The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-04-2016, 06:07 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 02:13 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 10:54 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  This will be a collective decision, only after the country has moved too far to the left that no return is possible. Many things will need to happen before this can occur. It will take a far left Democrat in the white house, a majority of Democrats in both houses of Congress, and a majority of left wing judges on the supreme Court. A major anti gun law will have to be passed, signed into law, and successfully upheld by the courts. This could take years before this scenario plays out. But I suspect some day it actually will.

And at that time you idiots will cheerfully go to war against the principles of democracy? Welcome to Third World warlord heaven Rolleyes

America is not a democracy. The bill of rights are considered natural rights, not to be taken away by vote of the majority of people. If the 2nd amendment is to be changed, it should be done through the amendment process. If 51% of the country thinks guns should be banned, that doesn't mean they should be. Just as if 51% of Americans are christian, we are all not forced to be christian.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Lord Dark Helmet's post
26-04-2016, 06:41 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 06:07 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 02:13 AM)morondog Wrote:  And at that time you idiots will cheerfully go to war against the principles of democracy? Welcome to Third World warlord heaven Rolleyes

America is not a democracy. The bill of rights are considered natural rights, not to be taken away by vote of the majority of people. If the 2nd amendment is to be changed, it should be done through the amendment process. If 51% of the country thinks guns should be banned, that doesn't mean they should be. Just as if 51% of Americans are christian, we are all not forced to be christian.

That's why a Constitutional amendment requires a 66 percent majority of the House and the Senate to pass...............

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 07:02 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
The 2A is irrelevant today. It was implemented because the States didn't want a standing army, and thought local militias would be sufficient to defend the frontier settlements from Indian raids and the coastal town from pirate attacks.

Invoking the 2A without consideration of the first clause, the one that states WHY people should be allowed to bear arms, is hypocritical. It's as bad a wrapping oneself in the flag. I've yet to see a "well-regulated militia" meet for drills.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 07:19 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 05:50 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If this scenario ever needed to take place, it wouldn't be just an "uprising."

45% of the military comes from the south and a recent poll of active military members showed that less than 10% identify as Democrats. When the time comes, that firepower won't be on your side. The military might stay neutral, or they will be on the side of the revolution. In fact, I could see see military leaders leading the charge to overthrow a fully Democrat government and Court that was threatening to alter the 2nd amendment.

You are insane.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Unbeliever's post
26-04-2016, 07:58 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 07:02 AM)Gawdzilla Wrote:  The 2A is irrelevant today. It was implemented because the States didn't want a standing army, and thought local militias would be sufficient to defend the frontier settlements from Indian raids and the coastal town from pirate attacks.

Invoking the 2A without consideration of the first clause, the one that states WHY people should be allowed to bear arms, is hypocritical. It's as bad a wrapping oneself in the flag. I've yet to see a "well-regulated militia" meet for drills.

Actually, it was to protect against slave revolts in the south. The Amendment was pushed to prevent a President from an anti-slavery northern state playing the commander-and-chief role and ordering a militia far from home, leaving the citizens with no means to defend against the slaves, who seriously outnumbered them. The 2nd Amendment ensured the south could always quickly replenish the local militia.

The southern states had very active militia at that time precisely because of the slave revolt concerns. And, the tension between free and slave states existed from day 1 of the union. The most amazing part of the Civil War is that it took roughly 70 years to happen. We were heading that direction long before the south fired on Fort Sumter.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
26-04-2016, 08:46 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 05:50 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 12:05 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  Completely disagree. Small arms cannot effectively neutralize ground-attack aircraft, main battle tanks, financial strength, and such an uprising would surely incur the resentment if not the active hostility of the local population.

This scenario is a fantasy.

If this scenario ever needed to take place, it wouldn't be just an "uprising."

45% of the military comes from the south and a recent poll of active military members showed that less than 10% identify as Democrats. When the time comes, that firepower won't be on your side. The military might stay neutral, or they will be on the side of the revolution. In fact, I could see see military leaders leading the charge to overthrow a fully Democrat government and Court that was threatening to alter the 2nd amendment.


I think you seriously underestimate the coordination and discipline needed to make this happen, while also seriously underestimating the discipline of the US military.

Far-right conservatives can't even propose a semi-popular presidential nominee who isn't bat-shit-crazy; what makes you think they could find a charismatic leader to foment revolution within an institution like the U.S. military?

As for the "uprising", I've got two words to suggest: drone strikes

Your faith is not evidence, your opinion is not fact, and your bias is not wisdom
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Reducetarian's post
26-04-2016, 09:24 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 12:15 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  
(25-04-2016 11:44 AM)BnW Wrote:  To be honest, I'd vote for Kasich if he got the nod. If it's him or Clinton, that's a no brainer for me.

I'd have to think about it, but Kasich is the only Republican I'd even consider. I dislike his stance on reproductive rights, and I dislike his comments on re-invading Iraq -- those are two big issues with me, candidate notwithstanding.

Kasich does, however, have the advantages of not being either batshit crazy, or a congenital liar. There's that.

Leaving aside the people wanting to commit treason and launch an uprising to destroy the rule of law in our nation; how do you feel about Romney then as a brokered convention candidate? Part of me wonders if he could actually do well under the "Make Politics Bland Again" banner.

Need to think of a witty signature.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Shai Hulud's post
26-04-2016, 09:27 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 08:46 AM)Reducetarian Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 05:50 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  If this scenario ever needed to take place, it wouldn't be just an "uprising."

45% of the military comes from the south and a recent poll of active military members showed that less than 10% identify as Democrats. When the time comes, that firepower won't be on your side. The military might stay neutral, or they will be on the side of the revolution. In fact, I could see see military leaders leading the charge to overthrow a fully Democrat government and Court that was threatening to alter the 2nd amendment.


I think you seriously underestimate the coordination and discipline needed to make this happen, while also seriously underestimating the discipline of the US military.

Far-right conservatives can't even propose a semi-popular presidential nominee who isn't bat-shit-crazy; what makes you think they could find a charismatic leader to foment revolution within an institution like the U.S. military?

As for the "uprising", I've got two words to suggest: drone strikes

Good luck finding people to control drones from a group that sympathizes with the uprising. As I said before, only 10% of military members identify as Democrat. Most of the officers are conservative republicans as well.

100 million armed Americans, 70% or more of the U.S. military. This civil war would last a day at most.

You think Americans just keep guns for fun? Most of us keep guns for self defense. The day the government attempts to take that ability from us is the day the government is replaced.

We will not disarm. Ever.

"Evil will always triumph over good, because good is dumb." - Lord Dark Helmet
[Image: 25397spaceballs.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-04-2016, 09:40 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 09:27 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 08:46 AM)Reducetarian Wrote:  I think you seriously underestimate the coordination and discipline needed to make this happen, while also seriously underestimating the discipline of the US military.

Far-right conservatives can't even propose a semi-popular presidential nominee who isn't bat-shit-crazy; what makes you think they could find a charismatic leader to foment revolution within an institution like the U.S. military?

As for the "uprising", I've got two words to suggest: drone strikes

Good luck finding people to control drones from a group that sympathizes with the uprising. As I said before, only 10% of military members identify as Democrat. Most of the officers are conservative republicans as well.

100 million armed Americans, 70% or more of the U.S. military. This civil war would last a day at most.

You think Americans just keep guns for fun? Most of us keep guns for self defense. The day the government attempts to take that ability from us is the day the government is replaced.

We will not disarm. Ever.

What makes you think the drones need to be fired from US soil, by US forces?

I don't discount the possibility of a second US civil war, but I don't believe it will be left versus right, or government versus anti-government forces: I think it is more likely to be the increasingly marginalized poor and middle classes uprising to overthrow the 1%.
But whether they succeed or not is an entirely different kettle of fish.

Your faith is not evidence, your opinion is not fact, and your bias is not wisdom
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Reducetarian's post
26-04-2016, 09:41 AM
RE: The Civil War of the Grand Old Party
(26-04-2016 09:27 AM)Lord Dark Helmet Wrote:  
(26-04-2016 08:46 AM)Reducetarian Wrote:  I think you seriously underestimate the coordination and discipline needed to make this happen, while also seriously underestimating the discipline of the US military.

Far-right conservatives can't even propose a semi-popular presidential nominee who isn't bat-shit-crazy; what makes you think they could find a charismatic leader to foment revolution within an institution like the U.S. military?

As for the "uprising", I've got two words to suggest: drone strikes

Good luck finding people to control drones from a group that sympathizes with the uprising. As I said before, only 10% of military members identify as Democrat. Most of the officers are conservative republicans as well.

100 million armed Americans, 70% or more of the U.S. military. This civil war would last a day at most.

You think Americans just keep guns for fun? Most of us keep guns for self defense. The day the government attempts to take that ability from us is the day the government is replaced.

We will not disarm. Ever.

In your scenario, you explicitly stated that a far left president would be in office (i.e. an elected representative of the people), that both houses of parliament would be left dominated and that the law would have passed. In other words a majority of the nation would have voted for it. That would mean that most people *did* want to disarm, and that you with your gun fetish were an illegal rebel.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: