Health Care reform was an extremely emotional bill.
The people that lost are distraught and highly emotional.
You can't threaten the President of the United States, however.
-John
Before I get my gun (via the 2nd amendment), I'd rather see states exercise their rights ynder the constitution. "all other rights are reserved to the poeple, or the state."
That's not even an amendment.
-John
Andrew Breitbart has had a $10,000 reward for anyone who can show a video, photo etc of a tea party person calling names. No takers so far of course. It was a stunt.
He welcomes us to pick through his piles of shit looking for a kernel of corn.
Hey!
Why not?
The government uses threats against the people all of the time.
Read up on the history of the 2nd amendment and its original intent in the mind of the framers.
Health Care reform was an extremely emotional bill.
The people that lost are distraught and highly emotional.
You can't threaten the President of the United States, however.
So original, poignant, and concise."I'm all for spilling the blood of a few "progressives". That's some cleansing I hope we can take care of in the near future."
So original, poignant, and concise.
The main problem being that progressives aren't the ones talking about a violent uprising. Conservatives/tea partiers are.
You'll find that most of us on the left are pacifists. If any blood is spilt, it will be at the hands of our well-trained police and military forces doing their jobs to protect the American public from a small fringe lunatic right wing.
"I'm all for spilling the blood of a few "progressives". That's some cleansing I hope we can take care of in the near future."
And Tab created an entire thread advocating violence as the next step for recourse for the right wing. He's still around. How is that selective vision working for you?Yeah, except YOU posted that in the other thread. YOU are advocating killing "tea partiers" and somehow getting away with it. But yeah, advocating killing isn't something you shitbag libera...uh I mean "progressives" do...
Could someone PM on how to enable the ignore function here. I've had as much as I can stand of this clown. He probably thinks the quote marks (unattributed quote) let him off the hook somehow.
And Tab created an entire thread advocating violence as the next step for recourse for the right wing. He's still around. How is that selective vision working for you?
I don't get it. Are you guys for violence, or against it? Or maybe you're just for it, as long as nobody on the right gets hurt or killed? Maybe tea partiers should stick to cutting propane lines and running away before anybody sees them.
Ah yes, the face-less/soul-less government. We can advocate violence against them without recourse. Nevermind the fact that the government, and their supporters, are regular people like you and me.1st off calling for an uprising against a heavy handed gov't is one thing - calling for the blood spilling of "tea partiers" is quite another. You know that, yet you continue to try to play ignorant.
The Constitution is up for interpretation, amendment, etc. I don't think HCR damaged our Constitution, and you do. That doesn't mean you're justified in your violence.I am for the Constitution. The Constitution must be protected. The last resort for it's protection may have to be an uprising against the gov't that is ignoring the Constitution.
No, I'm pretty sure that 99.999% of the threats of violence after the HCR bill passed have been from the right wing. It's just very interesting how your panties got wadded after a single mention of tea partiers getting hurt. You can dish it out, but can't swallow your own medicine?So it really should be YOU answering your question since it is YOU who called for blood spilling...
Ah yes, the face-less/soul-less government. We can advocate violence against them without recourse. Nevermind the fact that the government, and their supporters, are regular people like you and me.
What are your thoughts on the Oklahoma City bombing? It was a federal building, housing 550 federal employees who had their blood spilt in April 1995 when someone decided violence was the only recourse against the "heavy handed gov't". Is that the kind of uprising you're okay with CAD?
The Constitution is up for interpretation, amendment, etc. I don't think HCR damaged our Constitution, and you do. That doesn't mean you're justified in your violence.
No, I'm pretty sure that 99.999% of the threats of violence after the HCR bill passed have been from the right wing. It's just very interesting how your panties got wadded after a single mention of tea partiers getting hurt. You can dish it out, but can't swallow your own medicine?
Did you think we were just going to allow the right wing to violently assault this country without a response?
There's no rhyme or reason for these butt sore losers.Wait so spending trillions on a fake war and sending our own red blooded American's off to die for lies was A OK.
Spending that money domestically to save red blooded American's is cause for a revolution.
Got it!
What you're talking about is removing lawfully elected officials by physical force, completely bypassing the democratic process. And the chances of that happening without violence are zero. Bloodless coups aren't unheard of, but require overwhelming numbers from the opposition...something your side isn't even close to having (even within your own ranks).I'm not advocating "violence" like you are. I'm talking revolution/overthrow/removal/etc with the last resort of it being violent(which will likely come from the gov't itself first anyway).
Speaking of nutjobs, what do you call a person who advocates a revolution (undoubtedly a violent one) because our government is reforming our broken system of health care?OKC was not an uprising - it was domestic terrorism by a nutjob or two. If you suggest that an uprising to PROTECT our nation from an abusive gov't is the same as OKC then you are a lost cause(which you basically are at this point anyway).
What you're talking about is removing lawfully elected officials by physical force, completely bypassing the democratic process. And the chances of that happening without violence are zero. Bloodless coups aren't unheard of, but require overwhelming numbers from the opposition...something your side isn't even close to having (even within your own ranks).
Speaking of nutjobs, what do you call a person who advocates a revolution (undoubtedly a violent one) because our government is reforming our broken system of health care?