I withdraw my consent to be governed ...

[Synthaholic]

We need to promote self government. If we restore that our constitution will take care of itself

Skylar is a demagogue, but I have emphasized from the start that an uprising against the entrenched ruling elite need not be violent. I agree that self-government and particularly self-reliance are the key elements to reestablishing Constitutional government.

I completely agree that an uprising need not be violent. Gandhi taught the Indian people that if they want to be a free people they need to govern themselves. We need to do the same.

We do that now.

And I find this funny coming from someone whose religion takes a very dim view of non-conformity.

 

[Synthaholic]

the left realize that, which is why they are so hysterical to shut our speech down.

Got any examples? Anything at all?

 

[kaz]

the left realize that, which is why they are so hysterical to shut our speech down.

Got any examples? Anything at all?

This thread

 

[NYcarbineer]

the left realize that, which is why they are so hysterical to shut our speech down.

Got any examples? Anything at all?

This thread

You're still talking foolishness, how has your speech been shut down?

 

[NYcarbineer]

What you're describing is, for lack of a better term, passive resistance. If that's our plan then we need to study the masters. Jesus, Gandhi, mlk jr

That is my intent for any and all unconstitutional gun restrictions.

Do not comply with unconstitutional laws.

You don't have the authority to rule laws unconstitutional, so non-compliance with what you think is an unconstitutional law would be

1. illegal, and

2. contrary to the Constitution.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The people voted, not the DNC.

Sure they did sparky, and the checks in the mail.

I mean, who are we going to believe, a Soros hack like you, or the actual emails from Schultz et al?

The people chose Hillary. You may not have noticed, but the RNC was against Crazy Donald. Again, the people spoke. They chose Crazy Donald.

The RNC may be stupid, but the held a fair election, unlike the Khmer Rouge democrats.

Then why did Trump complain about primaries being rigged?

 

[billyerock1991]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

boy are you lost in the land of la la land ... if you don't like the way the system is run, you have two choices
1)vote them out
2) move to a different country and become a citizen there ...
you can't withdraw

 

[kaz]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

boy are you lost in the land of la la land ... if you don't like the way the system is run, you have two choices
1)vote them out
2) move to a different country and become a citizen there ...
you can't withdraw

False dichotomy fallacy

 

[billyerock1991]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

boy are you lost in the land of la la land ... if you don't like the way the system is run, you have two choices
1)vote them out
2) move to a different country and become a citizen there ...
you can't withdraw

False dichotomy fallacy

yep La la Land fits you to a tea

 

[kaz]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

boy are you lost in the land of la la land ... if you don't like the way the system is run, you have two choices
1)vote them out
2) move to a different country and become a citizen there ...
you can't withdraw

False dichotomy fallacy

yep La la Land fits you to a tea

Thanks for the intellectual content, very thought provoking. If you want to leave, see ya

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What you're describing is, for lack of a better term, passive resistance. If that's our plan then we need to study the masters. Jesus, Gandhi, mlk jr

That is my intent for any and all unconstitutional gun restrictions.

Do not comply with unconstitutional laws.

Thankfully, neither you nor any other wrongheaded conservative has the authority to determine what is or is not Constitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

boy are you lost in the land of la la land ... if you don't like the way the system is run, you have two choices
1)vote them out
2) move to a different country and become a citizen there ...
you can't withdraw

False dichotomy fallacy

Oh, right, number 3 you can break the law and go to jail.

 

[kaz]

What you're describing is, for lack of a better term, passive resistance. If that's our plan then we need to study the masters. Jesus, Gandhi, mlk jr

That is my intent for any and all unconstitutional gun restrictions.

Do not comply with unconstitutional laws.

Thankfully, neither you nor any other wrongheaded conservative has the authority to determine what is or is not Constitutional.

No, that's for the US Politburo do decide. We call our politburo the "Supreme Court" and they are a law unto themselves

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Because you're brain-dead and can't understand the states, including the one of which you're a citizen, formed a compact with the federal government, bound by the U.S. Constitution and the framework laid out within it. Neither you nor krazy kaz, as individuals, get to unilaterally "opt out." You're morons who can't grasp that, I get that; but comprehend it or not, the majority of voters decide their representatives for everyone in the U.S. The majority of electoral votes decides the president for everyone in the U.S.

Don't like it? The shit is still tough and you still have a choice to escape it, as I mentioned earlier.

And you're beyond stupid to think you had a choice of only "two" to send to Washington. Republicans offered 17 candidates from which to choose. Democrats offered 3. America picked the two we have remaining to choose from.

It is you Bolsheviks who are violating this compact. The states consented to the CONSTITUTION of the United States. As you subvert this, such consent becomes null.

Further, the question is not who is elected president, the question is can unelected justices nullify and revoke the ratified Constitution? You of the left demand that the SCOTUS alone is the law of this nation, that the Constitution has no meaning, If the courts can render the Bill of Rights null, then the compact is null and void.

As I demonstrated from WikiLeaks, the Khmer Rouge democrats offered only one Candidate. Regardless of the choice of the people, Hillary was the choice.

Hillary is dedicated to appointing members of the Dictatorship of the Judiciary who will revoke the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments, the heart of the Bill of Rights. Such a move is not legitimate and will be rightfully met with resistance by those who support government of the people, by the people, for the people.

"...who will revoke the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments"

With the decade long assault your party has waged on civil rights, do you think your ploy convinces anyone?

Anyone at all?

Democrats for decades have fought to defend the voting rights of minorities, the privacy rights of women, the due process rights of immigrants, and the equal protection rights of gay Americans – opposed every step of the way by republicans hostile to citizens’ rights and protected liberties.

And republican state lawmakers continue to seek to violate the privacy rights of women and the equal protection rights of gay Americans in spite of Supreme Court rulings prohibiting the states from doing so – exhibiting the right’s continued contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and he rule of law.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

We need to promote self government. If we restore that our constitution will take care of itself

Skylar is a demagogue, but I have emphasized from the start that an uprising against the entrenched ruling elite need not be violent. I agree that self-government and particularly self-reliance are the key elements to reestablishing Constitutional government.

It starts with people like us speaking up and convincing people. In a way, the left realize that, which is why they are so hysterical to shut our speech down. What they are getting away with is built on ignorance. Information is their enemy

Further evidence of the propensity of most on the right to lie; and further evidence of the ignorance common to most on the right.

No one on ‘the left’ has sought to enact any law or measure at any level of government with the intent to ‘shut down’ anyone’s speech.

The doctrine of free speech and expression concerns solely the relationship between government and those governed, not between and among private persons and organizations.

Appropriate, warranted criticism of errant rightwing dogma by private persons in the context of private venues in no way ‘shuts down’ speech.

 

[rdean]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out of the country.

 

[rdean]

Because you're brain-dead and can't understand the states, including the one of which you're a citizen, formed a compact with the federal government, bound by the U.S. Constitution and the framework laid out within it. Neither you nor krazy kaz, as individuals, get to unilaterally "opt out." You're morons who can't grasp that, I get that; but comprehend it or not, the majority of voters decide their representatives for everyone in the U.S. The majority of electoral votes decides the president for everyone in the U.S.

Don't like it? The shit is still tough and you still have a choice to escape it, as I mentioned earlier.

And you're beyond stupid to think you had a choice of only "two" to send to Washington. Republicans offered 17 candidates from which to choose. Democrats offered 3. America picked the two we have remaining to choose from.

It is you Bolsheviks who are violating this compact. The states consented to the CONSTITUTION of the United States. As you subvert this, such consent becomes null.

Further, the question is not who is elected president, the question is can unelected justices nullify and revoke the ratified Constitution? You of the left demand that the SCOTUS alone is the law of this nation, that the Constitution has no meaning, If the courts can render the Bill of Rights null, then the compact is null and void.

As I demonstrated from WikiLeaks, the Khmer Rouge democrats offered only one Candidate. Regardless of the choice of the people, Hillary was the choice.

Hillary is dedicated to appointing members of the Dictatorship of the Judiciary who will revoke the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments, the heart of the Bill of Rights. Such a move is not legitimate and will be rightfully met with resistance by those who support government of the people, by the people, for the people.

"...who will revoke the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments"

With the decade long assault your party has waged on civil rights, do you think your ploy convinces anyone?

Anyone at all?

Democrats for decades have fought to defend the voting rights of minorities, the privacy rights of women, the due process rights of immigrants, and the equal protection rights of gay Americans – opposed every step of the way by republicans hostile to citizens’ rights and protected liberties.

And republican state lawmakers continue to seek to violate the privacy rights of women and the equal protection rights of gay Americans in spite of Supreme Court rulings prohibiting the states from doing so – exhibiting the right’s continued contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and he rule of law.

Republicans come up with but, but, but,
but they know it's true.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You insane people really crack me up.

Of course. Support of the Bill of Rights is "insane" according to the Khmer Rouge democrats.

No doubt those who "cling to guns, god, and the Constitution" will find themselves in party work camps to rehabilitate such "insane thoughts." We have seen this from your side before.

http://www.jaapl.org/content/30/1/136.full.pdf

More lies and moronic hyperbole – most on the right are incapable of meaningful ‘debate’ because it’s impossible to defend their failed, inane dogma devoid of truth.

There is no position held by democrats in any official capacity that in any manner conflicts with current Second Amendment jurisprudence.

The Supreme Court has never ruled as to the Constitutionality of measures placing restrictions on firearms such as AR platform rifles.

It is a lie that democrats are ‘hostile’ to ‘gun rights,’ it is a lie that democrats advocate ‘confiscating’ guns, and it is a lie that democrats don’t support the Bill of Rights.

All you and others on the right have are lies.

 

[David_42]

So edgy.

 

[kaz]

Because you're brain-dead and can't understand the states, including the one of which you're a citizen, formed a compact with the federal government, bound by the U.S. Constitution and the framework laid out within it. Neither you nor krazy kaz, as individuals, get to unilaterally "opt out." You're morons who can't grasp that, I get that; but comprehend it or not, the majority of voters decide their representatives for everyone in the U.S. The majority of electoral votes decides the president for everyone in the U.S.

Don't like it? The shit is still tough and you still have a choice to escape it, as I mentioned earlier.

And you're beyond stupid to think you had a choice of only "two" to send to Washington. Republicans offered 17 candidates from which to choose. Democrats offered 3. America picked the two we have remaining to choose from.

It is you Bolsheviks who are violating this compact. The states consented to the CONSTITUTION of the United States. As you subvert this, such consent becomes null.

Further, the question is not who is elected president, the question is can unelected justices nullify and revoke the ratified Constitution? You of the left demand that the SCOTUS alone is the law of this nation, that the Constitution has no meaning, If the courts can render the Bill of Rights null, then the compact is null and void.

As I demonstrated from WikiLeaks, the Khmer Rouge democrats offered only one Candidate. Regardless of the choice of the people, Hillary was the choice.

Hillary is dedicated to appointing members of the Dictatorship of the Judiciary who will revoke the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments, the heart of the Bill of Rights. Such a move is not legitimate and will be rightfully met with resistance by those who support government of the people, by the people, for the people.

"...who will revoke the 1st, 2nd, and 4th Amendments"

With the decade long assault your party has waged on civil rights, do you think your ploy convinces anyone?

Anyone at all?

Democrats for decades have fought to defend the voting rights of minorities, the privacy rights of women, the due process rights of immigrants, and the equal protection rights of gay Americans – opposed every step of the way by republicans hostile to citizens’ rights and protected liberties.

And republican state lawmakers continue to seek to violate the privacy rights of women and the equal protection rights of gay Americans in spite of Supreme Court rulings prohibiting the states from doing so – exhibiting the right’s continued contempt for the Constitution, its case law, and he rule of law.

Lying partisan hack, you have no grasp of reality at all. You're just swilling kool-aid.

Opportunity is what makes America great. You're just shilling handouts and dependencies