Will you partcipate in an armed rebellion against the federal government?

[Derek_Plumber]

So fat-cat Democrats don't exist?

Of course not. When dems become fat cats, the switch parties. ​

Where were you?

I answered that question in another thread weeks ago.

Repubs; always a day late and a dollar short.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Hell no, I wouldn't take up arms in a civil war or a rebellion because I'm a liberal. We don't own guns! When the rebellion happens I'll be fleeing to Canada and claiming political asylum from the nazis, er, I mean Republicans who are wholesale slaughtering hippies, vegetarians, hipsters, artists, writers, musicians, green businesses, small business owners who practice progressive business, pacifists, feminists, homosexuals, abortion doctors, intellectuals, college professors, scientists, atheists, Muslims, immigrants, black people, comedians, journalists, minorities, deer, elk, pheasants, fish...........

It'll be like the Spanish Civil War but with a lot of Budweiser and hunting camo.

 

[Gunny]

There are some on the board who are talking about an armed rebellion or civil war sometime down the road. That got me thinking, are you planning to participate in an armed insurrection against the federal government?

Frankly, I find this fascinating.

It's a fascinating discussion if you can keep the rhetoric zombies out of it.

Let me respond to your question with a question: If the US Federal government ceases to represent the US Constitution, is it not one's duty as a US citizen to defend the latter against the former?

I do not out of hand support armed rebellion when the political mechanisms exist to change the government through peaceful means. The problem, IMO, lies in the fact that so many are so polarized to their side's rhetoric, they can't figure out their asses from holes in the ground, much less see that with a little thought applied to the situation, armed conflict is not necessary.

In other words, just agree with YOUR rhetoric, and we'll all be just fine.

There is no rhetoric in my post. Only the facts.

Or do you have some problem with doing things the legal way as I suggested in my post?

I didn't think so.

 

[Gunny]

There are some on the board who are talking about an armed rebellion or civil war sometime down the road. That got me thinking, are you planning to participate in an armed insurrection against the federal government?

Frankly, I find this fascinating.

Taking a look at the politicians who are beginning to make public their disagreements with all that Obama is doing, and seeing this question come up in so many ways, is an indication that in America we have a problem. I remember Perry's comment about Texas leaving the country behind. Just the mention of these things is clear evidence that somewhere along the way Americans have voted themselves back into a corner.

It is my hope that there will be no all out war here, but I would participate in a systematic removal of many of the politicians and other government workers who are currently in high places. We do need to make some drastic changes.

As I see it, the best hope is that someone will come along who understands how to lead the country, through the media, in the future elections, toward a clear cleansing of the nations of the crap that is in Washington DC now. I wish I were smart enough to lead it. Our votes are worthless unless we have someone worth voting for. Farmers, volunteer community leaders, organizations with high ethical and moral histories, and others who have the educational understanding needed, need to step up to the plate and lead in a plan to organize and take those offices over in our government.

There does need to be a cleansing. Government is corrupt, and most politicians need to be removed.

I don't think I would be involved in all out war, but in organized cleansing, I would jump right in.

Just one man's opinion.

Once again, the very fact that these kinds of comments are being made publicly in so many places not means we need to do something, or we will lose this great nation forever.

A good start, then, would be for "conservatives" to stop ripping the Republican Party apart by their wild-eyed isolationism from the basic tenets of the Grand OLd Party. While you may not agree with nor like everything the GOP currently stands for, there is strength in numbers. As long as you continue to act like bratty children (JUST SAY NO), and are unwilling to compromise, even a little, you will continue to lose regardless how much "cleansing" is done of the current batch serving in Washington.

A better start would be for extremist partisan hacks like you to stop babbling like a toddler. Your posts evidence that you are everything you accuse Republicans of being.

Questioning your own party and it's goals is called being honest. Something you lemming-o-crats wouldn't know a damned thing about.

 

[eots]

any armed rebellion worth its salt would be supported by larg numbers of military and ex military
this is why we must guard against the use of foreign troops on our soil..like the guys in the blue hats


"Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government."
- Henry Kissinger, Bilderberg meeting, Evian-les-Bains, France, 1992-

 

[AllieBaba]

Not likely.

Assuming the worst, the fracus won't be the people of the USA V the US government, it will come to us as a civil war which will likely devolve into governance by the gun.

Given the choice between warlord anarchism and existing civil authority, I'm likely to side with the civil authorities even if I don't have much respect for them, either.

Even a bad government is typically better than the mob rule anarchy that typically comes during a civil war, folks.

What fucking planet do you live on?

Who said anything about eliminating government? We are not obligated to accept any government put in place over us. We are obligated to protect freedom AT ALL COSTS, and yes, that includes taking up arms against our own government if it oppresses the people, violates human rights, or changes into something that is not for the people, by the people, etc.

At least that's what Jefferson thought. I'll go with him instead of Edidick.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

 

[Big Black Dog]

If there's an armed rebellion here I'm going back to England and tell them I'm sorry about that thing in 1776 and ask them if I can stay... God Save the Queen! They don't have Democrats there.

 

[Foxfyre]

Taking a look at the politicians who are beginning to make public their disagreements with all that Obama is doing, and seeing this question come up in so many ways, is an indication that in America we have a problem. I remember Perry's comment about Texas leaving the country behind. Just the mention of these things is clear evidence that somewhere along the way Americans have voted themselves back into a corner.

It is my hope that there will be no all out war here, but I would participate in a systematic removal of many of the politicians and other government workers who are currently in high places. We do need to make some drastic changes.

As I see it, the best hope is that someone will come along who understands how to lead the country, through the media, in the future elections, toward a clear cleansing of the nations of the crap that is in Washington DC now. I wish I were smart enough to lead it. Our votes are worthless unless we have someone worth voting for. Farmers, volunteer community leaders, organizations with high ethical and moral histories, and others who have the educational understanding needed, need to step up to the plate and lead in a plan to organize and take those offices over in our government.

There does need to be a cleansing. Government is corrupt, and most politicians need to be removed.

I don't think I would be involved in all out war, but in organized cleansing, I would jump right in.

Just one man's opinion.

Once again, the very fact that these kinds of comments are being made publicly in so many places not means we need to do something, or we will lose this great nation forever.

A good start, then, would be for "conservatives" to stop ripping the Republican Party apart by their wild-eyed isolationism from the basic tenets of the Grand OLd Party. While you may not agree with nor like everything the GOP currently stands for, there is strength in numbers. As long as you continue to act like bratty children (JUST SAY NO), and are unwilling to compromise, even a little, you will continue to lose regardless how much "cleansing" is done of the current batch serving in Washington.

A better start would be for extremist partisan hacks like you to stop babbling like a toddler. Your posts evidence that you are everything you accuse Republicans of being.

Questioning your own party and it's goals is called being honest. Something you lemming-o-crats wouldn't know a damned thing about.

I agree. The GOP is the only game in town for modern conservatives and, if it refuses to be conservative, then we have no game at all. We don't have to trash the GOP in order to express our displeasure with the way the leadership in Congress is behaving. If it doesn't make any difference whichever party is in power, why bother to have a multiple party system at all?

I am seeing phrases similar to this one being circulated around the web, but think we have to elect Republicans to Congress before it could happen even if justification can be made for it:

OBAMA IS ACTING IN VIOLATION OF USA LAW TO ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES WHICH VIOLATE USA LAW.
The solution for how to save our Constitutional Republic is to first impeach President Obama, or initiate his removal from the presidency some other lawful way. He is violating the Constitution of the USA that he swore to support. He is leading the transfer of private property from those persons and from those organizations who have lawfully earned it to those persons and organizations who have not lawfully earned it.

But I can't see Americans taking up arms against its government UNLESS the government is demolished by a totalitarian coup or some such. I CAN see one or more states getting so fed up with the imcompetence and erosion of our freedoms, choices, opportunities, and options via a creeping soft Marxism that they would opt to secede.

My question would not be whether Americans would take up arms against their government.

My question is what would Obama and the Congress do if say Texas and New Mexico seceded and refused to relinquish any more taxes or resources to the Federal government until it reversed its current disastrous course?

 

[xsited1]

There are some on the board who are talking about an armed rebellion or civil war sometime down the road. That got me thinking, are you planning to participate in an armed insurrection against the federal government?

Frankly, I find this fascinating.

It's a fascinating discussion if you can keep the rhetoric zombies out of it.

Let me respond to your question with a question: If the US Federal government ceases to represent the US Constitution, is it not one's duty as a US citizen to defend the latter against the former?

I do not out of hand support armed rebellion when the political mechanisms exist to change the government through peaceful means. The problem, IMO, lies in the fact that so many are so polarized to their side's rhetoric, they can't figure out their asses from holes in the ground, much less see that with a little thought applied to the situation, armed conflict is not necessary.

It is fascinating because as a foreigner, it is difficult to understand the American ethos without understanding the broad and deep premise of your question. America, more than any other country that I am aware, is based on an ideal. Generally, what foreigners do not understand is that what might look insane - people talking armed rebellion, for example - is a manifestation of that ideal that runs deep in the American ethos such that a small portion of the population is willing to die fighting the Federal government if their taxes are too high. In a way, it is insane, but in another way, there is nobility to it. (Of course, you could say the same thing about Marxists, but hey...)

An ideal is right. Americans decided they weren't going to be enslaved anymore by an oppressive and coercive government and decided to fight. (I guess you've figured out by now that it's not just about taxes.) Most people would just fall in-line like lemmings, but not true Americans. Unfortunately, there aren't too many of us left.

 

[Aristophanes]

There are some on the board who are talking about an armed rebellion or civil war sometime down the road. That got me thinking, are you planning to participate in an armed insurrection against the federal government?

Frankly, I find this fascinating.

That would depend on the circumstances.

I'm willing to bet I could discover a set of circumstances that would drive you or anyone else to armed revolt.

Remember...armed revolt is how our country was started, so attempting to cast is as somehow morally inappropriate is a bit foolish.

Not saying that's what you're doing here, but still...I think it's funny how liberals only start to care about their country when they fear losing the ability to run it.

 

[AllieBaba]

They don't give a shit about it then, either. They just sit back and wait for people of integrity and honor to save them.

 

[EriktheRed]

No, but I might enjoy putting away a few members of the American Aristocracy;

AKA fat-cat Republicans.

Good things come in time.

Dreams can come true.




​

I'm guessing you're joking, but that's particularly funny.​

 

[EriktheRed]

If there's an armed rebellion here I'm going back to England and tell them I'm sorry about that thing in 1776 and ask them if I can stay... God Save the Queen! They don't have Democrats there.

No, but their "left" is even more left than here.

 

[AllieBaba]

If America doesn't exist, Britain won't exist either.

 

[MaggieMae]

Not likely.

Assuming the worst, the fracus won't be the people of the USA V the US government, it will come to us as a civil war which will likely devolve into governance by the gun.

Given the choice between warlord anarchism and existing civil authority, I'm likely to side with the civil authorities even if I don't have much respect for them, either.

Even a bad government is typically better than the mob rule anarchy that typically comes during a civil war, folks.

What fucking planet do you live on?

Who said anything about eliminating government? We are not obligated to accept any government put in place over us. We are obligated to protect freedom AT ALL COSTS, and yes, that includes taking up arms against our own government if it oppresses the people, violates human rights, or changes into something that is not for the people, by the people, etc.

At least that's what Jefferson thought. I'll go with him instead of Edidick.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, -- That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."

Jefferson wrote that following the insurrection against the British Monarchy. What's ironic is nowhere therein does he define WHICH set of perceived violations of rights would be intolerable in the new world. But since the passage from the letter contains the veiled suggestion of another violent uprising, today's cons jump right on it as though Jefferson were giving THEM carte blanche to react violently to any government principles THEY may not like, and Jefferson's words should not be interpreted otherwise.

I seriously doubt that Jefferson was arbitrarily calling for militant uprisings every time there are disagreements among the powers that be. The letter itself was written to William Steven Smith, a British nobleman who didn't understand the insurrection; Jefferson was attempting to explain it.

 

[MaggieMae]

If there's an armed rebellion here I'm going back to England and tell them I'm sorry about that thing in 1776 and ask them if I can stay... God Save the Queen! They don't have Democrats there.

No, they're all Socialists aren't they?

(I hope you were joking. I'd hate to think the Mods here gave you a state governor ranking already with only slightly more than a month's time on this board if you're really that dumb.)

 

[MaggieMae]

A good start, then, would be for "conservatives" to stop ripping the Republican Party apart by their wild-eyed isolationism from the basic tenets of the Grand OLd Party. While you may not agree with nor like everything the GOP currently stands for, there is strength in numbers. As long as you continue to act like bratty children (JUST SAY NO), and are unwilling to compromise, even a little, you will continue to lose regardless how much "cleansing" is done of the current batch serving in Washington.

A better start would be for extremist partisan hacks like you to stop babbling like a toddler. Your posts evidence that you are everything you accuse Republicans of being.

Questioning your own party and it's goals is called being honest. Something you lemming-o-crats wouldn't know a damned thing about.

I agree. The GOP is the only game in town for modern conservatives and, if it refuses to be conservative, then we have no game at all. We don't have to trash the GOP in order to express our displeasure with the way the leadership in Congress is behaving. If it doesn't make any difference whichever party is in power, why bother to have a multiple party system at all?

I am seeing phrases similar to this one being circulated around the web, but think we have to elect Republicans to Congress before it could happen even if justification can be made for it:

OBAMA IS ACTING IN VIOLATION OF USA LAW TO ACHIEVE OBJECTIVES WHICH VIOLATE USA LAW.
The solution for how to save our Constitutional Republic is to first impeach President Obama, or initiate his removal from the presidency some other lawful way. He is violating the Constitution of the USA that he swore to support. He is leading the transfer of private property from those persons and from those organizations who have lawfully earned it to those persons and organizations who have not lawfully earned it.

But I can't see Americans taking up arms against its government UNLESS the government is demolished by a totalitarian coup or some such. I CAN see one or more states getting so fed up with the imcompetence and erosion of our freedoms, choices, opportunities, and options via a creeping soft Marxism that they would opt to secede.

My question would not be whether Americans would take up arms against their government.

My question is what would Obama and the Congress do if say Texas and New Mexico seceded and refused to relinquish any more taxes or resources to the Federal government until it reversed its current disastrous course?

That is the biggest piece of propagandized horseshit I've ever seen. Please cite the Article so violated in the Constitution.

And PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, secede!!!!!!!!!

 

[Foxfyre]

That is the biggest piece of propagandized horseshit I've ever seen. Please cite the Article so violated in the Constitution.

And PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, secede!!!!!!!!!

Why should I cite the article so violated? I didn't write the phrase. I only reported that I've seen it and it is being circulated. I thought I left open the very real possibility that valid support for it might not be established.

Do you have a reading comprehension problem or is it a rare thing to misunderstand a post as badly as you seem to have misunderstood mine?

But can you answer the question: If one or more states should decide to secede, how do you think the current Congress and Administration would respond to that?

 

[MaggieMae]

There are some on the board who are talking about an armed rebellion or civil war sometime down the road. That got me thinking, are you planning to participate in an armed insurrection against the federal government?

Frankly, I find this fascinating.

That would depend on the circumstances.

I'm willing to bet I could discover a set of circumstances that would drive you or anyone else to armed revolt.

Remember...armed revolt is how our country was started, so attempting to cast is as somehow morally inappropriate is a bit foolish.

Not saying that's what you're doing here, but still...I think it's funny how liberals only start to care about their country when they fear losing the ability to run it.

Using guns and revolutions to accomplish what a political faction decides is best for the country literally went out with cannon balls and high button shoes. You may want to go the way of banana republics to overturn your adversaries, but thinking Americans prefer to move forward, not backward.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A bill before Congress right now could lead to that break in the right of US citizens to vote, It has a provision that would allow the Attorney General to label any person, any group, any organization he disagreed with as a terrorist organization, which would lead to disbarment of such members from voting.

I might add THIS law is illegal and Unconstitutional. And could easily lead to armed rebellion when Obama and his Administration use such laws to remove from the rolls large swatches of American Citizens from the right to vote.

Returning us to a condition of A government ruling with out just representation of the people of the Country.