• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on the ta

Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

And Democrats need to understand that terrorists won't go away by offering them a bag of weed.

Does that include domestic terrorists, or only furreners?

I would just like to add this: purple crap that comes from the behind of a baboon is not suitable to use as nutrients.

Since it seems we're making ridiculous statements that have no basis in reality I thought I'd join in.

So are you saying that Americans will be intimidated by terrorist threats? I have a much higher opinion of my countrymen than that.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

No, I'm saying there's no "terrorists threats" that's being discussed in this thread so you're ridiculous statement was as pertinent to the topic as me talking about purple crapping baboons.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

If you were referring to 'classic liberalism' then you should say so. But you said 'Right Wing' and of course, in the usage of the term today, they were certainly "Right Wing". It is the Left Wing who is trying to undo what these wise men created, and who will bring down the country in the process.

Calling the US Founding Fathers "Left Wing" would be a very egregious insult to their memory and foresight.

"In politics, Left, left-wing and leftist are generally used to describe support for social change to create a more egalitarian society.[1][2] The terms Left and Right were coined during the French Revolution, referring to the seating arrangement in parliament; those who sat on the left generally supported the radical changes of the revolution, including the creation of a republic and secularization.[3]" Wikipedia



The Founding Fathers were left wing.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Whose thoughts and philosophies are by FAR better-represented among modern American "conservatives" than they are among modern American "liberals."

Liberals are for change, progression, secularization and equal rights for everyone. This sounds like are founding fathers. Conservatives want to keep things the way they are, discriminate against certain classes and want to enforce social control based on Christian ideologies. Please explain how are founding fathers were in-line with modern day conservatives.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Liberals are for change, progression, secularization and equal rights for everyone. This sounds like are founding fathers. Conservatives want to keep things the way they are, discriminate against certain classes and want to enforce social control based on Christian ideologies. Please explain how are founding fathers were in-line with modern day conservatives.

You must have forgotten that the Southern colonies were all represented in the Continental Congress by 'conservatives', who were well off, influential, slave owning and supporting men who wanted those things to remain part of their lives in the new country they were trying to form. Were the southern delegates any less founding fathers than the northern?
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

You must have forgotten that the Southern colonies were all represented in the Continental Congress by 'conservatives', who were well off, influential, slave owning and supporting men who wanted those things to remain part of their lives in the new country they were trying to form. Were the southern delegates any less founding fathers than the northern?

Touche. I should have deleted that last point "equal rights for everyone". That was their hypocrisy, they only believed in equal rights for WASP, and considered anyone else second class citizens.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Liberals are for change, progression, secularization and equal rights for everyone. This sounds like are founding fathers. Conservatives want to keep things the way they are, discriminate against certain classes and want to enforce social control based on Christian ideologies. Please explain how are founding fathers were in-line with modern day conservatives.

Liberals are for destruction of tradition, dependency, devaluing of human life, and creating special classes of people based on race and gender. Conservatives want to respect traditions, treating people equal under the law, allow for individual excellence, and believe that every view point and action isn't inherently "okay".

Isn't it wonderful when you use hyperbolic stereotyping to overgeneralize and narrowly describe through bias the opposite side in the worst way possible while putting the best spin possible on your own all in the misguided notion that you're making some kind of enlightening point? Its so fun!

The entire notion of arguing which side is "more like the founders" is a bit ridiculous because there's issues on both sides that break with them. While an argument could be made one or the other is "closer", the only reason such an irrelevant argument is made is to try and imply that by being "Closer" that they represent the ideals of the founders.

Not to mention this entire notion that the founders are some kind of monolithic entity where the entire group viewed situations all in a singular way is ridiculous. There are undoubtably some founding fathers that likely thought closer in line with todays democrats, others with todays republicans, others with todays libertarians, and still others who likely bare show any true relation to any of them. Its a rather pointless dick measuring contest.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Liberals are for change, progression, secularization and equal rights for everyone. This sounds like are founding fathers.

If you think so, then you have no idea what the Revolution was about.

Conservatives want to keep things the way they are, discriminate against certain classes and want to enforce social control based on Christian ideologies. Please explain how are founding fathers were in-line with modern day conservatives.

Even taking this slobberingly self-serving definition of "conservatives" as gospel, you should probably research the actual men who were our Founders a bit more.

And, once again, you should probably find out what the Revolution was actually about.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

No, I'm saying there's no "terrorists threats" that's being discussed in this thread

Threatening violence if the American people don't vote how you want them to is a terrorist threat - one Republicans have been making with increasing impunity ever since 2008. And I'm saying we will not be intimidated. Hopefully that's clear enough.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Threatening violence if the American people don't vote how you want them to is a terrorist threat

What candidate is making those threats? Specific quotes? What political party has that as some kind of platform? What commonly held Tea Party document or individual has stated this?

one Republicans have been making with increasing impunity ever since 2008.

Please show me quotes of Republicans, especially in any kind of significant number, suggesting violence if people don't vote how they want.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

What candidate is making those threats? Specific quotes? What political party has that as some kind of platform? What commonly held Tea Party document or individual has stated this?



Please show me quotes of Republicans, especially in any kind of significant number, suggesting violence if people don't vote how they want.

you know that angle has specifically brought up "second amendment remedies".......
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

you know that angle has specifically brought up "second amendment remedies".......

Specific quote please.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th


Liblady, the following:

"Our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason, and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government," Angle told conservative talk show host Lars Larson in January. "In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that's not where we're going, but you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."

Is HUGELY different than this

Threatening violence if the American people don't vote how you want them to is a terrorist threat

Sharon Angle is not "theatening violence", indeed she states that she hopes there is no violence. She is not talking about "votes" but actions. She is not speaking about herself, but about what she thinks others are doing.

Every quote of her your post presented had her specifically saying she hopes that's not what happens or doesn't want that ot happen, none of it is her threatening it, none of them are advocating it. It is a large leap to go from her stating that she thinks, but hopes its not the case, that people are approaching the desire to take "second amendment remedies" if congress doesn't change what its doing and her "threatening violence if people don't vote her way".
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Liblady, the following:



Is HUGELY different than this



Sharon Angle is not "theatening violence", indeed she states that she hopes there is no violence. She is not talking about "votes" but actions. She is not speaking about herself, but about what she thinks others are doing.

Every quote of her your post presented had her specifically saying she hopes that's not what happens or doesn't want that ot happen, none of it is her threatening it, none of them are advocating it. It is a large leap to go from her stating that she thinks, but hopes its not the case, that people are approaching the desire to take "second amendment remedies" if congress doesn't change what its doing and her "threatening violence if people don't vote her way".

i disagee.....the fact that she brings up "second amendment remedies" at all is troubling. saying "she hopes" people don't resort to that is disengenuous. because what she is really saying is that if she doesn't win, all hell will break loose.

Angle: I feel that the Second Amendment is the right to keep and bear arms for our citizenry. This not for someone who's in the military. This not for law enforcement. This is for us. And in fact when you read that Constitution and the founding fathers, they intended this to stop tyranny. This is for us when our government becomes tyrannical...

Manders: If we needed it at any time in history, it might be right now.

Angle: Well it's to defend ourselves. And you know, I'm hoping that we're not getting to Second Amendment remedies. I hope the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems

now, what do you suppose she means? i don't understand why some of you can't admit that she is bat**** crazy.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

i disagee.....the fact that she brings up "second amendment remedies" at all is troubling.

But I'm not discussing if its troubling or not. YOU jumped into a conversation where I was addressing the other posters extremely hyperbole. If you want to have a discussion on whether its troubling I'd love to have it elsewhere, but don't jump into the middle of one discussion and not expect the conversation to be about what you're jumping into.

Troubling language is different than Terrorists Threats.

saying "she hopes" people don't resort to that is disengenuous. because what she is really saying is that if she doesn't win, all hell will break loose.

No, that's YOUR implication. Her statement is that if congress doesn't change the way its acting she fears in time people may be looking towards revolution. That is FAR different than "Threatening terrorist actions".

now, what do you suppose she means? i don't understand why some of you can't admit that she is bat**** crazy.

The conversation isn't about whether or not she's bat**** crazy. The conversation is about whether or not she's issuing terrorist threats.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

But I'm not discussing if its troubling or not. YOU jumped into a conversation where I was addressing the other posters extremely hyperbole. If you want to have a discussion on whether its troubling I'd love to have it elsewhere, but don't jump into the middle of one discussion and not expect the conversation to be about what you're jumping into.

Troubling language is different than Terrorists Threats.





No, that's YOUR implication. Her statement is that if congress doesn't change the way its acting she fears in time people may be looking towards revolution. That is FAR different than "Threatening terrorist actions".



The conversation isn't about whether or not she's bat**** crazy. The conversation is about whether or not she's issuing terrorist threats.

you're right, zyphlin, about jumping into the conversation. my bad.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

you're right, zyphlin, about jumping into the conversation. my bad.

Trust me, I'm not a giant Sharon Angle fan. I think she makes some ludicrous statements. I think the statements you linked to were ridiculous and stupid to say.

I don't think they're

Troubadour said:
terrorist threats

that were

Troubadour said:
Threatening violence if the American people don't vote how you want them to

It was the over exaggeration and hyperbole, and using that over exaggeration and hyperbole to insult all republicans, which was the problems.

If someone says Charles Barkley was the greatest NBA player of all time then I'm going to say that's absolutely crazy. That doesn't mean I don't think Charles Barkley is a good player, or even ONE of the greatest, it just means I'm disagreeing with the over the top exaggeration someone was stating.

Saying that what Sharon Angle said wasn't a Terrorist Threat isn't saying what she said was smart, understandable, or reasonable.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

As I read this story I must have missed the part that somehow connects Obama's tyranny and despotism (which are the same thing) to President Bush.

The Trifecta of Doom has acted with impunity as they ignored "WE THE PEOPLE" and as much as gave us all the finger and passed the phony Health Care kill Granny plan anyway.

They have continued to spend money we don't have on projects that have been proven don't work.

I have been waiting to hear this out in the open. For almost a year I have heard this said and have seen and been told of emails that were hinting of the possibility.

Okay first he misquoted the Declaration of Independence which says:




I want the revolution to come Nov.2nd at the ballot box, not as suggested by radical followers of Mao in the Obama administration at the point of a gun.

Besides as I have pointed out Obama has violated his oath of office as it relates to Article 4 Section 4 of the Constitution, which says in part: "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion,"

This is an impeachable offense and it's only one of many, and that's god enough for me.

What a load of sanctimonious crap.

And that's all I have to say about this piece of poor arguing.

It's all Republicans can do - lose an election one year and use their monetary machine to trump up false charges and attempt to throw the Democrat out of office.

Same old story. You once again prove that there is nothing 'new' about the Tea Party at all. It's just regurgitation of failed policies that have been attempted by the past several generations of Republicans. You let Republicans destroy the economy over from about 2002 to 2007; blame the other side; manipulate a legitimately angry populous into voting against its own self-interest and then make up bull**** charges against a Democratic President so you can set up K-Street for your lobbyists and make sure your Wall Street masters can once again rape the Middle Class with illegal market tools meant to steal from the unsuspecting while they place hedge bets against them so they'll walk away billionaires while you work till you die because your 401(k) is gone.

Hope you enjoy it, because it will be your fault when it all starts all over again in about three or four years.
 
Re: Republican congressional candidate says violent overthrow of government is 'on th

Yeah, right. LOL

I hate to tell you this, those "liberals" you refer to had GUNS and believed in GOD. You'd hate every one of them.

Todays liberals would never have been laughed out of town in those days.

I have guns (well, I did have quite a few, and plan to get some more) and believe in God. What exactly are you trying to say?
 
Back
Top Bottom