Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wishing to protect our rights and freedoms in the 2nd amendment, according to the OP, are akin to encouraging neo-Nazi lunatics to kill people, but supporting the likes of Obama or Feinstien to take away our guns is not encouraging neo-Nazi lunatics to kill people?
No, I never said that or came anywhere near saying that. Also Obama and Pelosi are not trying to take away your guns, that is another lie
In this book I make a claim that will seem startling at the outset. The cultural left in this country (such people as Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, George Soros, Michael Moore, Bill Moyers, and Noam Chomsky) is responsible for causing 9/11.
The term “cultural left” does not refer to the Democratic Party. Nor does it refer to all liberals. It refers to the left wing of the Democratic Party—admittedly the most energetic group among Democrats, and the main source of the party’s ideas. The cultural left also includes a few Republicans, notably those who adopt a left-wing stance on foreign policy and social issues. Moreover, the cultural left includes organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, Human Rights Watch, and moveon.org.
In faulting the cultural left, I am not making the absurd accusation that this group blew up the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I am saying that the cultural left and its allies in Congress, the media, Hollywood, the nonprofit sector and the universities are the primary cause of the volcano of anger toward America that is erupting from the Islamic world. The Muslims who carried out the 9/11 attacks were the product of this visceral rage—some of it based on legitimate concerns, some of it based on wrongful prejudice—but all of it fueled and encouraged by the cultural left. Thus without the cultural left, 9/11 would not have happened.
I realize that this is a strong charge, one that no one has made before. But it is a completely neglected aspect of the 9/11 debate, and it is critical to understanding the current debate over the war against terrorism. Here in America, the political right routinely accuses the left of being weak in its response to Islamic terrorism. For example, conservatives often allege that the left’s desire to “understand” the roots of Islamic discontent dilutes American resolve in fighting the enemy. If this is true, then fortifying the left’s resolve becomes the obvious solution. My argument is quite different. It is that the left is the primary reason for Islamic anti-Americanism as well as the anti-Americanism of other traditional cultures around the world. I intend to show that the left has actively fostered the intense hatred of America that has led to murderous attacks such as 9/11. If I am right, then no war against terrorism can be effectively fought using the left-wing premises that are now accepted doctrine among mainstream liberals and Democrats.
The Declaration of Independence is what says that.
(emphasis mine)
Right now, you argue the case of King George III, as a loyalist. Lots of folks in the Colonies did the same thing after Jefferson paraphrased Locke and penned the official "go pound salt" memo to His Majesty. The most famous Loyalist would be Benedict Arnold, but he was certainly not alone, as maybe 20% of the Colonies' population were loyal to His Majesty.
Nothing particularly wrong with being a loyalist I guess, as every argument needs at least two sides to continue being an argument, but history typically favors the revolutionaries, not those defending tyranny's status quos.
But always remember that one of your inalienable rights, as in a right granted to you merely from existence, is liberty. Government does not grant that right, it can only abridge, oppress or violate it. And our nation's government, at any level (per the US Constitution) is constructed with the order of sovereignty being individuals, then states, then nation, and our government serves us, it does not rule us. Don't take my word for it, take Madison, Hamilton, Jay, and Jefferson's words for it. Read Washington and Adam's inaugural addresses. Read Patrick Henry's anti-Constitution speeches in defense of individual and state's rights.
Saying no to the government, even if it involves saying it forcefully, is the most fundamental, quintessential aspect of what it means to be an American.
Sean Hannity and Sarah Palin didn't come up with any of that, a bunch of landowners and lawyers in the 18th Century did...and they wrote it all down, and all those RWNJs did was READ IT.
You don't get it do you? This has nothing at all to do with the Declaration of Independence or King George III or Jefferson or Locke or any of that other stuff you trot out. This is about rightwing crazies advocating violence and Hannity et al saying yeah that's a good idea
Truthfully, though the ideology of a lot of these militia groups clashes with my views, I believe another Ruby Ridge was avoided because of their presence at Bunckerville. Nuf said.
Nuf said?? Probably a good idea in this case. So they shouldn't enforce the law? Bundy shouldn't have to pay the fees which are his legal obligation? If you have enough guns then you don't have to obey the law. That's what this is all about
Why thread over? To blame 911 on any political party is naive and quite sad. And here you agree An enormous tragedy such as that should not be made political.
For those who yammer and yap about government overreach this video at about 6:00 brings up the case of a police officer spraying pepper spray directly into the faces of kneeling Occupy people. Not only did Hannity or anybody else on the right call that overreach but on Fox they actually laughed about it as if to say ha ha those people got what they deserve.
Look, you said, "When the crazies advocate armed rebellion and even state that armed rebellion is their constitutional right and then are told by people like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin et al that they're patriots and real Americans, that's giving them the go ahead for an armed uprising."
From what I can tell from your statement. You seem to be complaining that "crazies" think it is their constitutional right to have an armed rebellion. I merely stated that "armed rebellion isn't a constitutional right, it is a natural right."
Which means I both agree with your basic argument that the crazies shouldn't be arguing that it is their constitutional right, it isn't their constitutional right. But I continue on that it is their "natural right". And if you understand anything about the Revolutionary War. You'll realize that the people like Thomas Jefferson who used the "natural right to revolution", regularly called themselves "Patriots".
Which is somewhat ironic, since they weren't really Patriots. They were basically the exact opposite of a Patriot. Since "their country" was technically the British Empire. The truth is, they were secessionists, rebels, or revolutionaries.
Look at the first line of the Declaration of Independence, it is about "Natural law".
"When in the course of human events it becomes necessary for a people to advance from that subordination in which they have hitherto remained, & to assume among the powers of the earth the equal & independant station to which the laws of nature & of nature's god entitle them.
You should really read some John Locke. Maybe you'll come around.
You seem to have a big problem with basic reading comprehension. I NEVER said treason was a constitutional right. What I said was that OTHER PEOPLE have said that treason is a constitutional right. It's amazing that you don't know the difference.
This has nothing to do with Jefferson or Locke. This is about people advocating violence and Sean Hannity encouraging them
Sounds quite immature, if I say. Why not grieve for the families instead of be divisive and point fingers. That's what's terribly wrong with this nation.
What if it was a group of leftwing crazies advocating violence and what if Rachel Maddow or Ed Schultz praising those violence advocating leftwing crazies and what if a couple of those leftwing crazies than shot and killed people. Do you think anybody on the right would be grieving for the families instead of being divisive and pointing fingers?
Sure blame everyone but the violent people who do these murders. Typical liberal thinking and why it will continue. Does that mean Democrats and Obama are directly responsible for all the murders in Chicago?
Typical liberal thinking?? Is rightwing hero Dinesh D'SDouza a liberal? He blames Hillary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Barbara Boxer, George Soros, Michael Moore, Bill Moyers, Noam Chomsky, the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Organization for Women, People for the American Way, Planned Parenthood, Human Rights Watch, and moveon.org. for 9/11
And no, Democrats and Obama are not directly responsible for all the murders in Chicago. Why the hell would they be?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
An enormous tragedy such as that should not be made political.