I am a part insists that the founders themselves, adn Jefferson in particular, warned us not to engage in this sort of foolishness. Indeed, Jefferson who was himself excoriated in his day by his political opponents as an athiest would probably be sickened by the extent to which some people in the modern world try to deify him.

It seems to me that the so-called "strict constructionists" are indeed insisting that we wear still the coat that fit us as a boy and that we are somehow bound to remain under the Regimen of our barbarous ancestors. I reject this utterly.

 

[LiberalNut]

we had overwhelming numbers of Thunderbolts, Mustangs and Lightnings

We did not. While I will agree that the yak, in all it's many variations, was slightly inferior to Western Allied fighter aircraft, they had more of them, many more. And let's not forget that they had quite a few lend-lease Lightnings and Spitfires and Hurricanes. No credible argument for easy air supremacy or even superiority can be made for the Western Allies in March of 1945 and the Russians obviously had the overwhelming superiority on the ground.

 

[LiberalNut]

Is The Army Times a source you might trust?

Yeah, yeah, I read up on it. If you read up on it you will find that there is an easy remedy for any troop who didn't get a ballot. You go to your unit voting officer and you tell them you didn't get a ballot. You are then given a standard DoD issue write-in ballot which can be faxed to the States Immediately. Some troops of course can take advantage of Internet voting.

In short, accusations of intentional voter suppression are the worst form of hyperbolic, partisan hackery.

 

[LiberalNut]

He's already been blatantly wrong on one historical point.

Well, I was sloppy enough in my verbiage that i could be considered to have been wrong. I recovered well though i thought. In any case, it is inevitable that i will from time to time make mistakes just as it is inevitable that you will use those mistakes as an excuse to ignore every fact that I offer in contradiction of your pre-conceived notions. Such is the lot of those who attempt rational debate with wingnuts.

 

[RadiomanATL]

He's already been blatantly wrong on one historical point.

Well, I was sloppy enough in my verbiage that i could be considered to have been wrong. I recovered well though i thought. In any case, it is inevitable that i will from time to time make mistakes just as it is inevitable that you will use those mistakes as an excuse to ignore every fact that I offer in contradiction of your pre-conceived notions. Such is the lot of those who attempt rational debate with wingnuts.

It was not verbiage. You said A, when B is actually true.

It was flat out wrong.

Care to point out any views of mine that you consider wingnuttery?

My bet is that you're wrong there too.

 

[LiberalNut]

I'm not into re-arguing a point that I have already admitted I screwed the pooch on. Do you have anything to offer on any of the many topics in this thread or is harping on my one mistake all that is floating your boat at the moment?

 

[RadiomanATL]

I'm not into re-arguing a point that I have already admitted I screwed the pooch on. Do you have anything to offer on any of the many topics in this thread or is harping on my one mistake all that is floating your boat at the moment?

I think you are referring to a different mistake.

So, that's two now

 

[LiberalNut]

 

[RadiomanATL]

Welcome to the fray.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you rightwingers revolt and establish a new government, it will have to be an undemocratic one if you want to sustain your agenda, because if you set up one that is democratic, i.e., that supports the will of the people,

you'll end up right back where we are,

because most Americans don't agree with your agenda.

The will of the people should not always be followed. What if the will of the people were to kill all people with user names of "NYcarbineer"?

The founders established a constitutional republic to protect the minority's rights. We are not a mob rules nation. We abide by the rule of law....At least were supposed too.

The Supreme Court is the Constitutional guardian of minority rights and conservatives love to hate it.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

There is a reason our Founding Fathers wanted you to keep your guns. An armed Citizenry is the ultimate Check & Balance on our Government. Our Founding Fathers understood this very well. The Government cannot completely crush the People if most of them are armed. Many people just need to get out of the mind-set that the Government is always the 'Good Guy.' They really aren't. Just arm yourself and all will be well in the end.

 

[LiberalNut]

Libo is now in infinite repeat mode. How uninteresting and sad.