Tea Party organizers say "No guns!"

[zeezee]

I feel another locked thread coming on.



I told you I was confused. First, violence is never justified, by any party, as a way of changing a "democratically" elected government, the ballot box is the way to do this. Now, a government installed or extended by corruption is another matter.

This is a completely irresponsible statement and also short-sighted. First, we are a long way from needing to resort to violence. Second, some people, including myself, do not feel that the present government is actually doing anything that justifies violence. To put it plainly, if the rabid section of the community decides to resort to violence to remove a government elcted by the majority of US citizens then they will find me on the streets also - standing on the OTHER side of the barrier. I do not think I will be alone.

Changing the political system I will support but this should not be done at the expense of a second civil war.

Hmmm, let me start with quotes from one of our founders, and you can decide if he was inciting violence;

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. (has not tyranny arrived?)
Thomas Jefferson

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. (OH MY, violence)
Thomas Jefferson

Watcher, what side of the street would you align Mr. Thomas Jefferson?

And not doing anything that justifies violence? Our government? LOL! What about this health care bill that they have forced down Every AMERICANS throat? Next they are going to tell you, sorry watcher the only car you can buy is GM made, or the only light bulbs you can use are . . . . Wait they are doing that now! How much do you think OUR Founding Fathers would have taken before they rebelled? We have become a nation of sit on our hands and wait WIMPS rather than a nation of Patriots returning OUR COUNTRY to it's roots in the CONSTITUTION! Heck, most of us don't even vote! They are dividing and conquering us as we speak and here is the perfect example. There's a difference between 2nd Amendment people and TEA Party people. BULL CRAP!
Do I encourage violence leading to a second civil war? HECK NO! First we exhaust the power of voting by getting as many AMERICANS to vote as possible.

 

[watcher]

I will be with you on 2nd protection. I will be with you when all sensible avenues to create change have been exhausted.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. (has not tyranny arrived?)
Thomas Jefferson

I agree with the "last resort". Has tyranny arrived - I can tell you, as someone who has worked in some very shady parts of the World, we are nowhere even close to tyranny.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. (OH MY, violence)
Thomas Jefferson

Of course, Jefferson did not specify what made a patriot and what made a tyrant. This depends on personal viewpoint, mine is different from yours. For example, I see a suicide bomber as a patriot, you see him as a terrorist. I do not hate him less than you do, I just acknowledge that what you see depends on where you stand.

What about this health care bill that they have forced down Every AMERICANS throat? Next they are going to tell you, sorry watcher the only car you can buy is GM made, or the only light bulbs you can use are . . . . Wait they are doing that now! How much do you think OUR Founding Fathers would have taken before they rebelled? We have become a nation of sit on our hands and wait WIMPS rather than a nation of Patriots returning OUR COUNTRY to it's roots in the CONSTITUTION!

Comparative flea bites that can be corrected in the future do not justify civil war that will destroy our country once-and-for-all.

 

[zeezee]

I will be with you on 2nd protection. I will be with you when all sensible avenues to create change have been exhausted.

I agree with the "last resort". Has tyranny arrived - I can tell you, as someone who has worked in some very shady parts of the World, we are nowhere even close to tyranny.


Of course, Jefferson did not specify what made a patriot and what made a tyrant. This depends on personal viewpoint, mine is different from yours. For example, I see a suicide bomber as a patriot, you see him as a terrorist. I do not hate him less than you do, I just acknowledge that what you see depends on where you stand.


Comparative flea bites that can be corrected in the future do not justify civil war that will destroy our country once-and-for-all.

Yeah, your view of tyranny MUST be different than mine, are we there yet? How about as close as I ever thought the American Republic would get and pray it doesn't move one inch closer. I prefer we stop it now before tyranny is the rule rather than the exception.

Suicide bomber a patriot? OMG, you have got to be kidding me! How about a coward killing innocent women & children?

Flea bites that keep biting into my pay check in support of this socialist regime. And to close another quote from my favorite Constitutional author.
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson

 

[fingolfen]

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'.

... or did he just not have an option...

‘‘Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest.’’

— Mahatma Ghandi, "Gandhi, An Autobiography", page 446

 

[zeezee]

... or did he just not have an option...

Great point! I pray it never comes to that here.
God Bless AMERICA

 

[zeezee]

Maybe the one point everyone, Tea Party member of 2nd Amendment believer is that WE THE PEOPLE must remain armed and that goal can be accomplished by uniting behind the Constitution.
Thanks for your view point Watcher

 

[Bark]

I feel another locked thread coming on.



I told you I was confused. First, violence is never justified, by any party, as a way of changing a "democratically" elected government, the ballot box is the way to do this. Now, a government installed or extended by corruption is another matter.

This is a completely irresponsible statement and also short-sighted. First, we are a long way from needing to resort to violence. Second, some people, including myself, do not feel that the present government is actually doing anything that justifies violence. To put it plainly, if the rabid section of the community decides to resort to violence to remove a government elected by the majority of US citizens then they will find me on the streets also - standing on the OTHER side of the barrier. I do not think I will be alone.

Changing the political system I will support but this should not be done at the expense of a second civil war.

No, you will not be alone. I believe the vast majority of Americans will get very upset if a minority attempts to impose their will by violent means, myself incluced.

 

[Lloyd Braun]

support them
many are new to politics and have never felt the rath of the lame-stream media.
they are idealogical cousins to most of us, and conservative without ever knowing it untill now
always good to get normal people engaged in the political process

 

[zeezee]

No, you will not be alone. I believe the vast majority of Americans will get very upset if a minority attempts to impose their will by violent means, myself incluced.

Hmm, you mean like the 3% who decided we were best off ruling ourselves via the Constitution than under the king of englands rule? 3% of the populace joined the 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence and fought for and obtained our freedom. Guess you and many others should be wearing red coats.

 

[unionguy]

Well, Nov. '08 was a great example of what you get when unions are allowed to spend unchecked based on their membership.
I know more than one union member that is always pissed about the political contributions made in their name. Their alternative? Quit their job.
"Community organizations" are another entity that is allowed to work tirelessly on a candidates behalf, with few/no restrictions.
Balance politically isn't ALWAYS a bad thing.

Corporations outspend unions 14 to 1 in every presidential election cycle for the past 20-some years. So, it's hard for me to buy the "unions run the world" line.

They also have the alternative to elect new officers in their union, get involved with their candidate endorsement process, etc. Also, unions cannot spend union dues on FEDERAL candidates at least, those must all be voluntarily contributed dolllars. That's the law.

 

[zeezee]

Corporations outspend unions 14 to 1 in every presidential election cycle for the past 20-some years. So, it's hard for me to buy the "unions run the world" line.

They also have the alternative to elect new officers in their union, get involved with their candidate endorsement process, etc. Also, unions cannot spend union dues on FEDERAL candidates at least, those must all be voluntarily contributed dolllars. That's the law.

Of course we would expect to hear that from a loyal union guy.

 

[BroncoFan]

And how much was spent by the unions in support of 66 and 67 in Oregon?

 

[fingolfen]

Corporations outspend unions 14 to 1 in every presidential election cycle for the past 20-some years. So, it's hard for me to buy the "unions run the world" line.

They also have the alternative to elect new officers in their union, get involved with their candidate endorsement process, etc. Also, unions cannot spend union dues on FEDERAL candidates at least, those must all be voluntarily contributed dolllars. That's the law.

I'd love to see some references on that...

... I'd also like to see the breakdown by party of corporate support vs. union support... I think that would tell a fairly interesting story as well...

 

[Jamie6.5]

You're technically correct. Except for PACs. Its a shell game. The money still ends up in the candidate's pocket.
Nice try tho!

 

[Partsproduction]

What it says is: CODE OF CONDUCT FOR THE RALLY! Is this a Second Amendment Rally? No, this is a TEA Party Rally? And they have asked for you not to carry

When I go out there, I carry.

If you want to go unarmed good for you, I'm not against you in that. I choose to not allow myself to be unarmed for any reason if it can be avoided.

I think there should have been a caveat about this applying to open carry only, that's all. I won't be going this time. I also suspect that the organizers are not CCW people, and they have a right to be stupid or ignorant, but I don't because I know how things really are.

Go if you wish, but please talk to the organizers about the wisdom in concealed carry while you're there. There is no downside to concealed carry for a permit holder, none!

 

[Monkeyman]

Man you sure talk like a liberal because you don't know anything about the TEA Party but that the left lunatic fringed media has has been spoon feeding you. Before you poke fun at the TEA Party or the Republicans maybe you should get involved in your own corrupt liberal democrat whine group. "But I also hate all politicians and most people. So whatever. Enjoy your bread and circuses." From that statement alone I wouldn't want you around me or anyone I know. Go find yourself a cave.

+100. Whiner, never been to an event. To my eyes, as one who's been active in the events since last April, anyone who thinks this is a Republican "rebranding" is listening to too much NPR.

Wakey wakey, there's a BIG surprise coming. . .

 

[Monkeyman]

+1. The recent Supreme Court decision on elections giving corporations unlimited spending on them is a massive threat to ALL our freedoms. I wish our politicians had to wear NASCAR style suits with patches from their sponsors all the time.

Corporate spending=BAD

Union corruption of DC=PROGRESS FOR THE LITTLE GUY.

Give me a break.

 

[zeezee]

I will be with you on 2nd protection. I will be with you when all sensible avenues to create change have been exhausted.

I agree with the "last resort". Has tyranny arrived - I can tell you, as someone who has worked in some very shady parts of the World, we are nowhere even close to tyranny.


Of course, Jefferson did not specify what made a patriot and what made a tyrant. This depends on personal viewpoint, mine is different from yours. For example, I see a suicide bomber as a patriot, you see him as a terrorist. I do not hate him less than you do, I just acknowledge that what you see depends on where you stand.


Comparative flea bites that can be corrected in the future do not justify civil war that will destroy our country once-and-for-all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAtozFg66Sc&feature=player_embedded

 

[motoman98]

Hummm, vigorous political discussion, here!
But, there IS a looming danger to our Country and our rights. Not the Tea Party or supporters of our Constitution; but this immigration/amnestly thing comming down the road from the Congress.
Imagine 20 to 30 million new voters, beholden to the politicians that legalized them.
The opposition party will be marginalized forever.
Big Brother from "1984" will be above us all...

 

[Doubletap]

Nothing against the Tea Party groups..but I don't go ANYWHERE my weapon can't go with me.. Simple as that..