Tea Party organizers say "No guns!"

[smurf hunter]

Gandhi did not approve of the use of weapons at political rallies. He didn't even approve of the use of weapons when fighting armies and overthrowing empires.

Just sayin'.

India was/is so socially fragmented, it would have been next to impossible to coordinate any sort of military rebellion.

 

[Stomper]

RESTORATION...... NOT Revolution!!

 

[watcher]

Good line Stomper

 

[jrvause]

I guess a typo on this site is a really big deal.

 

[Partsproduction]

The bunch of idiots we have running the country now needs to go but this bunch was voted in by the people and it needs to be voted out by the people.

The problem is that the whole of the medium of the exchange of ideas is firmly in the hands of the left, with tiny exceptions like this and talk radio and FOX news.

The scholastic institutions are and have been owned by the left for 40 years, what that means is that we do not have even a ghost of true representation because the little ones are being brainwashed, and when they grow up they vote liberal. The ballot is not the answer. There is no answer by normally accepted mechanisms. Part of the indoctrination includes antidotes to individual logic and reason, and if people cannot reason then voting cannot answer problems. People who don't reason vote based on what they are told and the "tellers" are liberals.

I agree with the response "Pray".

 

[Partsproduction]

you people are still stuck in a "left right paradigm" WAKE UP!!!!!

The conservative reactions make more sense to many of us than the left's ideas, left to the liberals we would have no second amendment, and no rights under the Constitution at all. You wouldn't be able to say what you just did in this forum because it wouldn't exist. Perhaps it's you who are asleep?

 

[watcher]

Partsproduction
So, what you are saying is that because your chosen group is not capable of organizing a democratic change of power then you advocate violent revolution as an alternative. Nowhere in the Constitution does it suggest that revolt is an acceptable alternative to the ballot box.

The power is with the people and however they vote, acting unwisely or not, the final vote tally decides who will run the country. Using revolution as a substitute for the hard work required to influence voters is the action of a mentally and morally bankrupt faction that quite clearly lacks popular support.

If you are going to claim that you are defender of the Constitution then defend the WHOLE Constitution. To do less is to put yourself level with the anti-2nd crowd.

 

[Partsproduction]

So, what you are saying is that because your chosen group is not capable of organizing a democratic change of power then you advocate violent revolution as an alternative

First error. I didn't advocate violent revolution. Get it right, ok?

Second error. You went right past what I just explained to you. When the number of idiots is greater than the number of people with understanding there can be no correct results at a ballot. Consider also that the left spikes the ballots with illegals and dead people.

Many of the people who voted for Obama are still waiting for him to make their house and car payments! Not a bright bunch.

Nowhere in the Constitution does it suggest that revolt is an acceptable alternative to the ballot box.

Are you really that ignorant of what Jefferson and other founding fathers said about revolution? You say you are a teacher?

You said you are willing to hear "new" ideas, well here are some from over two hundred years ago

Jefferson;
"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."

Madison;
"Americans need not fear the federal government because
they enjoy the advantage of being armed, which you possess over
the people of almost every other nation."

",,,the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

Patrick Henry;
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."

I could go on and on.

What you say goes against what the founders said, who indeed said that the people must have the ready access to the implements of force to preserve their freedoms!

Do you have any idea at all of why we have a second amendment? You teach in schools, you evidently don't know or understand the intent of the second amendment, you are part of the problem!

 

[watcher]

There is no answer by normally accepted mechanisms.

Sorry if I misinterpreted this but it does sound as though you are advocating something other than a "normally accepted mechanisms".

Communication gap here. I never said that the founding fathers had never "talked" about revolution. I said "Nowhere in the Constitution does it suggest that revolt is an acceptable alternative to the ballot box." A very different matter. I think it is interesting that although the founding fathers talked about revolution they never did make a provision for revolution in the Constitution or even precisely define when it would be justified. Now if you want to talk about the Declaration of Independence that is a whole other matter.

Neither did I say that the public should not be armed or that revolution would NEVER be justified. There may be a time and place for revolution but it is not because a small group of malcontents, with a wish to avoid paying taxes and an urge to set the country back 100 years, see this as the only option to getting off their backsides and actually taking part in the democratic process.

Yes, I know why we have a 2nd Amendment.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

It says the people should bear arms because it is "necessary to the security of a free State,". It does not say whether the protection of the free state is against outside aggression, or its own leaders, or against roving bands of extremists, perhaps we should assume all three.

 

[zeezee]

First error. I didn't advocate violent revolution. Get it right, ok?

Second error. You went right past what I just explained to you. When the number of idiots is greater than the number of people with understanding there can be no correct results at a ballot. Consider also that the left spikes the ballots with illegals and dead people.

Many of the people who voted for Obama are still waiting for him to make their house and car payments! Not a bright bunch.



Are you really that ignorant of what Jefferson and other founding fathers said about revolution? You say you are a teacher?

You said you are willing to hear "new" ideas, well here are some from over two hundred years ago

Jefferson;
"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."

Madison;
"Americans need not fear the federal government because
they enjoy the advantage of being armed, which you possess over
the people of almost every other nation."

",,,the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation...(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms."

Patrick Henry;
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."

I could go on and on.

What you say goes against what the founders said, who indeed said that the people must have the ready access to the implements of force to preserve their freedoms!

Do you have any idea at all of why we have a second amendment? You teach in schools, you evidently don't know or understand the intent of the second amendment, you are part of the problem!

Great post!!!!

 

[zeezee]

for those palin people out in nwfa land:

http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2010/04/palin_appearance_sells_out_in.html
excerpt:


She has managed to sell out a 750 seat venue @$250.00 a pop. In eugene, oregon!!
As a political force for the tea party movement she's pretty effective, at least as a fund raiser.
I believe that, elected or not, she will continue to be so for a few years anyway. Certainly more than the usual "15 minutes" of fame.
Now in reference to carrying at this event. It's eugene after all, so i would imagine enforcement will be attempting to disallow it.

go sarah palin!!!!!!

 

[zeezee]

Don't put your faith in the Tea Party, they will fail you. They were born out of a modern day tax protest. If you want to keep you Amendments then you should be supporting a Libertarian candidate.

Keep trying, maybe one of these days you will make the ballot. Better advice, join together with the rest of the conservatives in one party.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

RESTORATION...... NOT Revolution!!

The revolutionaries are in the white house and congress!

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I guess a typo on this site is a really big deal.

I thought it was pretty funny

 

[Blitzkrieg]

The conservative reactions make more sense to many of us than the left's ideas, left to the liberals we would have no second amendment, and no rights under the Constitution at all. You wouldn't be able to say what you just did in this forum because it wouldn't exist. Perhaps it's you who are asleep?

The left also wants speech crimes legislation, not limited merely to the 2nd amendment. They want to shut up the opposition, badly

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Keep trying, maybe one of these days you will make the ballot. Better advice, join together with the rest of the conservatives in one party.

Many libertarians are not conservative.. many are hippies, druggies and other undesirables who want their lifestyle legitimized as acceptable

 

[watcher]

Actually ZeeZee, it is hardly a convincing post. Partsproduction is a man who claims not to advocate violent revolution then he goes on to quote a string of comments all of which do, in the strongest terms, approve and encourage that revolution. It is hardly difficult to see where his ideas lie, at least at a subliminal level.

Our friend also has a strange concept of democracy - democracy allows idiots to vote. The vote of an idiot counts equally with the vote of a college professor or a housewife. We have two choices, reduce the franchise which is probably what most extremists would prefer, or educate the population. Educating the population is why we spend two years out of four years watching the pantomime of elections and why we spend VAST amounts of money on television advertising etc to mold opinions. Based on the quality of most TV attack advertisements it is easy to see why idiots remain idiots. Of course, I suspect that in this case "idiots" = "people who I disagree with" while "patriots" = ""my group".

Finally, I am not a teacher, never have been, but I am always ready to hear something new. Unfortunately I am not hearing much new coming from the rabid right.

 

[zeezee]

Actually ZeeZee, it is hardly a convincing post. Partsproduction is a man who claims not to advocate violent revolution then he goes on to quote a string of comments all of which do, in the strongest terms, approve and encourage that revolution. It is hardly difficult to see where his ideas lie, at least at a subliminal level.

Our friend also has a strange concept of democracy - democracy allows idiots to vote. The vote of an idiot counts equally with the vote of a college professor or a housewife. We have two choices, reduce the franchise which is probably what most extremists would prefer, or educate the population. Educating the population is why we spend two years out of four years watching the pantomime of elections and why we spend VAST amounts of money on television advertising etc to mold opinions. Based on the quality of most TV attack advertisements it is easy to see why idiots remain idiots. Of course, I suspect that in this case "idiots" = "people who I disagree with" while "patriots" = ""my group".

Finally, I am not a teacher, never have been, but I am always ready to hear something new. Unfortunately I am not hearing much new coming from the rabid right.

http://www.memorableplaces.com/m1garand/joinordie.html

Unite, Or Die.

 

[watcher]

I think Blitzkrieg's "big tent" philosophy is an umbrella.

 

[watcher]

Thanks ZeeZee.
You will not accept or believe this but I can agree to disagree with you on almost everything except the descent into armed rebellion. That way lies the destruction of the nation.

In the words of the old medical joke "the operation was a success but unfortunately the patient died". That is how I see the result of the revolution so many here seem to desire.