Posted on 12/24/2010 8:49:29 AM PST by Lazamataz
This is where yo make the best point...Something, a few others do not, or refuse to see...
Sure we can certainly take it to a violent level, but wouldn’t it be great to just make the changes we can every year at the ballot box???
If the November election didn’t prove it to anyone who was paying attention, then I dunno...
If we et to a point where it turns to violence, then we ALL lose...
That doesn’t mean I am unable or unwilling to do what Ihave to in any situation...We just had better figure out what we can do before it “really” comes to blows...
We (Conservatives) are way smarter than this...
I’ve read that Thomas Jefferson was asked by someone, “Do you have us a Constitution?” - Jefferson answered, “Yes. If you can keep it.”
I believe that the founders who practiced prayer did pray that we could KEEP IT!
Spot on.
While an excellent argument can be made for term limits (which, along with elimination of the fat pensions, perks and LAME DUCK SESSIONS I favor), I would offer that, currently, our chances of getting them are somewhere between slim and none. The sad fact that we are even discussing them is a manifestation of the even sadder fact that, until recently, Americans have grown complacently inattentive to the actions of and abuses by government at all levels. The phrase “Let George do it” springs to mind. More folks know the names of the characters on “Lost” and “Dancing With The Stars” than know who allegedly “represents” them in the House.
Having said that, I must respectfully disagree with calls for a Constitutional Convention. I do so for the same reasons I joined with others to repel the push for a ConCon during the Carter maladministration.
Please recall that the FIRST ConCon was convened to REVISE the Articles of Confederation and, while it produced a radically different – and arguably superior – national charter, the problem to which I referred at the top would almost certainly lead to a loss of even more of the freedoms too many of us now take for granted.
A second ConCon would be populated by current political elites who have been selected BY their fellow political elites. Think Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, Fortney “Pete” Stark, etc. Be afraid. Be VERY AFRAID!
Unfortunately for us and our liberties, General Washington, Messers. Madison, Franklin, Adams, Sherman and the others will not be there this time. Once in session, THERE WOULD BE NO PRACTICAL WAY TO CONTROL THEM.
But, say you, the PEOPLE would have to ratify any such actions. Please recall that, today, these would be the same people who gave us Barrack Obama and hundreds of “progressives” on Capitol Hill in 2008.
Yes, 2010 WAS a course change and, no, I’m not giving up on the people. In our system, they should, within Constitutional constraints, have the last word.
Mr. Jefferson’s advice in that area comes to mind:
“I know of no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them but to inform their discretion.”
Those of us who wish to save this nation and return it to a condition the Founders would again recognize must continue to “…inform their discretion.”
Dick Bachert
Not to be pedantic, but I believe that question was addressed to Benjamin Franklin by a woman as he emerged from the last session of the convention. His response was as you reported it.
This is what brought down the USSR. The soviet security forces refused to put down the demonstrations; and that would be the case for a popular uprising in the US.
The Tea Party movement is the beginning of this. The biggest protest was (I think) around 2 Million people. If they had been more ticked off, they could have taken over and occupied the Capitol Building for example. Libertarians and Conservatives are not accustomed to this kind of extreme protest, but it would scare the ruling class, and they would not ignore it like they do with the Tea Parties.
If the ruling class used force (sound waves, etc) to put down the demonstration, it would be all over Facebook, etc, and the rebellion would grow. If the govt shuts down the internet, the rebellion would grow.
This is how Tyrannies end.
Good deal...LOL ! We stay prepared for all things , good and bad and try and vote with our dollars between elections.
Both those books are on my shelf and in PDF form on the computer and kindle reader etc ... and shared with friends and coworkers trying to keep those around us educated as to what we perceive is right and wrong with our nation right now and tomorrow etc ...
Merry Christmas to you and yours Sir !
Stay safe !
Any protest or standoff at the neighborhood level would, at best, end like the Branch Davidians in Waco. It was all over the news, and people cheered for the government.
All protests need to be on federal turf. That is where the ruling class is. It will take millions of protesters in the same camera shot to get the ball rolling.
Thanks for the ping, JB.
Excellent article, Laz.
Merry Christmas to y’all and your families.
If the dog is in the kitchen getting into the food,
you shouldn’t blame the dog, after all, he is just being a dog.
You should blame the person who let the dog in the kitchen.
This is how I think about Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and their ilk.
They are just behaving as who they are.
I blame my fellow citizens who put them in office.
If you got rid of Pelosi, Reid, Obama, and their ilk;
and had the same electorate in place,
those people would just be replaced by someone just like them,
and the electorate would let another dog in the kitchen.
Our fellow citizens need education and enlightenment as to
why that is a bad idea.
Thanks for the ping.
I’d have to disagree.
Depends on the guy (or gal) with the 12 guage who is probably a retired Marine, and the young Marine with the Machine gun. ;) who just might surprise people with where that machine gun winds up getting pointed.
Brazil.
I do believe that you specified that "government forces can go one block at a time with crushing force", which seems to me to be beyond the appropriate reaction to a mere protest. Do you agree?
In the case of the Branch Davidians, yes, the fedgov and their media cheerers-on did indeed spend a lot of time and effort in their propaganda campaign, marginalizing them and painting them as "weirdos", and they were successful. In the beginning. For the most part. However, I do recall (and there should be plenty in the FR archives and elsewhere to support this) that not everyone was cheering, and that fewer and fewer people agreed with the actions of the fedgov as time went on.
(Of course, the media didn't report much or any of that, did they?)
So, yes, the fedgov and the media would likely be successful with a similar propaganda campaign. In the beginning. For a while. However, I believe that the further they carried their campaign of "crushing force ... block by block", the more the tide of public support would turn against them. Do you not agree? Ask yourself how you would react should your daughter's block be one of the blocks in the path of the crushing force.
All protests need to be on federal turf. That is where the ruling class is.
It all depends on just where things are at in the process, does it not? Millions showed up for the various Tea Party protests, and the fedgov and the media either ignored, under-counted or marginalized and misrepresented them. Why do you believe that similar mass protests would not receive the same treatment?
However, my response was aimed more at the "what happens when fedgov begins their 'block by block, crushing force'" campaign of terror that you hypothesized, not whether mass protests were or were not an appropriate starting place and first (or second, or third) attempt at getting the attention of our servants and employees.
In that light, it appears that you did not ponder the points that I offered up. I suggest that, while the offices and trappings of power are indeed mostly on fedgov land, not all of individual or collective fedgov apparatchiks are so restricted, and not all of the time. They have homes and families and places that they frequent and so on, just like those people in the blocks you believe will be so effectively and easily crushed, one by one.
What I'm suggesting is that I do not believe that such a campaign of terror, even if initially and seemingly supported by the American public (if one would believe the drive-by media reports) would be able to maintain its support or ongoing success. I believe that it would ultimately fail, for a variety of reasons.
Very good, Laz.
bttt
“it is WELL PAST Claire Wolfe’s popular admonition”
Claire herself has said so.
“We are now involved in a Civil....Civil War.”
Baloney. Everyone is following the rules, however strained or creative the interpretation thereof. Nobody is being killed as a matter of SOP.
“War” is when rules are disregarded/broken en masse, to wit killing people and breaking things, until one side consents to submit just to get devastation to end.
“Civil”, as in civilized war, is when both sides stop to sing Christmas carols, then get back to gassing each other.
What we have now is outright submission. If you were fined $25 for incorrect disposal of a CFL light, you’d pay it to avoid conflict. That is not war.
Well done. I hope you had a very Merry Christmas.
Thank you, dear sir. I intend to write a series of articles offering suggestions and recruiting personnel to implement this Infiltration and Education Plan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.