RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing?

RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 9:05:09 AM)
ah, but you have it. he didn't. we know how much of everything we had because we sold it to him.

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 9:18:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Yanno, perhaps it dates me, but I heard so much crap about "The Revolution" from the left when I was growing up, that I find it really disingenuous of the lefties on this board to suddenly discover that talk of revolution somehow is so horrible. Firm Can't let this one go...perhaps because it dates me.Revolution in the 60's,save for fringe radical movements,amounted to peaceful,though noisy and discordant exercise of free speech and free assembly.There were no mainstream candidates discussing the possible overthrow,by violent means,of the gov't should an election not go their way. There was dissatisfaction with authority with war and with deceit.....but save for some nuts(the weatherman et al) no one was calling for armed insurrection.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 2:24:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Yanno, perhaps it dates me, but I heard so much crap about "The Revolution" from the left when I was growing up, that I find it really disingenuous of the lefties on this board to suddenly discover that talk of revolution somehow is so horrible. Firm Can't let this one go...perhaps because it dates me.Revolution in the 60's,save for fringe radical movements,amounted to peaceful,though noisy and discordant exercise of free speech and free assembly.There were no mainstream candidates discussing the possible overthrow,by violent means,of the gov't should an election not go their way. There was dissatisfaction with authority with war and with deceit.....but save for some nuts(the weatherman et al) no one was calling for armed insurrection. So, the weatherman, et al, were just "calling" for armed insurrection? Firm

jlf1961 -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 2:33:54 PM)
No, the weather underground were not just calling for armed rebellion, they actually had a bombing campaign. However, the main difference is the simple fact that they did not care how the election went, whereas these particular right wing conservative candidates are calling for armed rebellion if the election does not go their way.

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 2:44:30 PM)
The weatherman were a fringe criminal group...not candidates threatening dire circumstances if the electorate rejects them and their policies....the analogy is assinine on its face....and it suprises me that you are offering it.

rulemylife -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 2:53:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY Yanno, perhaps it dates me, but I heard so much crap about "The Revolution" from the left when I was growing up, that I find it really disingenuous of the lefties on this board to suddenly discover that talk of revolution somehow is so horrible. Firm Yanno, I'm really getting sick of conservatives who defend this nonsense based on "they did it first" childishness.

truckinslave -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 4:53:41 PM)
quote: Yanno, I'm really getting sick of conservatives who defend this nonsense based on "they did it first" childishness. You've got that wrong as well. Both the candidate and the 60s radicals were well within their 1st Amendment rights. As Firm knows. He was decrying the libs, not the speech- any speech. If I understood him.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 6:02:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: Yanno, I'm really getting sick of conservatives who defend this nonsense based on "they did it first" childishness. You've got that wrong as well. Both the candidate and the 60s radicals were well within their 1st Amendment rights. As Firm knows. He was decrying the libs, not the speech- any speech. If I understood him. You do. Firm

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 6:09:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u The weatherman were a fringe criminal group...not candidates threatening dire circumstances if the electorate rejects them and their policies....the analogy is assinine on its face....and it suprises me that you are offering it. I didn't make the analogy. You brought the weathermen up. There were many others. How many ROTC buildings were bombed or burned? There was plenty of violence and threats of violence, all through that period. But that was then, and this is now. When a figure from the right even slighly alludes to the facts of American history, and the "right of revolt", a bunch of lefties get their panties all in a wad and start yelling "traitor!", "sedition!" "arrest the bastard!" (not you specifically, mike). I find this humorous, actually. A faint acknowledgment of the possibility, versus the historical facts of actually doing it, and its the right that's nuts? Don't think so. I do think that the left should be worried though. When the normal "law and order" parts of the American people start muttering about taking up arms, then lefties truly do have something to worry about: the loss of any creditability, and the loss of elections and their power in the social and governmental structure. Firm

Icarys -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 6:28:41 PM)
Throughout history men have stood up against what they saw as abuses and no doubt negative words were used against them as well. This is and will be no different if it were to ever happen. I personally don't think change will come till something large happens...be it a peaceful march to the white-house steps or an armed one. My bet though is it'll take more than a 1,000,000 people holding hands and passing out flowers to get anything done. This isn't the sixties and the powers that be would likely try to promise to do what needs to be done without actually doing it..Yanno..business as usual. BTW...I'm for whatever side actually implements change and at this point..by whatever means works.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 6:34:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys Throughout history men have stood up against what they saw as abuses and no doubt negative words were used against them as well. This is and will be no different if it were to ever happen. I personally don't think change will come till something large happens...be it a peaceful march to the white-house steps or an armed one. My bet though is it'll take more than a 1,000,000 people holding hands and passing out flowers to get anything done. This isn't the sixties and the powers that be would likely try to promise to do what needs to be done without actually doing it..Yanno..business as usual. BTW...I'm for whatever side actually implements change and at this point..by whatever means works. Excellent post, Icarys. I also think it places you in the group that I belong to: anticipating yet dreading some major change in society or combination of events that will give a solid impetus to just such dissatisfaction that it will likely cause armed insurrection. That doesn't mean encouraging, or hoping, btw, (for the forum members who like to jump up and condemn at the slightly hint of something dark). Firm

thornhappy -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 6:54:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls ...our so called commander in chief gave away nuclear secrets to the Soviets. If you or I had done that, we would have been executed for treason a few decades ago, and today we would have been locked up and the key thrown away. Which one and how?

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 8:05:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u The weatherman were a fringe criminal group...not candidates threatening dire circumstances if the electorate rejects them and their policies....the analogy is assinine on its face....and it suprises me that you are offering it. I didn't make the analogy. You brought the weathermen up. There were many others. How many ROTC buildings were bombed or burned? There was plenty of violence and threats of violence, all through that period. But that was then, and this is now. When a figure from the right even slighly alludes to the facts of American history, and the "right of revolt", a bunch of lefties get their panties all in a wad and start yelling "traitor!", "sedition!" "arrest the bastard!" (not you specifically, mike). I find this humorous, actually. A faint acknowledgment of the possibility, versus the historical facts of actually doing it, and its the right that's nuts? Don't think so. I do think that the left should be worried though. When the normal "law and order" parts of the American people start muttering about taking up arms, then lefties truly do have something to worry about: the loss of any creditability, and the loss of elections and their power in the social and governmental structure. Firm No Firm ,the reason the analogy sucks (and I didn't look at it as specific to the Weathermen)is because the groupd and activities that you are using as a referrence point were not,never were,represenative of the left.They were fringe radical groups....criminals in the final analyisis,And rejected by the actual left. What we are seeing here are actual right-wing candidates hinting that absent a political correction,a correction as per their views,the Republic is in danger of armed rebellion. It isn't,as far as I'm concerned ,a guestion of illegality....to me that is a foregone conclusion.It is that the mainstream right doesn't reject these loons !

truckinslave -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 8:14:47 PM)
quote: What we are seeing here are actual right-wing candidates hinting that absent a political correction,a correction as per their views,the Republic is in danger of armed rebellion. Violence has always been on the table (see: Second Amendment) You're aware that one of the States has issued a call for a Constitutional Convention?? People are angry. Shit happens when people get angry enough.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 8:15:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u No Firm ,the reason the analogy sucks (and I didn't look at it as specific to the Weathermen)is because the groupd and activities that you are using as a referrence point were not,never were,represenative of the left.They were fringe radical groups....criminals in the final analyisis,And rejected by the actual left. What we are seeing here are actual right-wing candidates hinting that absent a political correction,a correction as per their views,the Republic is in danger of armed rebellion. It isn't,as far as I'm concerned ,a guestion of illegality....to me that is a foregone conclusion.It is that the mainstream right doesn't reject these loons ! So, I guess that is why our current President has denounced the Weathermen and their actions? Firm

Hippiekinkster -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 8:22:46 PM)
He has? Interesting.

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 9:14:36 PM)
There is no imperative to denounce the weatherman and their actions....one does not need to attest to their basic belief that criminality is a bad thing....the weatherman have no relevance here.....He has also failed to specifically denounc the Lindberg kidnapping,but one assumes he would ,were it relevant!

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 9:21:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u There is no imperative to denounce the weatherman and their actions....one does not need to attest to their basic belief that criminality is a bad thing....the weatherman have no relevance here.....He has also failed to specifically denounc the Lindberg kidnapping,but one assumes he would ,were it relevant! But he doesn't have Bruno Hauptmann as a friend and neighbor, and arguably the ghost writer of one of his books. Firm

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 9:30:36 PM)
No,that's true...but the neighbor you are referring to commited his crimes when Obama was still in short pants..in other words not relevant.

FirmhandKY -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/23/2010 9:35:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u No,that's true...but the neighbor you are referring to commited his crimes when Obama was still in short pants..in other words not relevant. Not relevant? mike, mike, mike ... it's entirely relevant. What would you think the reaction would be from the left, if Bush had had a close friend and neighbor who was a known bomber and white supremacist and who had bombed blacks in the South during the Civil Rights movement, and who had never denounced his actions? In fact, who claimed it was entirely justified? The outrage from the left would have been deafening, wouldn't it? Firm

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875