This post is a felony

Sindawe

March 5, 2005, 11:36 PM

Don't just bitch, propose some kind of alternative to your legislators. Ask for something that completely repeals the current crop of campaign finance laws, and starts over. Representation by lottery/consription. Take all the campaigning and stuff out of the equation.

* KNOCK KNOCK KNOCK *

"Yes? May I help you?"

"Mr. Joe Six-pack?"

"Yes?.."

"We are from the Government. You have been selected to serve in Congress -"

"Wha???"

"- for the next three years. You have 30 minutes to set your affairs in order. Your stipend for the family is $xxxxx.xx, tax free. Your compensation at the end of service is $$xxx,xxx.xx at the end of service. Here is your Lime green
Congressional jumpsuit, here is the key to your Congressional apartment. We'll wait in the car."

"NOW WAIT JUST A GOSH DARN MIN-"

"If you'd rather, you may opt for Judical Conscription, where there the term of service is 10 years, and at the end of service you will be subject to judgement of your peers as to fitness of service and adherence to the U.S. Constitution in your rulings. If I were you, I'd take Congress over Judgeship. Congress-critters can only be scorned. Judges who displease the populace have been hanged."

"Oh, yea, thats right. We did the Judge McFool last year.....I'll see you fellows at the car."

Fletchette

March 5, 2005, 11:37 PM

Quote:
Much to the chagrin and confoundation of many a more "PC" dweller of the THR I'll say it: Yes, Claire, it's time and past it.

Empty threats and ineffectual chest beating cause me neither chagrin nor "confoundation". They simply bore me.

McCain-Feingold sucks -- it needs to go -- but the only thing you tough guys can think to do is make violent innuendos that (thankfully) you'll never follow through on. Pathetic. Simply pathetic.

I recognize your opinion. However, it seems to me that when people actually do decide to "follow through" they receive a bunch of criticism and are frequently chastized as "rambos" (look at all the criticism the Minuteman Project is getting for "following through").

I, for one, think *something* needs to be done, something other than citizens turning on each other.

Fletchette

March 5, 2005, 11:39 PM

I think it's the fatal flaw of the Constitution. If the people had a mechanism to bring charges against such traitors they'd think a little more about what they were doing before introducing something like this, or the NFA, or any of the others we've let slip by and accepted in the last 200 years.

I am of the opinion that such a mechanism already exists in the Constitution.

nico

March 6, 2005, 12:49 AM

The amazing thing is there are plenty of democrats, independents, and republicans who would vote for McCain in a general election. :uhoh:

edit: personally, I'd like to see how they could possibly pull this off without a significant amount of the public realizing what's going on and complaining about the trampling of their rights. If this happens, I'll be sure to put links to the websites of whatever candidate I support in my aim profile as well as the signatures on all the message boards I post on.

2nd Amendment

March 6, 2005, 02:13 AM

Empty threats and ineffectual chest beating cause me neither chagrin nor "confoundation". They simply bore me.

McCain-Feingold sucks -- it needs to go -- but the only thing you tough guys can think to do is make violent innuendos that (thankfully) you'll never follow through on. Pathetic. Simply pathetic.

Terribly humorous.

First off, show the "threat". Second, please tell us how you know whether it is "empty" or not. Then tell us how it is people like you can go from accusing anyone who speaks more bluntly than you have the character to do of being tough or "pathetic", to dismissing those who finally do take a stand with the various epithets you and yours use.

The ballot box is an empty gesture at this point. We are slowly being stifled from a variety of directions. Land rights, the 1st Amendment, the 2nd, etc. At what point will you take a stand? Or will you still be casting your vote and writing your congress-critter long after it is obvious to even the most jaded TV watching beer gut that it's pointless.

We're in trouble. At some point we either have to intimidate the thugs in government enough to believe we have had enough or we'll actually have to do it. Which is it you prefer? Or would you just rather not think about it and let your kids or grandkids deal with it? Personally I prefer a little bloodless intimidation, but I don't have a terrible problem with carrying it through. Whichever, we will have to handle it sooner or later. This shrinking-violet attitude of so many is less than useless. THAT is what is pathetic.

R.H. Lee

March 6, 2005, 12:31 PM

McCain-Feingold sucks -- it needs to go -- but the only thing you tough guys can think to do is make violent innuendos that (thankfully) you'll never follow through on. Pathetic. Simply pathetic.
OK. We'll sign a strongly worded petition first. :p

Sam

March 6, 2005, 01:02 PM

Anybody remember these lines?

"and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

207 degrees and on the rise.

Sam

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 01:08 PM

2nd Amendment: First off, show the "threat". :rolleyes: I've read Claire's essay. She says it's not time yet to take arms against the government. You say, "Claire, it's time and past it." Translation: You say it's time to take up arms against the governemnt.2nd Amendment: Second, please tell us how you know whether it is "empty" or not. You say it's time to take up arms against the governement, but you haven't, have you? Sounds empty to me.2nd Amendment: Then tell us how it is people like you can go from accusing anyone who speaks more bluntly than you have the character to do of being tough or "pathetic", to dismissing those who finally do take a stand with the various epithets you and yours use.Well, I never criticized people who take a stand. :rolleyes: Rather, I criticized people who make empty innuedos on the internet about violent rebellion. You guys are never going to follow through on your childish fantasies about a shooting war with "da gubmint." So stop strutting around pretending like you will. It's pathetic and tedious. It's boring and embarrasing.RileyMC: OK. We'll sign a strongly worded petition first.As useless as that might be, it would be a thousand times more effective than the the empty tough-guy fantasies we get on gun boards.

Wildalaska

March 6, 2005, 01:17 PM

Cuchulain :D

WildrightonAlaska

Art Eatman

March 6, 2005, 01:43 PM

Aw, Cuchulain, you're just an ol' meanie, trying to take the fun out of Internet harumphing.

Face it: The CFR redounds to the benefit of the mass media, who would band together to put the negative spin against the "strongly worded petition".

And, what with the new rules, the NFL, Nascar and F1 aren't near as much fun to watch, so we all need to find something worthwhile to do on a Sunday afternoon.

A few million folks, fed up and bored with the hassles of daily life and all that could just go on out and Do Something, two percent of which might be useful. After all, the only mammalian life form on the planet of which we have a surplus is Homo Sap, and every little bit helps...

You should pardon my occasionally-warped sense of humor; it's always a problem when my arthritis gets to biting...

Art

oldfart

March 6, 2005, 01:54 PM

At the beginning of a great national change, the patriot is a scarce man: scorned, ridiculed and forgotten. When his cause succeeds, however, all men will join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot. Mark Twain (1835 - 1910)

This says it all... I can't add anything worthwhile.

13A

March 6, 2005, 02:00 PM

Put water in pot. Put frog in water in pot. Apply heat to pot. Observe frog's reaction.

0007

March 6, 2005, 02:29 PM

Sindawe - :D :D :D

R.H. Lee

March 6, 2005, 02:59 PM

I'm convinced. Why even talk of action when you can litigate? The FF would be soooo proud. :rolleyes:

Brian Dale

March 6, 2005, 03:01 PM

1) Send Feingold and The Manchur... I mean "McCain" back into the private sector at the next opportunity.

2) the only thing you tough guys can think to do ...I disagree.

3) It's time to ramp up the level of practice. Spend the time between now and the next "gag-order period" writing, in public, and then keep doing what's protected by the First Amendment in spite of Congress having passed something stupid, wrong, illegal and unenforceable (that would be the McCain-Feingold Abomination, in case I've been vague).

4) Repeating, for clarity:
a. Vote against McCain
b. Vote against Feingold
c. Vote against their supporters in this travesty

5) Lather, rinse, repeat whenever and wherever it comes up again.

Sindawe, I love it. :D

Igloodude

March 6, 2005, 03:28 PM

Wasn't Feingold the one we were heaping praises upon in a different thread discussing the *ahem* merits of the "USA-PATRIOT Act"?

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 05:02 PM

RileyMc: I'm convinced. Why even talk of action when you can litigate? The FF would be soooo proud. Please tell me you don't actually think that the FF would be impressed by the empty innuendos of violence made by a bunch of do-nothing keyboard "patriots." :scrutiny: Happy Bob: I disagree.Hey! No fair coming in after the fact and bringing some reasonable discussion to the matter. :D

Thanks. :) Art Eatman: Aw, Cuchulain, you're just an ol' meanie, trying to take the fun out of Internet harumphing. The problem is that they actually believe their adolescent fantasies. It's sad and funny at the same time.

DRZinn

March 6, 2005, 05:42 PM

Yes, an armed revolution is justified. It was justified the very first time a law was passed that violated the rights of the people, whether or not it violated some document that sets out the riles for governing a country. It was justified every one of the thousands of times a similar law has been passed in the many years since. It is still justified.

What we have now is a risk/benefit analysis. We have not yet reached the point where an individual rising up against the government would be joined by enough others to be able to make a difference. That individual would be jailed and ridiculed, and the story told would be that of a lunatic on a "shooting rampage." Or perhaps a lunatic in an armored bulldozer. He (or she!) would accomplish nothing, and lose everything, and the status quo would remain entirely unchanged. Except that that incident along with a thousand others would register in the consciousness of liberty-minded people everywhere. And the next time, and the next time, and the next, until some magical point of saturation is reached, and the next individual that rises up to protect his rights against an unjust government finds he has started something....

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 06:01 PM

Hey Art Eatman! See what I mean?

Otherguy Overby

March 6, 2005, 06:02 PM

DocZinn:
I'd say the water is about 205 degrees....

Wellllll, that's at standard sea level air pressure: 14.7 pounds per sq inch.

Around sea level pressure drops about 1 inch per thousand feet of altitude.

The boiling point of water varies about 3 degrees per pound of pressure. IOW, a 2 pound radiator cap would get you about a 218 boiling point, but we are going the other way.

So, Doc, if you aren't sitting around at sea level drinking margaritas, and instead are somewhere at a couple of thousand feet of elevation, the water you are in is already bubbling.

PromptCritical

March 6, 2005, 06:04 PM

Has any part of the MSM reported on this "Blogger Insurrection" yet? I would expect they won't. Two reasons for this: Press seems to be pretty much exempt from the law and, bloggers are stealing the thunder from them. Most news outlets would be overjoyed if blogs are shut down. At least the VRWC and barking moonbats can agree on something.

2nd Amendment

March 6, 2005, 06:32 PM

I've read Claire's essay. She says it's not time yet to take arms against the government. You say, "Claire, it's time and past it." Translation: You say it's time to take up arms against the governemnt.

I had assumed the intent of my question was so painfully obvious it couldn't be missed. Your tortured logic above once again shows me I should never assume.

I voiced an opinion. I believe it is past time. A threat would be "I am going to..." One is opinion, the other a threat. You do grasp the difference, correct? This is why I asked you to show the threat, thinking you'd withdraw the slur. Instead you simply assign your own meanings to other's statements.

You say it's time to take up arms against the governement, but you haven't, have you? Sounds empty to me.

Baseless assumption almost unworthy of comment. You don't know me nor do you know anything about me. You are, however, full of assumptions designed to prop up your...less than shining courage.

No, what I have done is taken up pen and paper and internet. I've dispensed with a drivers license as well as plates. I don't use credit cards nor do I use banks. And I've managed to build a couple reasonably successful businesses and a nice home in the process. In short, I don't play their game. Have I taken up arms? No, nor will I be the first to run out, alone, and make a media article for you and yours to cluck over. OTOH when a credible figure or movement arises I'll be there and in the meantime I'll be agitating to start one. Where will you be? What are you doing?

Well, I never criticized people who take a stand. Rather, I criticized people who make empty innuedos on the internet about violent rebellion. You guys are never going to follow through on your childish fantasies about a shooting war with "da gubmint." So stop strutting around pretending like you will. It's pathetic and tedious. It's boring and embarrasing.

The only thing boring and embarrassing is people such as yourself. YOU will never lift a finger and thus you assume nobody else will. You can comfort yourself with the thought that, indeed, most people are like you. It's better than leaping up in public to condemn others for the failings you undoubtedly see in yourself. It also gets tiring to have some internet entity call me childish. I listed my involvements and actions to some other troll the last time some similar comment was made here. To the best of my knowledge he never replied. Would you care to also compare a list of which of us "does" more?

As useless as that might be, it would be a thousand times more effective than the the empty tough-guy fantasies we get on gun boards.

Really? And again you know this how? Crystal Ball? Second Sight? Tea Leaves? You know nothing except that YOU will (probably) never be effective. Stop branding everyone else with your personal limitations.

molonlabe

March 6, 2005, 06:55 PM

My hat is off to you 2nd Amendment

bigjim

March 6, 2005, 07:09 PM

Dang talk about about getting your ass handed to you on a plater....

Way to go 2a. That was a knock out.

DRZinn

March 6, 2005, 07:14 PM

Hey Art Eatman! See what I mean?And you'll be the one calling them all lunatics. Until they succeed.

R.H. Lee

March 6, 2005, 07:43 PM

Please tell me you don't actually think that the FF would be impressed by the empty innuendos of violence made by a bunch of do-nothing keyboard "patriots." You're the guy who just wanted to pay the extra King George tax and hand over his musket back in 1775. With guys like you in charge we'd all be subjects. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

P95Carry

March 6, 2005, 07:44 PM

Guys - don't let ''personals'' get any stronger - we have some good stuff here and be a shame to shut it down.

Always try and fight the argument :)

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 07:49 PM

2nd Amdendment: I voiced an opinion. I believe it is past time. A threat would be "I am going to..." One is opinion, the other a threat. You do grasp the difference, correct?Thank you for admitting that your rantings are a bunch of do-nothing chest beating. You talk about how it's time to take up arms, but you won't do it. It's amazing how quick you hightail it away from your tough talk about "it's time and past it."

You wanted us to think you were a tough rebel type, but as soon as your bluff is called, you retreat to "I voiced an opinion."

Wait, I recognize you now. You're the guy who won the bronze at Athens in the 100-meter backpedal, aren't you.Instead you simply assign your own meanings to other's statements. Actually, I suggested that you were simply blowing smoke out your arse, and that the "threat" wasn't really a threat at all, but an empty threat ... an empty innuendo. You've proven that true by backpedaling to "I voiced an opinion."Me: You say it's time to take up arms against the governement, but you haven't, have you? Sounds empty to me.2nd Amdendment: Baseless assumption almost unworthy of comment.
<snip>
Have I taken up arms? NoHmm? I said you hadn't taken up arms. You now admit that you haven't taken up arms. Apparently, it wasn't a baseless assumption on my part after all.nor will I be the first to run out Yep, just like all the other keyboard "patriots" -- you're in a constant circling pattern, waiting for someone else to move first, for the big moment, and then, by golly, you'll be right behind them. Meanwhile, you an your buddies puff yourself up with fantasies about your hero role the big rebellion. It's always just around the corner. Just one more line in the sand. Just gotta convince a few more people to act. Then it'll happen. Tomorrow. Tomorrow. Tomorrow. The rebellion will come out tomorrow. You can bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow, we will fight. Just thinking about tomorrow, drives away the jackboots and the UN, til there's none ... Tomorrow. Tomorrow. I love ya, tomorrow. You're always a dayyyyyy aaaaaaaa-wayyyyyyy.I've dispensed with a drivers license as well as plates. I don't use credit cards nor do I use banks. Who cares? :rolleyes: I listed my involvements and actions to some other troll the last time some similar comment was made here. Hey, if you actually do some worthwhile activities for the RKBA, good for you. Kudos. Seriously.

That doesn't make it any less silly for you to make empty threats (er, just opinions) about how its time to take up arms against the government.

You won't take up arms. So stop boring us with it. And stop deluding yourself about it.

P95Carry

March 6, 2005, 07:55 PM

I can see this getting over heated so - cool it - please.

We have two main camps - and I doubt agreement per se is possible so, agree if you can to differ before the fight spills too far. I can see where this might go!!

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 07:57 PM

P95Carry: we have some good stuff here No we don't. We had a bunch of empty innuendos about how it's time to take up arms. Now we have a backpedal position about that being just an opinion.

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 08:00 PM

P95Carry: I can see this getting over heated so - cool it - please. Eh, I'm done. I'm bored with it.

... and I've been laughing all the way. I'd hardly call that "heated." ;)

R.H. Lee

March 6, 2005, 08:08 PM

cuchulainn, the simple fact is that some of us just disagree with you. Some of us love freedom more than we love life and are not willing to trade the former for the latter. That is the salient point. Whether or not you think we'll ever take up arms is irrelevant, and not something we're required to prove to you. You are entitled to your opinion, but that entitlement does not bind us to your requirements.

P95Carry

March 6, 2005, 08:10 PM

''Heated'' is all relative - suffice it to say that from warm to hot to boiling can happen real quick. That is all. It was getting well warm.

''Good stuff'' means ... opinions that thrash out arguments .. and sure as heck I do not agree with all sides - but I remain a neutral. There is still value in debate, even if you feel otherwise. Maybe the observer gains more than the participants (combatants? LOL)

spacemanspiff

March 6, 2005, 08:11 PM

where do i sign up for this 'keyboard patriot' thing?

i hear its only one weekend a month i gotta serve. :neener:

i think what cuchlain is saying is that if we are indeed at a point and time where action should be taken, it should be taken by those who are discreet enough to NOT blab about it on the internet.

some things are better left done, and never discussed.
edit - but that means that such action is to be taken by those humble enough to not want to be labeled 'hero' or whatever.

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 08:21 PM

RileyMC: That is the salient point. Whether or not you think we'll ever take up arms is irrelevant, and not something we're required to prove to you. You are entitled to your opinion, but that entitlement does not bind us to your requirements. I never asked anyone to prove anything. I never required anything of anyone. I merely observed that "it's time and past it" was nothing but a bunch of empty strutting. I think we've seen that it is -- "I voiced an opinion".

Wait! I said I was done. Yeah, I couldn't resist.
spacemanspiff: i think what cuchlain is saying is that if we are indeed at a point and time where action should be taken, it should be taken by those who are discreet enough to NOT blab about it on the internet. :) No, spiff, I'm just bored to tears with the keyboard "patriots." It simply gets so tedious reading their empty bravado that I have to swat them every once in awhile.

But you do make a good point. Real rebels -- if they are out there -- aren't stupid enough to make a spectacle of themselves.

spartacus2002

March 6, 2005, 08:53 PM

Real rebels -- if they are out there -- aren't stupid enough to make a spectacle of themselves.

Sometimes a spectacle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_tea_party) is what is needed to get people off their butts and in motion. Who is to say that all keyboard commandos aren't the real thing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sons_of_Liberty)?

After all, somebody (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Adams) has to take a public stand to get people thinking, and it doesn't require an act of violence to do that.

2nd Amendment

March 6, 2005, 09:02 PM

So what is it you want, cuchulainn? Do you want to fix things before an armed revolt? Or do you just want people to run out shooting? Or do you prefer the idea of the lone gunman, getting himself picked off to no effect, while the media brands him a wacko or terrorist and you get to sit back and point at the "nut"?

I'm not going to be creating a movement. I don't have the charisma to attract followers. At least not enough. That's left for bigger men than me. But it IS past time, and there's not a damn thing wrong with stepping up and saying so. If enough people would go just that far that might be enough in and of itself. but there will always be people to call them names and dismiss them. Probably even if thy numbered in the millions.

There's no pleasing some people. If you do nothing you're part of the problem. If you do something you're part of the problem. If you discuss what you believe you're part of the problem. Exactly what IS it you want done? And exactly how do you expect it to be accomplished if nobody talks about it? Shall we all mutter to our own little closed groups? And if so then what purpose does the internet, or any other means of communication, serve?

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 09:08 PM

Sometimes a spectacle is what is needed to get people off their butts and in motion. Who is to say that all keyboard commandos aren't the real thing? No offense, but the keyboard "patriots" are nothing like the Sons of Liberty or Sam Adams, and their peakcock-like strutting is nothing like the Boston Tea Party. (Yeah, I looked at your links.) They aren't taking chances with their lives. They're making empty threats (er, just opinions) that they backpedal away from as soon as someone calls their bluff (just opinion, not a threat).

Please stop insulting the founding fathers by comparing them to these backpedallers.

After all, somebody has to take a public stand to get people thinking, and it doesn't require an act of violence to do that. No, it doesn't require an act of violence. It also doesn't require empty threats (er, just opinions) about violence.

Wait, I said I was done. Nope, couldn't resist again.

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 09:29 PM

2nd Amendment: So what is it you want, cuchulainn? I want you to spare us the silly, empty bravado. You think you're speaking out, but you aren't doing anything effective. You aren't changing any minds. You aren't rallying anyone to any cause. You aren't making people think. You sure as heck aren't making any "gubmint" agents rethink their actions.

You seem like you have a desire to do something effective. Then do it.

Talking about rebellion doesn't do anything. Nothing. I know it feels good, but it doesn't do anything.

Have a little discipline. Stop undermining your message to the fence sitters. They aren't impressed with talk of taking up arms. They don't say, "Ooh, I was on the fence about this campaign finance stuff, but that 2nd Amendment guy made some innuendos about violent rebellion. Golly, I guess I better rethink my position on whether bloggers have certain rights. Thank Odin that he said it was time to take up arms; I might have voted for McCain."

No, they simply say, "Yikes, what's up with that dude." They don't get angry. They don't get scared. They don't start thinking deep thoughts. No, they simply look at you askance and ignore anything else you have to say.

You shut down communication the second you play the rebellion card.

David W. Gay

March 6, 2005, 10:06 PM

I'm just bored to tears with the keyboard "patriots." It simply gets so tedious reading their empty bravado that I have to swat them every once in awhile.If they bore you so, don't read them. And as a consequence, you won't have to reply to them.

Otherwise, this is, as are most discussions around here, and in my humble opinion, a very interesting discussion. So what if there is a lot of keyboard bravado finding it's way to these pages? Long before the "Shot heard 'round the world", there had been, I would be willing to bet, much bar-room bravado expressed regarding the state of affairs of those times. It didn't take all, nor even a large percentage, of those bar room Patriots to ultimately make a difference.

For, up until that metaphorical pot of water thoroughly reached 212 (at sea level, of course :) ) and started to boil over, with acts such as that famous "massacre" in 1770 Boston, little bubbles of water - aka "bravado", were formed by those nearest, and more sensitive to, the heat source -aka King George and his violations of Liberty. Those bubbles served to indicate to the rest of the pot that things were just going to get hotter unless the sources of heat, all those violations of Liberty, were turned down.

The heat, or course, didn't get turned down. And we know what happened then. For today, we'll just have to see what happens as those nearest, and more sensitive to, today's sources of heat keep bubbling away and spreading the word.

I, for one, say... Oh, wait - I just said it. :)

fjolnirsson

March 6, 2005, 10:18 PM

Otherwise, this is, as are most discussions around here, and in my humble opinion, a very interesting discussion. So what if there is a lot of keyboard bravado finding it's way to these pages? Long before the "Shot heard 'round the world", there had been, I would be willing to bet, much bar-room bravado expressed regarding the state of affairs of those times. It didn't take all, nor even a large percentage, of those bar room Patriots to ultimately make a difference. For up until that metaphorical pot of water thoroughly reached 212 (at sea level, of course ) and started to boil over, with acts such as that famous "massacre" in 1770 Boston, little bubbles of water - aka "bravado", were formed by those nearest, and more sensitive to, the heat source -aka King George and his violations of Liberty. Those bubbles served to indicate to the rest of the pot that things were just going to get hotter unless the sources of heat, all those violations of Liberty, were turned down. The heat, or course, didn't get turned down. And we know what happened then. For today, we'll just have to see what happens as those nearest, and more sensitive to, today's sources of heat keep bubbling away and spreading the word.

http://combatcarry.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/others/schild42.gif

I'll be back, I'm gonna go get some http://www.combatcarry.com/vbulletin/images/smilies/evenmore/popcorn.gif

DRZinn

March 6, 2005, 10:25 PM

I'm certainly not going to start anything - I don't have the charisma to attract followers either, and there aren't enough likeminded individuals that would actually join me anyway. I would just get myself killed or jailed, and the anti's would have another case to point to. The fact is, those people who revolt as individuals are a little nuts - but that doesn't mean it isn't justified, just that no-one else joined in.

Art Eatman

March 6, 2005, 10:37 PM

Last I heard, this thread was about political blogs and controls thereof.

Thread drift in and out of the subject at hand isn't all that wrong a deal, but this one has gone way too far for way too long.

Either get back to the subject, or don't post.

Art

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 10:40 PM

David W. Gay: For today, we'll just have to see what happens as those nearest, and more sensitive to, today's sources of heat keep bubbling away and spreading the word. You aren't spreading the word. You are shutting down communication. You are undermining your message. You are making it harder to spread the word about what a crock McCain Feingold is.

Fence sitters don't see this talk about violent rebellion and say, "Golly, he's just like Sam Adams. I oughta listen to him. Maybe campaign finance is bad idea. Maybe those bloggers are being mistreated."

No, they turn you off and shut you out. They stop listening.

Deal with reality, not some fantasy version of 1776. You aren't Sam Adams or Patrick Henry. The mob isn't being converted by your talk of the need for violence. The good guys won't rally behind you because you type some tough-sounding words and make some allusions to Jefferson or Mason.

It is nearly unethical the way you people are willing to undermine the message of liberty by play-acting your tri-corner-hat fantasies.

2nd Amendment

March 6, 2005, 10:45 PM

All of this is your opinion. One obviously not shared by a great many people. So why do you feel your opinion is the last word on the subject? Clue: It isn't. My opinion is that it is the obvious and oft stated unwillingness to fight if need be that undermines any hope for the future. I'd say history pretty well backs up my opinion, what about yours?

R.H. Lee

March 6, 2005, 10:48 PM

You are making it harder to spread the word about what a crock McCain Feingold is. Waiting for your solution..........

cuchulainn

March 6, 2005, 11:08 PM

2nd. Amendmeng: My opinion is that it is the obvious and oft stated unwillingness to fight if need be that undermines any hope for the future. There's a big difference between saying you are unwilling to fight and refraining from making empty threats of violence so as not to shut down communication with those people you're trying to convince.

Deal with reality, not some fantasy version of 1776.

You think they see Patrick Henry and will listen to you. They don't. They see Tim McVeigh and the Unabomber, and they don't want to listen to Tim McVeigh and the Unabomber.
RileyMC: Waiting for your solution.......... Well it starts with spreading the word and getting the good people of Arizona to vote out McCain (as was suggested in the first post of this thread).

It includes trying to shut down fools whose adolescent fantasies of a "shootin' war wit' da gubmint" shut down communication with those people we're trying to convince.

Earlier you wrote, "lead, follow or get out of the way." Well, making vague threats of violence isn't any of those.

But you know what? It's rather absurd to demand a solution from me when you folks have done little but say, "I don't like me this here campaign finance law. I think it's nigh on time fer us to shoot us some o dem gubmint boys. That'll larn um not to pass laws we agin."

You got some other "solution" to McCain-Feingold other than that B.S. talk?

DRZinn

March 6, 2005, 11:46 PM

fools whose adolescent fantasies of a "shootin' war wit' da gubmint" shut down communication with those people we're trying to convince.Saying it's justified is far from advocating that someone do it. I know some people who need killin', but that doesn't mean I'm gonna do it....

Zundfolge

March 7, 2005, 12:05 AM

So cuchulainn, I'm unclear on just what it is you want.

Do you want the "keyboard patriots" to just shut up? Or do you want them to "put their money where their mouth is" and actually start killing people?

Not a flame ... just seeking clarification.

Fletchette

March 7, 2005, 12:15 AM

cuchulainn:

You have expressed your opinion that talk without action is worthless. I tend to agree. My favorite President said, "speak softly and carry a big stick". Therefore, I am speaking softly.

My simple question to you is, what is your opinion of the Minuteman Project? These people are, after all, getting out from behind their keyboards and are doing something real.

dustind

March 7, 2005, 12:41 AM

I can not believe some people are actually in favor of this law.

I guess I am over due for sending out snail mail to my elected reps.

Instead of actually shooting the bastards. How about starting a defense fund for the shooter? :evil: :p

Do you guys think we can beat this thing? Maybe this will hit home to enough people that they will push against it. I hope most pro freedom organizations get their membership behind a writing campaign.

Wildalaska

March 7, 2005, 02:49 AM

Cuch...... :D :D :D :D

Right on again....

And ya havent even gotten into thir total misunderstanding of the events of 1776 and their total oblivity to the nature of revolution and rebellion

My simple question to you is, what is your opinion of the Minuteman Project? These people are, after all, getting out from behind their keyboards and are doing something real.

Ya mean a bunch of vigilantes taking our their prejudices are somehow inolved in the eternal search for liberty and justice? Sort of thought that maybe they were just a bunch of yahoos looking to fullfill some cammi jammie fantasy on some poor bewildered wetbacks...

WildthewordspatriotandminutemanasusedtodaymakemewanttopukeAlaska

David W. Gay

March 7, 2005, 04:05 AM

"They simply bore me. "

"Pathetic. Simply pathetic. "

"So stop strutting around pretending like you will. It's pathetic and tedious. It's boring and embarrasing. "

"...a bunch of do-nothing keyboard "patriots." "

"...their adolescent fantasies. It's sad and funny at the same time. "

"I suggested that you were simply blowing smoke out your arse, ..."

"So stop boring us with it. "

"Eh, I'm done. I'm bored with it. "

"I'm just bored to tears with the keyboard 'patriots.' It simply gets so tedious reading their empty bravado that I have to swat them every once in awhile."

"... stupid enough to make a spectacle of themselves. "

"Wait, I said I was done. Nope, couldn't resist again. "

"... spare us the silly, empty bravado. "

"You are shutting down communication. "Mr. Cuchulainn,

In various posts to this thread, you made all of the quoted comments above.

I've read the entire thread, and find the nature of it's content, and it's continuence, as self-evident proof of people who support open communications.

Now, how exactly am I, or any other participants of this thread, "shutting down communication"?

If you truly find the hubris expressed by some, "Pathetic. Simply pathetic.", why do you bother to respond (to the hubris)?

As for people making references to, and expressing their admiration of, the founding fathers of this nation - so what? The founding fathers said and did a lot of things that need to be remembered. One thing that one of those FF's did was to boldly sign his name at the bottom of some obscure little document way back then. He wanted everyone to see his name.

I think there are quite a few of similar folk around today - those not afraid to voice their political views, and not afraid to boldly sign their names to such views, even with the threat of "legal" repression under the McCain-Feingold Anti-Liberty Act. And for that, they get accused of "...shutting down communication.", by merely expressing their abhorrence of those that actually do.

Maybe the consequences of expressing such a voice are not yet as dire as they were 230 years ago, but does that mean we should just sit quietly until they are?

=================================
"and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

peacefuljeffrey

March 7, 2005, 05:44 AM

Representation by lottery/consription. Take all the campaigning and stuff out of the equation.

Umm, I may be wrong, but this kind of idea seems like forced servitude to the people via service in the government. It is anathema to freedom, even if it were to accomplish the goal of better, more accountable, and less corrupt government. Slavery is slavery. If they take you from your bed, your wife, your family, your home, your town, your business, and force you to work as a congressman... how is that a better system? You just made a slave out of a free man, in the name of honest government.

Please don't tell me what your answer to crime is, because I fear it might run something along these lines: "First we install unbreakable locks on everyone's doors, see, and we lock them all in their houses. Then we let them out only to... ... and if they're not out and about of their own free will, they can't be committing crimes!" :rolleyes:

-Jeffrey

peacefuljeffrey

March 7, 2005, 05:54 AM

I've been thinking... Yeah, we are all sitting around watching how crappy things are in terms of erosion of our human/American rights... We see corrupt politicians lining their pockets; activist judges making absurd law, far outside their purview, with impunity. We see criminals not dealt with seriously because bleeding hearts are desperate to give murderers a chance "to be productive members of society."

We don't quite know if this is the time to rise up shooting, because, well, we don't know if everyone will stay down in the foxholes as we rise up and hear only OUR gun firing... :uhoh: It was mentioned before that it is not a lack of strength of one's convictions that keeps us from rebelling; it's the knowledge that if we are not certain to be joined by a critical mass of other like-minded rebels, our insurrection would fall flat on its face. And yes, many would then call us "nuts" even if they had been of similar opinions.

That's why -- and I don't know why we didn't think of this sooner -- we need to pack ourselves together, and fight as one giant robot...

VOLTRON!

Just think of it! 4 million gun owners, each assigned a position in the body of Voltron based on our NRA member numbers for organization! UNSTOPPABLE!! :p

Any giant creature the antis or the gov't might throw at us would surely be vulnerable to a slice down the forehead with our giant Blazing Sebenza!!

-Jeffrey

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 07:13 AM

David W. Gay: I've read the entire thread, and find the nature of it's content, and it's continuence, as self-evident proof of people who support open communications.I'm not talking about communication within this thread. I'm talking about communication with the American people. You guys say you want to change the direction of America, but you won't if you shut down communication with Americans.

Like it or not, ranting about violent revolution does nothing but make most Americans stop listening to you.David W. Gay: Maybe the consequences of expressing such a voice are not yet as dire as they were 230 years ago, but does that mean we should just sit quietly until they are? When did I say you should sit quitely? You know, it's possible to make a lot of noise that changes minds without resorting to silly fantasies about revolution -- fantasies that do nothing but shut down communication with the people you need to convince.David W. Gay: I think there are quite a few of similar folk around today - those not afraid to voice their political views, and not afraid to boldly sign their names to such views, even with the threat of "legal" repression under the McCain-Feingold Anti-Liberty Act. And for that, they get accused of "...shutting down communication.", by merely expressing their abhorrence of those that actually do. I never criticized such people. I never said they were shutting down communication. They have my admiration. There's a big difference between taking a stand that opens you up to the legal repercussion of an unjust law and making a bunch of empty noise about violent revolution.Zundfolge: Do you want the "keyboard patriots" to just shut up? Or do you want them to "put their money where their mouth is" and actually start killing people? Well that's a false dichotomy, isn't it? But there seem to be lots of false dichotomies floating around this thread, so what's the harm in one more.

I want them to make a lot of noise -- just effective noise, not rantings about violent revolution that do nothing but shut down communication.Fletchette: My simple question to you is, what is your opinion of the Minuteman Project? At best, they are accomplishing nothing. At worst they are exacerbating the problem while serving up propaganda opportunities to their political enemies on a silver platter.Wildalaska: And ya havent even gotten into thir total misunderstanding of the events of 1776 and their total oblivity to the nature of revolution and rebellion Well that would require total thread drift and probably get it shut down. But I will observe that they would be unable to give me an example of one revolution that was successful without a heavy dose of outside aid from the government's political enemies, and who's going to give them that? China? North Korea?

And thanks, by the way :)

hammer4nc

March 7, 2005, 07:14 AM

The Voltron proposal has more efficacy than anything proferrred by Wildalaka or cuchulainn in this or most recent threads. One gets the impression that even they don't even believe their own rantings. Some people get their social jollies by lobbing negative slurs and one-liners into the mix, and seeing how much mierda can be stirred. Stopping in every so often to egg things on, offering nothing of substance. What's the word I'm looking for? :uhoh:

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 07:20 AM

The Voltron proposal has more efficacy than anything proferrred by Wildalaka or cuchulainn in this or most recent threads. Yeah, because the keyboard "patriots" have offered us so much of substance. :rolleyes:

spartacus2002

March 7, 2005, 07:34 AM

That's why -- and I don't know why we didn't think of this sooner -- we need to pack ourselves together, and fight as one giant robot...

VOLTRON!

Just think of it! 4 million gun owners, each assigned a position in the body of Voltron based on our NRA member numbers for organization! UNSTOPPABLE!!

Don't laugh at this -- the aged have done this quite successfully, except they call their VOltron "AARP." Which is why we have politicians buying their votes with prescription drug benefits, etc.

dfaugh

March 7, 2005, 08:12 AM

And just post some opinions(isn't that what forums are for?)

Look at it this way, the internet is currently THE way for like minded individuals to get together, voice their opinions and offer solutions. 20 years ago who would have thought we could have gun enthusiats from all over the world, discussing the relative merits of _________(fill in the blank), in one place.

So what these people are proposing, in essence, is to eliminate one of the non-violent means that people can and do use to affect change in our society.

Should there be a revolt? You betcha. Should it be violent, ala 1776? I hope not. Violence is often counterproductive. Would I join in? Probably, but only when I was convinced that there are NO other avenues to pursue, and there are currently many, many others. As pointed out, however, getting a large group of people to take similar action, just doen't seem to happen any more. What happened to all the people that protested the Vietnam war? Don't you think they had some effect on our countries policies? THAT'S the type of stuff we need to be doing.

Look, they're trying to destroy the 2nd Amendment...They're working hard at at stomping the 4th(sometimes)...and here they wanna do serious damage to the 1st. What's next? Sometimes I think the politicians wish the Constitution and Bill of Rights would just go away.

Well, looks like I'm rambling, so I'll stop....But think on this:

"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent"- Robert Heinlein (IIRC)

DRZinn

March 7, 2005, 09:29 AM

a bunch of vigilantes taking our their prejudices....just a bunch of yahoos looking to fullfill some cammi jammie fantasyRight... What was that I said about some doing something and some calling them lunatics?

These "minutemen" may not accomplish much in terms of actually stopping illegals, but they've already done a pretty job of increasing public awareness of the problem, and that's before they even start.

pax

March 7, 2005, 10:00 AM

If there ever were a law that practically demanded widespread civil disobedience, McCain-Feingold is it.

pax

The most important political office is that of private citizen. --- Louis Brandeis

2nd Amendment

March 7, 2005, 10:06 AM

Well take a slightly different tack here, please bear with me folks...

cuchulainn, Do you have a line? You needn't define it, just state that it does or does not exist. Some point at which you feel revolution, or the threat of revolution as a tool of intimidation, is justified.

Second, if you do how would you handle this and where would you go with it? Just humor me and answer the questions, you'll understand soon enough.

2nd Amendment

March 7, 2005, 10:09 AM

Wild, I have a disgustingly thorough knowledge of the events of our nation's founding. I have an inordinate amount of general history overall rattling around in my brain. This is why I find it funny as all hell when you and a couple others question the general knowledge of those who disagree with you. You regularly display a complete ignorance of the motivations of that time and also of today, yet you insult others simply because they don't think like you. Stifling communication indeed.

I'll let your comments about the Minuteman Project stand unremarked. I think it says all that needs to be said to anyone previously unfamilar with your statist apologetics.

...a bunch of vigilantes taking our their prejudices are somehow inolved in the eternal search for liberty and justice? Sort of thought that maybe they were just a bunch of yahoos looking to fullfill some cammi jammie fantasy on some poor bewildered wetbacks...

MikeB

March 7, 2005, 10:14 AM

"Violence is the last resort of the incompetent"- Robert Heinlein (IIRC)

Asimov. In one of the Foundation stories, I forget the character.

pax

March 7, 2005, 10:21 AM

Mike ~

Yep, that was Asimov.

Heinlein's philosophy about violence was more like this: Anyone who clings to the historically untrue - and thoroughly immoral - doctrine 'that violence never settles anything' I would advise to conjure up the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and of the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it. The ghost of Hitler could referee, and the jury might well be the Dodo, the Great Auk and the Passenger Pigeon. Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedom. -- "Mr. Dubois" in Starship Troopers by Robert Heinlein

pax

Quoting: the act of repeating erroneously the words of another. -- Ambrose Bierce

MikeB

March 7, 2005, 10:57 AM

Quoting: the act of repeating erroneously the words of another. -- Ambrose Bierce

How true Pax. Even that Asimov quote I don't believe was really indicative of what Asimov believed about violence. Throughout his works violence solves lot's of problems. That quote relates to a particular situation under which the Foundation couldn't possibly have won the fight, and thus had to come up with a way to deal with the antagonists. As it happens the leader of the Foundation who said that quote - I can't believe I don't remember his name - did in fact use violence later in the story.

So as not to be off topic to much. I think it's been about time for a while now. Time to do something about the way our rights are being trashed by both the Dems and Republicans. What that something is is where the contention comes in. Violence probably isn't the best first thing. It shouldn't be discounted completely however if all other avenues of resolution have been exhausted.

One thing I would like to see is a commitees in the house and senate that do nothing but look for outdated inneffective and/or unconstitutional laws to remove from the books - I think that might be a good start. Also I think it was Ron Paul who tried to get a bill passed that would have required every bill to state how that bill was constitutional before it could be voted on. That might be a good start too.

Brian Dale

March 7, 2005, 10:59 AM

dfaugh,Sometimes I think the politicians wish the Constitution and Bill of Rights would just go away.Of course they do. Those documents were written to confound the natural inclinations of politicians.

R.H. Lee

March 7, 2005, 11:12 AM

You got some other "solution" to McCain-Feingold other than that B.S. talk?
Why yes. It's waaaay back on the first page (post #6 FYI). I said:

People (bloggers) ought to do whatever they want to do, "McCain-Feingold" be damned. We the people have the power. It's just on loan to .gov and we'll take it back any time we want.

I advocated civil disobedience, in the form (initially) of bloggers continuing to exercise their 1st Amendment right. You disagree with that, how? And while you're at it, explain how voting out McCain will nullify or reverse "McCain-Feingold", in some terms other than vague mutterings of powerlessness and discontent.

Third_Rail

March 7, 2005, 11:25 AM

I stayed out of this for quite some time, but I have something to say.

Laws that violate the BoR or the Constitution in any way aren't, in my mind, valid. If you don't agree with this kind of law, don't obey it - afterall, the civilian sector has ultimate power.

In my mind, it's ridiculous to debate whether the government can or can't do something like this. Of course they can't - you don't have to obey. Where's the line drawn, then? When they try to enforce something like this, resist.

Simple enough.

Nazirite

March 7, 2005, 12:00 PM

The campaign finance law is unconstitutional according to the first amendment. The politicians just wanted to make it harder for the common man to raise money so only the wealthy can get elected.

oldfart

March 7, 2005, 12:42 PM

Fora such as this generally have their share of saber-rattlers and chest-beaters. It’s a normal reaction to many of the problems of our society. Some say it’s counter-productive, that it turns off those in the general public who might otherwise be receptive to “lucid” arguments. Others fall back on the First Amendment to justify their words. I doubt I’m surprising anyone when I say that what we say or write here is watched by “Big Brother” (BB) who evaluates any perceived threat and probably laughs his a$$ off.

So what value is there in any of this? Well, it helps to relieve the pressure a bit. While we may secretly (or publicly) question the intelligence of some who post here it is extremely unlikely that anyone would post a direct threat on a public board and then try to carry it out. So rattling a saber here actually serves a good purpose in the short run. In the long run, it also serves to remind BB that the natives are getting restless and, while some are blustering, others are quietly … doing what?

We collect our guns for a variety of reasons; some for historical value, others for protection against everything from ‘crystal-meth crazed zombies’ to ‘attack chimps’ to …, yes, even BB. They’re our “big stick” that we carry as we “walk softly” into an uncertain future. We hope we never have to use them but the men of Concord and Lexington didn’t really want to use theirs either. They probably much preferred sitting in the tavern, drinking ale and bitching about the King while telling any who would listen what they’d do if the Redcoats ever crossed their line in the sand. Well, the redcoats crossed the line and the rest is history.

Today’s ‘Redcoats’ wear business suits, often with pancake holsters under their coats. Just as before, they’re coming to disarm us, only instead of marching up the road, they’re sneaking through the court systems, state legislatures and editorial pages. Instead of facing us directly they disguise themselves as researchers, as welfare workers, as clergy, as doctors and nurses who just want to get rid of all those evil guns so everyone could be better off.

There’s another group of modern-day Redcoats. They’re the ones who ridicule the words and efforts of any native who might dare mention the possibility that his restlessness could boil over. They’re much like the Virginia “Gentlemen” Patrick Henry referred to who cried for “peace” while men were dying in Massachusetts.

We’ve had Waco and Ruby Ridge and please, God, no more of those. But since then we’ve also had Klamath Falls and Jarbridge where the people called BB’s bluff and he backed down. That bluff was called as a direct result of a bunch of saber-rattlers and chest-beaters communicating via the internet and not giving a damn whether BB was reading their posts or not. I know of at least one man who went to Klamath Falls with his rifle in the trunk of his car. Just like his forebears in Lexington and Concord, he hoped he wouldn’t have to use it but he was ready to do so if needed. Well, he didn’t have to use it… that time, but what about the next time?

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 01:05 PM

2nd Amendment: cuchulainn, Do you have a line? You needn't define it, just state that it does or does not exist. Some point at which you feel revolution, or the threat of revolution as a tool of intimidation, is justified.Of course. Everyone does. I'm sure even Mother Theresa would have taken up arms at some point.2nd Amendment: Second, if you do how would you handle this and where would you go with it? I have no idea what you are asking. Please clarify.

I will say this -- no matter what side of "your line" you are on, it's pretty stupid to strut around focusing your speech and writing on the violence.

Before the line is crossed, you'll come accross as overly eager for violence as well as a tad loopy. You'll shut down communication and destroy any hope of changing laws and minds. In fact, you'll be doing nothing but feeding your political enemies propaganda to use against you.

After the line is crossed, and you are readying yourself for your blaze of glory, you'll just make yourself an easy target. Real rebels don't broadcast their intentions all over the internet.

The problem is that the whole (ahem) "patriot" movement seems to have the concepts of means and goal backwards. Its followers spend so much time shouting "amens" to each other about the coming rebellion, that the rebellion seems to have become the goal rather than the means of last resort.

Ending McCain-Feingold (or ending whatever) doesn't seem to be the goal. Rather, you all seem to turn means and goal on its head and view McCain-Feingold as an opportune spark for your revolutionary goals.

Maybe that's not the way you really think. But it sure is how it seems.

And remember, American isn't listening to you, and that's your fault.

America isn't energized by you, and it never will be. America isn't even afraid of you anymore (though it was about 10 years ago). On those rare occasions that America notices you, it merely thinks that you are a bunch of slightly-loopy wanna be commandos that probably should be kept tabs on.

I'm not trying to be mean or nasty. Really, I'm not. That's simply the way it is. You are undermining yourselves with your adolescent fantasy talk of revolution.

Step outside yourselves. Put aside all your rationalizations about "yeah, they're just sheeple" or "revolutionaries are always misunderstood at the beginning" -- you are just deluding yourselves with those copouts.

Look at yourselves and understand how you are undermining your ability to see the ideals that you profess.

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 01:26 PM

I’m surprising anyone when I say that what we say or write here is watched by “Big Brother” (BB) who evaluates any perceived threat and probably laughs his a$$ off. Spare me. There ain't some g-man sitting in his D.C. cubicle monitoring what you all write and then assessing it for threats.

Yes, the gov't is watching certains parts of the internet for "chatter" -- that's for sure. But it ain't here.

You guys aren't that important. :D

See, that's part of what you've done to yourselves. America (and the government) doesn't take you seriously. It doesn't think you have anything valuable, much less dangerous, to say.

You've undermined your credibility with decades of empty revolutionary fantasy talk.

Start focusing on those "lucid" arguments and maybe -- just maybe -- people will start to take you seriously.

Then maybe -- just maybe -- you'll have the clout to remind them about "restless natives."

Or better yet, maybe -- just maybe -- you can actually change a few minds.

R.H. Lee

March 7, 2005, 01:31 PM

<-------listening to the sound of crickets chirping.

And remember, American isn't listening to you, and that's your fault.

America isn't energized by you, and it never will be. I missed the memo where we appointed you spokesman. You're not even an American citizen, are you? :rolleyes:

richyoung

March 7, 2005, 01:45 PM

...let me start by stating my belief that the situation in this country is not YET insolvable by less-than-violent means. However, it's not far from it, as the assault has now progressed from attacking periphery issues such as drugs, taxes, and (pardon me on this one, fellows,...) guns, to directly compromising the ability to not only challange the powers-that-be for election, but even to criticise them. Make no mistake - I harbor no "cammie pajamy" fantasies of "Ramboing" my way through the countryside. I love my country, and especially the hard-working men and women who sacrifice so much to protect me and my family - not only in the Armed Forces, but also in law enforcement and other government function. The problem is that the very Constitution they've all sworn to "uphold and defend", (as have I), is being slanderded in educational and public discourse. That bold and brilliant document, which was and SHOULD STILL BE an ironclad limit on the powers of government has been perverted in the minds of not only the general public, but the federal employees drawn from the general public, into a "living document" that can spontaneously CHANGE ITS MEANING due NOT to the clearly deliniated methods of amendment within it, but rather the whims and wishes of an imperial and over-reaching judiary, inspired by unratified treaties, foreign laws, and the alleged opinion of the masses. In this they are aided and abetted by a morally corrupt and scandalously cowardly legislature too busy running for re-election and delegting their powers and authorities to unelected and unaccountable beauracracies such as the Federal Reserve, the IRS, the Base Closure Commision, EPA, OSHA, and a host of other alphabet soup agencies. The process is further hurried by an Executive branch without the stones to deny enforcing unconstitutional laws, regulations, or Supreme Court decisions. The silent rows of crosses at Arlington, and various and sundry places abroad, bear mute testimony that I owe my freedom to those who came before me and that were willing to risk, and lose, their very being in defense of that freedom for future generations. I owe a blood debt to thse honored dead - the terrible irony is that the greatest threat to that freedom is not a foreign despot and his minions, but rather the current brothers-in-arms of the very men that inspire me, and the government in which may send them forth to enforce illegal and unconscionable policies. God forbid it ever get to that point, as the length of time I predict my DCM Garand and I remain an effective fighting force against the power of the Federal governmentis laughably short, and the commensurate damage I might inflict in such time quite minor. Nor am I under any misapprehension as to becoming a martyr for a larger cause - in such event, I would fully expect that the mainstream media will label me as some gun nut kook, if they notice me at all - probably my fate would be to be erased from history, all records or traces of me expunged. Lastly, I hold no confidence that enough people would be moved in any case to put down their TV remotes and do something alongside me to make a difference. Yet my rifle sits, ready for action, and ammunition for it alongside. Not because I think I can win, or single handedly wrest back the pendulum that with the gun laws, the drug laws, the campaign finance "reform", the diminishing of land and water rights, the subordination of our nation's sovereignity and money to corrupt international bodies like the UN and the World Bank, and various other insults by the government to its own rules and laws, is swinging ever more toward tyranny. I wait, with heavy heart, ready to act because I owe it to the honored dead, to generations yet to come, and to myself that if the situation ever so develops, to die a free man rather than live as a slave.

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 01:52 PM

listening to the sound of crickets chirping. That's because America left a long time ago and isn't listening to you.I missed the memo where we appointed you spokesman. I never claimed to speak for you guys.You're not even an American citizen, are you?What the hell are you talking about? Yes, I'm a U.S. citizen. Where the bleep did that come from? :confused:

Revolutionary fantasy is the opiate of would-be "patriots"

2nd Amendment

March 7, 2005, 02:02 PM

Of course. Everyone does. I'm sure even Mother Theresa would have taken up arms at some point. In reply to whether cuchulainn has a line that must not be crossed

Then your argument here is over. The only point of debate becomes a mere question of when. For me the line of justification has been crossed. For you it has not. That's the only meaningful point of contention and all your bluster about chest beating is rendered moot. One thing I can tell you, though: When they cross your line I won't be trying to tear you down for speaking out. And that leads to...

I have no idea what you are asking. Please clarify.

I'll clarify, but the answer is obvious based on your initial comment above. When your line is crossed what will you do? Who will you talk to? How will you network? Or will you go out alone and sacrifice yourself for the honor of being labeled "extremist" and "gun nut", or even "property rights nut" or "free speech extremist"? Of course not, we both know you're too smart for that.

You'll talk. You'll vent your indignation. You'll try to stir like thinkers thru some venue...and you can bet your ass someone will be present to call you every name and slur you have used in this thread. Afterall, HIS line will be a little further down the track than yours, or mine, and since you got to yours first...and haven't gone out and started the revolution yet...you must be an empty chest-beater.

Think about it.

2nd Amendment

March 7, 2005, 02:05 PM

That's because America left a long time ago and isn't listening to you.

Actually more and more of the Citizens of this nation are listening every day because FedGov is forcing them to. How many issues do you need? Land grabs, water sheds, Agenda 21, the 1st Amendment, the 2nd...it's coming to the point where everyone's ox is being gored to some degree.

But, regardless, as I said above you really have no argument here except that your personal line is a little further along than ours is. That's fair enough, but stop trying to condemn everyone else just because we're a bit more touchy than you are.

R.H. Lee

March 7, 2005, 02:23 PM

cuchalainn- You don't seem to have any argument for your point of view. You've spent your time dissing and belittling those with whom you disagree, yet you've evaded answering any questions on how to combat McCain Feingold. You haven't even addressed the issue civil disobedience as a counter to illegal and unconstitutional law. I can only assume your purpose is to attempt to build yourself up by tearing others down.

We all understand your position on 'armed revolt'. Now explain (if you can) your solution to McCain Feingold.

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 02:40 PM

But, regardless, as I said above you really have no argument here except that your personal line is a little further along than ours isSpare me the sophestry. :rolleyes: My point is still valid -- You guys have destroyed your credibility with decades of empty talk.

You really missed the point, didn't you? It's not a matter of whose line is the right place. It's a matter of what you have done to yourselves.

You say your line has been crossed, but you're still not doing anything.

Tomorrow! Tomorrow! I love ya Tommorow. You're always a daaayyy aaaaa-waayyyyyyy!

Empty threats. Sound and fury, signifying nothing. America knows this.

America ain't listening.
America ain't afraid.
America ain't energized.

America doesn't care, and you have only yourselves to blame.Actually more and more of the Citizens of this nation are listening every day because FedGov is forcing them to. How many issues do you need? Land grabs, water sheds, Agenda 21, the 1st Amendment, the 2nd...it's coming to the point where everyone's ox is being gored to some degree. Yes, people are getting mad about all that stuff.

But don't delude yourselves into thinking that means they've started listening to you guys.

You ain't got the clout. You blew it decades ago with all the empty talk.

spacemanspiff

March 7, 2005, 02:53 PM

No, what I have done is taken up pen and paper and internet. I've dispensed with a drivers license as well as plates. I don't use credit cards nor do I use banks. And I've managed to build a couple reasonably successful businesses and a nice home in the process. In short, I don't play their game. Have I taken up arms? No, nor will I be the first to run out, alone, and make a media article for you and yours to cluck over. OTOH when a credible figure or movement arises I'll be there and in the meantime I'll be agitating to start one. Where will you be? What are you doing?
yeah but you are posting to the internet from i would guess, a static IP, which can be traced.

in fact, my uber-tacticool-black-helipcopter-detectors tell me that they are within 5 miles of your home right this moment.
i suggest you hop on your segueway and putter out of the KillZone stat!
no, wait, this isnt my medical drama fantasy, its my ninja-vs-the-volcano, no wait, wrong movie, hang on, i'll get back to ya'll.

longeyes

March 7, 2005, 03:04 PM

"Empty threats. Sound and fury, signifying nothing. America knows this.

America ain't listening.
America ain't afraid.
America ain't energized."

I don't know who you mean by "America." A LOT of people are listening and are increasingly pissed off. No one, except the insane, WANTS violence, but in fact violence is being perpetrated against those of us who believe in Constitutional freedoms right now, incrementally, slowly but surely. Yes, there is plenty we who lament this sorry state of affairs can do in terms of political mobilization, and we should definitely try it...while we can. What is missing so far are the loud public voices that rise above the everyday b.s. and clearly articulate the true issues for the undecided American public that is not yet utterly hypnotized by pop culture and poop politicians. That day will come; it started with the people on talk radio--don't discount their power, they are already showing it in local and state elections and initiatives.

America's not afraid? Americans, in my view, are very afraid. They have a lot to lose, since they live more comfortably, on the whole, than anyone else on this planet. They are also very, very dependent on both technology and civilized cooperation to maintain that way of life. If the "unafraid" America is counting on .gov to keep them safe and warm they are fools. And not everyone in this country is a fool.

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 03:05 PM

RileyMc: yet you've evaded answering any questions on how to combat McCain Feingold. I answered that question when you asked it. I've already given more ideas than your single idea of civil disobedience (it's a good idea though).
RileyMc: You haven't even addressed the issue civil disobedience as a counter to illegal and unconstitutional law. Um, actually, when Mr. Gay mentioned it, I said I admired people willing to take that risk.

See my third comment in post #74 http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=1573670&postcount=74RileyMc: Now explain (if you can) your solution to McCain Feingold. I already told you that I'd start by working to get McCain voted out. (I suppose we should include Feingold, eh?). No, that won't negate the law, but it needs to be done.

I've already said that admire those willing to take the risks of civil disobedience. I support their actions.

I've already said more on that matter than your comment about civil disobedience.

You want more?

We should look for new ways to challenge it in court, until we find one that knocks it down.

We pester our representatives to no end.

Marches would be great, but are probably a pipe dream.

Send money to those organizations working to overturn it.

Withhold money from anyone who voted for it -- even if they're the RKBA's best friend.

Become your own little meme generator. You know how we should take non-shooters to the range to move them in our direction? Well, we should try to find opportunites to point out the CFR problems to those around us. Yeah, since politics isn't a polite subject for conversation, that's hard. But we should try.

Heck, why not turn some of McCain-Feingold's victims into martyrs. Be creative. It costs you less than $10 to make and printout flyers to leave around the subway or the local mall. Make it look like a wanted poster -- a picture with the guy/gal's crime.

How's that for a start? I've given more solutions than everyone else in this thread combined

GigaBuist

March 7, 2005, 03:07 PM

I'm still wondering what the specifics being proposed are... not that I'll agree with any of them, but I'm still curious.

Isn't there some kind of "cap" on how much you can spend when you're officially tied to a candidate? $5000 or something?

Pax was right, this certainly calls for civil disobidience if it becomes policy.

So, lets see where this goes, find out exactly what it takes to violate it, and go out of our way to do so.

spacemanspiff

March 7, 2005, 03:11 PM

i got a better idea. set up shell corporations that will register/host the domains where the blogs are posted.
the blogs are only posted for a few weeks at a time, and by the time the jbt investigators come around, the shell corp will have been dissolved and new ones created.

ohhhhhh, wait, maybe i shouldnt have suggested this out in public?

2nd Amendment

March 7, 2005, 03:16 PM

Well, this will probably be my last post in this thread because, so far as I can see, cuchulainn has completely collapsed, if he ever had anything goin here in the first place.

Spare me the sophestry. My point is still valid

This isn't even logical. You just clearly stated you have your own line and now you complain about having this fact pointed out to you? :rolleyes:

-- You guys have destroyed your credibility with decades of empty talk.

Well there you go again. Decades? What have I been doing for decades? How would you know? For that matter, considering you aren't actually saying anything anymore and we've established you have no basis for argument except a desire to keep people from talking about the subject, why are you still talking?

Regardless, how is credibility destroyed when an increasing number of people are coming to the same conclusion? Or do you, along with your arbitrary line in the sand, have an arbitrary time line that must also be met by everyone else?

You really missed the point, didn't you? It's not a matter of whose line is the right place. It's a matter of what you have done to yourselves.

Again, nonsensical. Illogical. The act of discussion and the gradual increase in civil disobedience IS the point. What is not relevant is whether you personally agree with how others chose to do things.

You say your line has been crossed, but you're still not doing anything.

Do you not read? Or do you presume to decide for all what is and isn't "doing something". I've taken an actual stand on certain points, a verbal one on others and have a willingness to go much further if necessary and if we can ever produce a satisfactory leadership. Since you are obviously the sort who finds glee in condemning those who "go it alone" why is it you presume to sit here and demand just that and expect to not be labeled hypocritical?

Tomorrow! Tomorrow! I love ya Tommorow. You're always a daaayyy aaaaa-waayyyyyyy!

Empty threats. Sound and fury, signifying nothing. America knows this.

Here's a clue, AMERICA is the one upset and voicing the opinions. YOU are not America, nor does your opinion represent anyone other than yourself.

America ain't listening.

America is not merely listening, she's talking. Some, though, appear to be holding their ears...

America ain't afraid.

Appears to me you're utterly terrified.

America ain't energized.

Nope, but we're getting there in spite of nervous-nellies and the great-grandchildren of British loyalists.

America doesn't care, and you have only yourselves to blame.

America does care and we have only those such as yourself to blame for it having taken this long.

Yes, people are getting mad about all that stuff.

But don't delude yourselves into thinking that means they've started listening to you guys.

You ain't got the clout. You blew it decades ago with all the empty talk.

You have to be collecting a pay check for this. You don't make a bit of sense. WE are "America". WE are the ones mad about "that stuff". They are listening because we are them and thus we certainly do have the clout. Where do you get off trying to create these imaginary lines? Divide and conquer? Jeez. I did view you as a legitimate opponent with serious views but, at this point, I'm not certain what you think you're accomnplishing or even what you think your view is.

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 03:17 PM

longeyes: A LOT of people are listening and are increasingly pissed off. But they aren't moving to the ranks of the keyboard "patriots." Yes, Americans are pissed off, but they see the ACLU or the NRA as their hope, not a bunch of guys on the internet talking about the big revolution.

Heck, Americans are more likely to start voting in droves for the LP than to take the "patriot" movement seriously.
longeyes: America's not afraid? Americans, in my view, are very afraid.Sorry, I thought that the phrase "of the 'patriots'" was implied. :)

I was saying that Americans are not afraid of the "patriots" -- I was pointing out that the "patriots" lack any clout, no matter how you look at it.

America isn't afraid of the "patriots."
America isn't energized by the "patriots."
America isn't listening to the "patriots."
America isn't learning from the "patriots."

America doesn't care about the "patriots."

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 03:43 PM

2nd Amendment: You just clearly stated you have your own line and now you complain about having this fact pointed out to you? Yeah, I got a line. How does that change the fact that you guys are making empty threats and undermining your credibility?

I barely mentioned my disagreement with the placement of your line. (Yes I did mention it a time or two).

The line hasn't been the issue. You're engaing in a strawman argument.

But let's pretend the line was the issue. Let's pretend that rather than criticize you over and over for making stupid empty innuendoes about revolution, I had spent my time getting upset over the placement of your line.

If someone has a line, then they cannot criticize the actions of someone else?

Bull!

I got a line for fist fights too. It hasn't been crossed since I was a teen, but it's there. That doesn't mean I can't criticize the idiots who walk around with chips on their shoulders or the toothless lions who brag about what tough guys they are, but you know will never do anything.

Bin Ladin has a line too (I'm not comparing you to him). I sure as hell am going to criticize his action even though I got a line too. The fact that we both have lines (but in different places) doesn't mean I can't criticize his actions. That would be absurd.

Tim McVeigh had a line (again, no comparisons). I sure as hell am going to criticize his action even though I got a line too. The fact that we both have lines (but in different places) doesn't mean I can't criticize his actions. That would be absurd.

Not only are you engaging in a strawman argument, it doesn't even stand up when we pretend that it isn't one.

2nd Amendment: Well there you go again. Decades? What have I been doing for decades? I was talking about the "patriot" movement, not you personally. :rolleyes: The act of discussion and the gradual increase in civil disobedience IS the point. That hasn't been my point. :rolleyes: I admire the civil disobedience, though. I haven't criticized it.You have to be collecting a pay check for this. Nope, just calling it like I see it. American doesn't care about you guys. I know that breaks down the tri-corner-hat fantasy, but it's true.

You guys are meaningless to American politics today.

You guys will be meaningless to American history tomorrow.

That's too bad, too. You could be more. You certainly care more than most Americans. Your hearts are in the right place.

You just keep shooting yourselves in the feet with your empty talk of revolution.

Sad.

Intune

March 7, 2005, 04:26 PM

"Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did, and it never will. Find out just what the people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them; and these will continue till they have resisted with either words or blows, or by both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they suppress."
--Frederick Douglass, 1849

If we don't stand up now, in a lawful, non-violent fashion, the corrupt government has already won and they know it and things will only get worse. Deep down we all know this. So what would we be standing together against? The continued destruction of our natural born rights.

Our guns are the last thing between us and them and anyone who doubts that lives in a state of denial. We know that all these gun laws are unconstitutional, yet it will continue until the government finally reaches a point where they have orchestrated a situation in this country where full confiscation will take place. Without our guns, we will be toast. Deep in our hearts, we know this. We live in fear. Hard to admit and quite an unsavory taste cowardice has to it but we are even afraid to admit we’re afraid!

What if everyone who ever felt fear, just gave up and said, "I can live on my knees. At least I will be alive and comfortable." There is a movie called The Magnificent Seven. After the banditos come in and shoot up the village and kills one of the peons, the village men stand around looking at each other. One man sheepishly says, "It's not so bad. They do leave us a little to eat."

Is that what we've reduced our great nation to? As long as we are left a few crumbs, our cars & cable tv, we should get on our knees and accept it? We The People? This is cowardice. I am a coward for not standing up to what the Gov does to its people in my name. An apathetic coward is even worse. I have not even marched peacefully against policies that abridge my freedoms.

Do you know what happened to the men who signed the Declaration of Independence? Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned by the British. Two lost their sons in the Revolutionary Army. Five were captured by the British as traitors and tortured before they died. Nine of the 56 fought and died from their wounds or the incredible hardships of the Revolutionary War. When these men signed the Declaration of Independence, they signed and pledged their fortunes, their honor and the ultimate sacrifice, their lives.

Don’t you think that Patrick Henry was afraid deep down inside the pit of his gut when he gave his "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death" speech on March 23, 1775? It would have been easier for Henry and the others to just get on their knees and settle for the scraps from the table of King George III. But, they couldn't do that, the fire in their belly that burned for freedom was stronger than their fear. Look what we The People, The Power, have allowed to be taken from us in the last 250 or so years. No, make it the last 100 years. Sad. I have lost the fire of freedom in my belly. I am a coward and that stings. But I am not so cowardly that I will attempt to dissuade people who would stand up on my behalf, lawfully and peaceably, in the fear that they will ignite a firestorm from that which oppresses me/us because some may spill into my little safe cocoon. It is the lack of unity towards a specific cause that hinders us. McC-Fein bill irks some. The borders irks others. The 2nd trampled irks others. We’re fractured. Will any of you join the Betty Crocker icing needs more chocolate demonstrations? The gov loves this fracture and may show just how oppressive they are if any specific group gains momentum.

The political machine of government is not stupid. When it pushes too hard & the sheep begin to mill about and grow restless it backs down a bit to more comfortable strictures. It hasn’t forgotten what it wanted, it merely bides its time to reintroduce that which now has a less alarming look to it. A familiarity. Comfort zone. A “padded” noose if you will. Gov must grow, it has no choice. There will be a day when the yoke grows too heavy and the corral fences will be broken down in the quest for freedom. And make no mistake, it will be an ugly day. I hope the Republic emerges intact. And I have none to blame but myself and we, ourselves. Let’s try & get our rights back peaceably, by being united and lawful so that perhaps our final option will be pushed hundreds and hundreds of years into the future, if ever necessary. Then we can say we tried. We haven’t. Dang, I talk too much.

David W. Gay

March 7, 2005, 04:50 PM

This is the Thread that does not end...
It goes on and on my friend...
Some people, started reading it,
Not knowing what it was...
And they'll keep on posting to it forever just because
This is the Thread that does not end...
It goes on and on my friend..
Some people, started reading it,
Not knowing what it was...
And they'll keep on posting to it forever just because
This is the Thread that does not end...
It goes on and on my friend...
Some people, started reading it,
Not knowing what it was...
And they'll keep on posting to it forever just because
This is the Thread that does not end...
It goes on and on my friend..
Some people, started reading it,
Not knowing what it was...
And they'll keep on posting to it forever just because
.
.
.
:)

spacemanspiff

March 7, 2005, 04:55 PM

the erosion of our rights has more to blame from Political Correctness on the behalf of our elected government officials, rather than the 'lack of action' from the disenfranchised, imho.

one need only look at this countrys border policy to see that proven.

David W. Gay

March 7, 2005, 05:16 PM

"McCain/Feingold act sucks!"

"Sure does! Molon Labe!!!!"

"What ever - you're all just a bunch of do-nothing blow-hards."

"No we're not! You are! You just can't acknowledge our actions."

"What actions??? A bunch of blow-hards blabbing away on the Internet? "

"Yea, you tell 'em!"

"Whatever - Molon Labe!"

"Blah blah blah...Pathetic."

"Just because we haven't yet taken to the streets..."

"A counter productive, do nothing sentiment made by children."

"Just because we haven't yet taken to the streets..."

"Stop embarrassing yourselves.."

"You stop!"

"No, You stop!"

"You started it!"

"No I didn't, you did!"

"Did not!"

"Did to!"

"Did not!"

"It goes on and on my friend...."

Oh well...
Cheers!
...

horge

March 7, 2005, 05:49 PM

cuchulainn,

You talk an awful lot about the United States of America, and what
its people would and would not listen to; what they would or would not do.

This foreigner begs you clarify, if you please: are you American?

Not a few would place a little more stock in your perceptions if you were,
simply because it is AMERICAN perception of some posts here that counts,
and a foreign perspective is more prone to skewing away from American
thought and temper, debate and decision, argument and action.

Thinking that Americans are too lazy to listen, or else are 'all talk', well...
THAT can start to get pathetic and boring too.

Underestimating Americans is a mistake.
Lots of history to back that one up.

-
horge
http://mabma.thereeftank.com/postpics/3dflagsdotcom_phili_2fabs.gif

PromptCritical

March 7, 2005, 05:55 PM

A little gun nut psychoanalysis: People of the "Gun-culture" have been demonized as half-wit, racist, antisocial, right-wing, redneck troglodytes for the last 25 or so years. We know what we believe is true. As one, I agree. The only real way to say "Hah! I told you so!" to the rest of the masses is a successful armed rebellion. Anything short of that and everyone goes on believing us to be nut-jobs. Therein lies the problem. None of us really wants a war. War is rather nasty business. If all these problems are resolved via the ballot box as was intended, the country will be more free, but, we will still be thought of as half-wit, racist, antisocial, right-wing, redneck troglodytes. Free, but still treated like scum. A revolution would be our final vindication.

cuchulainn

March 7, 2005, 06:58 PM

This foreigner begs you clarify, if you please: are you American? Yes, I'm citizen. I've been one since the day I was born.

I've lived in the USA my whole life.

:confused:

Grey54956

March 7, 2005, 07:21 PM

Can I have a Lime Green Jumpsuit?

molonlabe

March 7, 2005, 07:28 PM

Post 111 finally brought me back to reality. Thanks David. I'm outta here. ;)

I just read 109 LOL

Fletchette

March 7, 2005, 08:07 PM

After reading through all these posts (excruciating) I have concluded that I, personally have irreconsilable differences with cuchulainn and Wildalaska. That's fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion.

My opinion is the following: It is all fine and dandy to berate those who rattle their sabers, but it is hypocritical to turn around and berate those who are actually walking the walk (Minutemen). You may not agree with their cause, but it is contradictory to not respect them for taking the initiative.

Civil disobedience has been all very trendy in the last few decades, but I am afraid it simply will not work in the Blogosphere. Openly defying the government will not result in controversial pictures of peaceful citizens getting mauled by police dogs. All that will happen is that the webpage of the vocal blogger will simply dissappear; "404 Not Found".

Without lines of communication, we as a community would be no more. I think that it is very important for people to discuss NOW what we should do should McCain-Feingold decend onto the internet.

horge

March 8, 2005, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by cuchulainn
Yes, I'm citizen. I've been one since the day I was born.
I've lived in the USA my whole life.

Thanks.

cuchulainn

March 8, 2005, 05:17 AM

Well, it seems like 2nd Amendment has run away after mounting a strawman argument.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=1574351&postcount=107

R.H. Lee

March 8, 2005, 08:10 AM

Excellent post, Intune. Very well stated. :)

2nd Amendment

March 8, 2005, 09:05 AM

There was no strawman argument. You don't even have that definition correct. What you have is yet another opinion of yours masquerading as fact. And allow me to thank you for further eroding any slim measure of credibility you may have still had with that childish outburst in BIG WRITING.

cuchulainn

March 8, 2005, 09:19 AM

There was no strawman argument. You don't even have that definition correct. Jeeze o peeze, now I have to trot out the definitions.

My argument in this thread: The keyboard "patriots" are silly, boring and often harmful because all they do is spew out a bunch of empty rhetoric. They are nothing a bunch of blowhards who will never act on their violent innuendos.

2nd Amendment's straw man: He asked if I had "a line" where I'd rebel. I told him that like every human, yes I do. He then proceded to pretend that we had been arguing about whether it ever was proper to rebel (and since I had a line, it was "only a matter of when").

He made up and argument, ascribed it to me and attacked that. He committed a case book straw man.

Definition of a straw man argument

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.htmlThe Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person's actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1) Person A has position X.
2) Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3) Person B attacks position Y.
4) Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself. One might as well expect an attack on a poor drawing of a person to hurt the person.

Molon Labe

March 8, 2005, 09:22 AM

Exciting thread.

2nd Amendment: You're a true patriot, my friend. And seeing that we're neighbors, I look forward to the day of fighting side-by-side with you. Email me.

cuchulainn: I can only assume you would have supported the Crown in 1776, and ridiculed all the "chest-beaters" populating the pubs in downtown Boston. It's not necessary for you to feel shame about this; after all, a good chunk of the populace shares your opinion, both then and now. But it is good for us patriots to know this about you. We will not forget.

Cuchulainn, the day will come when I and others fight. In fact, and apparently unbeknownst to you, it has already started if you consider training to be a prerequisite to fighting. Right now there are many groups across this country that train on a regular basis. Training primarily focuses on the strategies and tactics of guerrilla warfare, and honing skills such as precision rifle shooting, land navigation, cover & concealment, caching, communication, ambushing, and propaganda. We've been doing this for years. (In fact, I attended training last Saturday with a local group. Everyone took Fred's AQT test to evaluate their rifleman skills.)

"So when are you going to do it, Molon? Is the McCain-Feingold bill the straw that breaks the camel’s back?" No. I laugh in the bill's face. I simply ignore it. See how easy that was? I didn't even have to grab my FAL.

One of your problems, cuchulainn, is that you envision the rebellion starting at a discrete point in time. You envision people running out of their homes with rifles in hand. This is not how a guerrilla warfare campaign is conducted. Such a campaign lasts many years and goes through many phases.

The initial phases have already begun.

cuchulainn

March 8, 2005, 09:27 AM

cuchulainn: I can only assume you would have supported the Crown in 1776, and ridiculed all the "chest-beaters" populating the pubs in downtown Boston. The difference -- AND THIS HAS BEEN MY POINT ALL ALONG -- is that today's keyboard "patriots" are nothing like the real 1776 Patriots.

They are nothing but hot air. They won't rebel. For decades, they've been talking about "the revolution" being just around the corner. But they never act.

It's always tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow with them.

Comparing the keyboard "patriots" to the real 1776 Patriots.

is like

Comparing guy who pretends to have gone to Vietam with a guy who lost a leg and won the Medal of Honor saving his buddies over there.

2nd Amendment

March 8, 2005, 09:52 AM

Thank you for further demonstrating you have no point and that there was no strawman argument. The Patriots of then talked about it for years. It took specific events to finally light the rhetoric afire with a sufficient number of them to get the job done. Each had a slightly different place where their line was drawn, but eventually enough of those lines were crossed. And in the meantime each talked about it with others. Thus my point, which you of course understand clearly but are desperate to ignore.

The only difference between today and then is we have different methods of communication which more freely allow the...unwilling... to be, or pretend to be, involved. That and we, today, have tolerated far more than they were willing to then. Sadly, that provides the likes of you even more fodder for your harrassment.

Personally I think this thread is done. All I see from the current Resident Statist is the same error repeated almost verbatim time and time again. I refuse to dignify it with any further replies.