This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
More Than 44,000 Demand GOP Arrests For "Seditious Conspiracy" Against USA
More than 44,000 people have signed a petition on the MoveOn.org sebsite calling for the Departmnet of Justice to arrest some House Republican leaders for their roles in the givernment shutdown and debt-ceiling debacle. As The Hill reports, the petition singles out Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) and House majority leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), as well as "other decision-making House Republican leaders," for the crime of "seditious conspiracy against the United States of America." While careful to point out that it does not "necessarily endorse the contents of petitions" we thought it ironic that more people successfully completed the petition to arrest the GOP for trying to abolish Obamacare than have successfully signed up for the new law.
Click image for petition
“The House GOP leadership's use of the Hastert Rule and H. Res 368 to shut down the government and threaten the U.S. economy with default is an attempt to extort the United States government into altering or abolishing the Affordable Care Act, and thus, is self-evidently a seditious conspiracy. Arrest the perpetrators in Congress immediately and bring them to justice,” the petition reads.
...Merely reaching the goal doesn’t guarantee the liberal advocacy group will circulate the petition to its email list, which includes the White House, Congress, governors and state legislators. According to its website, MoveOn asks its members directly which petitions should be circulated.
MoveOn says it does not “necessarily endorse the contents of petitions” posted on its site.
And some more explanatory thoughts on this farce from Andfrew McCarthy of The National Review,
...
The petitioners claim the GOP’s recent strategy, leading to a government shut down and “threaten[ing] the U.S. economy with default,” constitutes “an attempt to extort the United States government into altering or abolishing the Affordable Care Act.” That, they proclaim, “is self-evidently a seditious conspiracy”
...
I suppose I should break it to these newfangled patriots that seditious conspiracy is, in essence, about the use or planned use of force against the nation. In fact, Congress first codified the crime during the Civil War to address terrorist acts committed by confederate sympathizers. The Supreme Court explained in the 19th century that the law prohibits forcible aggression, and appellate courts have referred to it as the crime of “waging a war of urban terrorism” against our country.
The statute (Section 2384 of the federal penal code), which is very straightforward and easily accessible online, targets those who conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or levy war against them, or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States[.]…
Although the statute’s title is “seditious conspiracy,” you’ll notice that the word “sedition” does not appear in the text that defines the offense. That owes to the unsavory legacy of the Alien and Sedition Acts – a fact the Left is quick to remind us about when the statute is used against its obviously intended targets, terrorists.
»
- 30027 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
There's no accounting for stupid.
agreed. O&co. are the ones that need to be arrested for plethora of constitutional abuses and at very least 3 Watergate level scandals, and counting...
Progressivism is a mental disorder.
nice edit. classical liberalism isn't a disorder. this perverted progressivism sure is.
Thanks. I was worried that someone was gonna get in there before I could correct myself. ;)
Go Team. By stupid I meant anyone who thinks the politicians and not those who bribe them should be arrested first. The Fed and the bankers are not progressives. They are just greedy oligarchs. And the Blue Team is not progressive. True progressives don't want to build a society in which the top .01% take all the wealth, and they sure as fuck don't vote for banker bailouts. But I'm with you on arresting the whole lot for reasons completely different from the moveon petition.
He should be arrested for buckling under the pressure of the dry powder crowd.
Wow...
Around 50,000 people have forgotten how our government works when it works out deals...
Yeah, the bankers tell both sides what to do and it gets done.
I don't know what everyone is bitchin' about.
Lets start with the Repugnants and once the smell of blood is in the air let's work our way to the other side of the isle and do the Demoncrats.
Gullitones and chopping blocks all around.
Molon labe
So, now fiscal responsibility is treason ?
Now there's a petition I will sign. But we can start with either Team.
Have some fun with it: one player from each camp is let into a maze with one long rifle with one round. Game on!
Did anybody ever start a petition about getting to the bottom of that phony layered birth document, the Connecticut SSN or the Colombia and Harvard foreign mediocre student affirmative action records?
Good luck.
Barry Hussein Soetoro.
I pray you're not completely wicked.
Redemption is possible until you're laying on a slab.
You still have some time.
When are they going to petition the heaping of debt on future generations? Oh I see, you are the "special people" from a "special generation" and consequences don't matter at least for you.
Reality doesn't matter any more. Disgusting!
The 44,000+ on the petition means there are 44,000 people who should be turned into soylent green
national review's distinction regarding force seems less convincing when it is the government, in this case the house of representatives, doing it. the government, remember, has a monopoly on force so when they do something "legal" there is implied force in it.
the part i like best is the disparity in sign up rates. as i read it, the aca is a brick wall for the economy and another millstone around the neck of the working and middle classes.
http://paulcraigroberts.org/2013/02/03/obamacare-a-primer/print/
there may be a mixed metaphor above there but at least it stayed within minerals.
I wonder if these guys realise they're funded by George Soros?
If so, they probably think he's a great philanthropist. Fucking funny old world sometimes.
A guy could die laughing.
Soros funded MoveOn.org, are basically Marxist ‘agent provocateurs’.
George Schwartz (aka Soros) should know all about mass arrests.
Schwartz is possibly the most despicable sort of sociopath.
Schwartz born in Hungary, in order to survive, it is said he collaborated with the Nazis, and worked with a Judenrat, a Jewish council set up by the Nazis to gather information for them, in the arrest and deportation of other Jews.
He enjoyed collaborating with the Nazis against his own people...
George Soros "The Happiest Time in My Life"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZ2U6Rl98PM
We could handle only 50,000. We're talking many M I L L I O N!!
Folks, we've got work to do.
government works?
OK, so now here's one petition to which UKnowWho will respond as it has in excess of the 10k or whatever that "red line" is that he'd promised was to initiate action on behalf of the "people"
ummmmm
Wrong website. This is a MoveOn.org petition and is not the 'We The People' (whitehouse) website.
(we the people. indeed ... cracks me up)
I thought the WH bumped that up to 100K because too many petitions were passing the 10K action mark.
Can't have of-by-for-people.gov being too responsive, like to every...you know...whim.
How many Progressives do you know that are awake? Simply incompatible.
Not many. My point is that most people are tribal. They belong to one of the Teams. The Blue Team is not progressive and the Red Team is not conservative, but most people who belong to one of the Teams identify themselves as one or the other. They are wrong. And the petition is stupid because these people actually think raising the debt ceiling is somehow a good thing for them as opposed to the bankers, and they actually believe that the GOP wanted to stop it from being raised (they never did because their banker contributors wanted it raised). There's no accounting for stupid.
I appreciate your response.
I'd actually really like to hear about the Progs that you know that are awake. I don't understand how someone could continue down the path of Progressivism and then come to the conclusion that the government is the problem.
I don't know what your definition of Progressive is. Personally, I would like to see much smaller government but I believe elected government is a critical check and balance to rule by the biggest bully (oligarchs). I believe government is necessary for a common defense, and I believe government is useful for things like roads, airports, space exploration (think GPS), helping poor people (not the bloated corrupt welfare system now but a true safety net), creating pensions given that the private sector can't or won't, funding but not necessarily running schools, and a host of other things that we all take for granted. The Founders were considered Progressives in their time. I would like to see a government that they envisioned, while preserving freedom everywhere else.
If there were a candidate I believed in who ran for President, I'll bet you'd vote for him over the other guys just as I voted for RP. EDIT, or maybe not based on the downvotes. I know, let's all just take ideological sides and watch it burn while the two Teams who don't believe in ANYTHING we believe in rule us because we are divided on some things.
It is easy to label people. What's not easy is finding the basis for labeling.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/25/books/review/the-righteous-mind-by-jon...
"To the question many people ask about politics — Why doesn’t the other side listen to reason? — Haidt replies: We were never designed to listen to reason. When you ask people moral questions, time their responses and scan their brains, their answers and brain activation patterns indicate that they reach conclusions quickly and produce reasons later only to justify what they’ve decided. The funniest and most painful illustrations are Haidt’s transcripts of interviews about bizarre scenarios. Is it wrong to have sex with a dead chicken? How about with your sister? Is it O.K. to defecate in a urinal? If your dog dies, why not eat it? Under interrogation, most subjects in psychology experiments agree these things are wrong. But none can explain why.
The problem isn’t that people don’t reason. They do reason. But their arguments aim to support their conclusions, not yours. Reason doesn’t work like a judge or teacher, impartially weighing evidence or guiding us to wisdom. It works more like a lawyer or press secretary, justifying our acts and judgments to others. Haidt shows, for example, how subjects relentlessly marshal arguments for the incest taboo, no matter how thoroughly an interrogator demolishes these arguments.
To explain this persistence, Haidt invokes an evolutionary hypothesis: We compete for social status, and the key advantage in this struggle is the ability to influence others. Reason, in this view, evolved to help us spin, not to help us learn. So if you want to change people’s minds, Haidt concludes, don’t appeal to their reason. Appeal to reason’s boss: the underlying moral intuitions whose conclusions reason defends.
Haidt’s account of reason is a bit too simple — his whole book, after all, is a deployment of reason to advance learning — and his advice sounds cynical. But set aside those objections for now, and go with him. If you follow Haidt through the tunnel of cynicism, you’ll find that what he’s really after is enlightenment. He wants to open your mind to the moral intuitions of other people.
In the West, we think morality is all about harm, rights, fairness and consent. Does the guy own the chicken? Is the dog already dead? Is the sister of legal age? But step outside your neighborhood or your country, and you’ll discover that your perspective is highly anomalous. Haidt has read ethnographies, traveled the world and surveyed tens of thousands of people online. He and his colleagues have compiled a catalog of six fundamental ideas that commonly undergird moral systems: care, fairness, liberty, loyalty, authority and sanctity. Alongside these principles, he has found related themes that carry moral weight: divinity, community, hierarchy, tradition, sin and degradation.
The worldviews Haidt discusses may differ from yours. They don’t start with the individual. They start with the group or the cosmic order. They exalt families, armies and communities. They assume that people should be treated differently according to social role or status — elders should be honored, subordinates should be protected. They suppress forms of self-expression that might weaken the social fabric. They assume interdependence, not autonomy. They prize order, not equality.
These moral systems aren’t ignorant or backward. Haidt argues that they’re common in history and across the globe because they fit human nature. He compares them to cuisines. We acquire morality the same way we acquire food preferences: we start with what we’re given. If it tastes good, we stick with it. If it doesn’t, we reject it. People accept God, authority and karma because these ideas suit their moral taste buds. Haidt points to research showing that people punish cheaters, accept many hierarchies and don’t support equal distribution of benefits when contributions are unequal."
He's right but he forgets one basic truth -- what many people believe is based on what they are taught as children. Most people (not all, but the large majority) belong to a particular religion, for example, because they were raised with that religion . It is the reason that many Muslims are convinced 100% that the religion is the only true one. Same for many Christians. It's no coincidence that the vast majority of those people are raised by parents who believe in that religion and they are indoctrinated. The tendency to be indoctrinated may be hardwired, but it is the teaching that selects the religion. The oligarchs who control this country teach both Teams what to believe. Most people who are raised Blue stay blue and same for the other Team. We now have a media owned by a few giant corporations that teach the two Team values day in and day out on the tee vee. It is no accident that big corporations have developed competing cable and other tee vee that pretends to have different values, while teaching the same basic "truths" like that the Fed is okay and taxing the rich too much will destroy the world. And most importantly, that you must vote for one of the Teams to fix things. The internet is causing some people to wake up and realize they have been programmed (no pun intended). There's hope, until they shut it down. Which they are working on (not to get rid of it, but to make it controlled entirely by the same corporations that control television and newspapers).
An excellent response and unfortunately full of truth. :)
I have yet to find where this wabbit hole leads. Down, down -- deeper we must go.
I'm 'liberal progressive', don't hold any of the beliefs I was raised in.
Reading, travelling and getting out of your comfort zone will make you learn. If all you know is what you were taught by your parents, yeah, you'll probably think just like them.
So you really mean "illiberal regressive", right?
Actually, that explains a lot about you.
Actually, that explains a lot about you.
After arguing with me for this long on zh you haven't noticed?? lol
I was a Progressive. Born and raised.
Woke up. Chased team Red for a year or two. Listened to Mr. Beck for a while. So many memories...
--
Progressivism (i.e., gov do no wrong, gov solution, more gov better solution, etc.), as it's practiced today, is a dead end.
--
Long Live Our Constitutional Republic.
@ JAMES COLE Maybe you are one of those gaming the liberal line to keep your 3 Obamaphones and section 8 housing and EBT card. Or are you sitting in a MIC cyber room trolling the ZH cite to get in your 8 hours? Either way you're a cockroach. Just sayin bro.
I'm 'liberal progressive', don't hold any of the beliefs I was raised in.
Most of the time though, you sound just plain retard...
It's not really teaching, more like re-inforcing innate behaviors - developing them.
-- Is it wrong to have sex with a dead chicken?
Only if you can't find a live chicken to have sex with.
-- How about your sister?
If your parents don't mind.
-- Is it O.K. to defecate in a urinal?
Depends on what shape the stalls are in.
-- If your dog dies, why not eat it?
Why not fuck it, you fucked the chicken.
Unless the chicken was just a careless fling... careless fling?... Never mind, too much Sven.
Is it okay to kill an innocent person to save the lives of five?
Is it okay to wipe your butt with an American flag or pages from the Bible?
Effing comment of the day....at least. ROFLMAO
It is 'conditioning'---psychological, that is...
So are values and morals an issue subject to "progressive" change? How about honesty, loyalty and thrift? Respect of others opinions and property? These are things I was taught by my parents. I know it is so totally backward to not reject our parents values, but while I would agree it is important to follow nothing blindly, I do think there are some pretty stone cold facts about life that have not been disproven by time or technology.
So are values and morals an issue subject to "progressive" change? How about honesty, loyalty and thrift? Respect of others opinions and property? These are things I was taught by my parents.
If I have any good qualities I'd say they come mostly from my grandpa who grew up dirt poor but worked hard and made something of himself.
Progressivism refers to something specific and generally unrelated:
Progressivism is a general political philosophy based on the idea of progress that asserts that advances in science, technology, economic development, and social organization, can improve the human condition.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism
Ah..., and there in lies the rub, doesn't it? It all depends on the very subjective concept of just what exactly defines 'progress'. For example:
Advances in Science: Gender-selected abortions based on MRIs.
Advances in Technology: Police scanners that record ever single license plate as cars drive by.
Advances in 'economic development': NAFTA, The Federal Reserve, The IMF, etc.
Advances in Social Organization: Obamacare
And that's just to name a few. James, progress just for the sake of progress isn't. The litmus test is simple. If the so-called progress curtails individual freedoms, it ain't progress. It really is that easy.
And before you break into any supposed, hypothetical situation that would try to refute that, think on this. Government is evil. All of it. At best, under the most controlled scenarios it is a necessary evil, but it is evil pure and simple just the same. The progressives' concept that the purpose of government is to "do good" is vile, obnoxious and highly delusional.
If men did not sin against each other there would be no need for government. The existence of government is not one of a good to counteract the evil, (in mens' hearts). it is an evil to be used to keep that other evil in check, (theoretically), no more and no less. Unfortunately that little fine point has all but been lost in the discourses of the day. And lo, beware, evil this way comes.
You seem to mean well but your argument is absurd and particularly ironic that you would rail against the evils of technology and the government through the medium of the internet.
Sure, you can pick out things you don't like, but then there's this:
http://filipspagnoli.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/life-expectancy-through...
The litmus test is simple. If the so-called progress curtails individual freedoms, it ain't progress. It really is that easy.
So? Did anyone here define their standard of progress as only that it does curtail individual freedom?
Obviously, more people are more free now than they were 1000 yrs ago.
Government is evil. All of it. At best, under the most controlled scenarios it is a necessary evil, but it is evil pure and simple just the same.
Government simply refers to how a society is organized, it's not good or evil inherently.
The existence of government is not one of a good to counteract the evil, (in mens' hearts). it is an evil to be used to keep that other evil in check, (theoretically), no more and no less.
When you have societies of millions of people inevitably you will need some general structures (or very advanced technology), it's not only about 'sin.'
Theo's argument was sound.
yours was a whole lot of nuthin...
Good luck James.
"Progressing" from a good situation, usually means going for a worse one.
And who argued against any of those things? Go Team, right? Because your Team believes in those things which is what you were taught. And the other Team wants to rape everyone. You are making my point but you don't know it. Liberals love children, dogs, justice, and family too. But go cast a stone fuck face.
The word “liberal” was hijacked from libertarian minded folks by the logical positivists who wanted to mask their collectivist and statist control freak agenda much the same way the word "gay" was hijacked by the queers.
“Progressive” was the word the statist liberals adopted to mask their neo-liberal nature during the time that the word liberal had a slightly toxic political consequence.
Modern Progressive/Liberals want to appear “open” and “free” as opposed to the statist and New World Order subversives that they really are.
It is hypocrisy of the highest order.
I guess I'm just a little rocked to think that the FED should handle pensions.
Also, please cite your sources for the founders apparently being Progressives. I absolutely agree though that I'd like to see the government that they envisioned.
I wonder what RP would think of .GOV running our pension system. Personally, this sounds like Social Security which is ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT!
WHERE DO I OPT-OUT? If force is required for the "success" of such a program then this is more government overreach and a loss of freedom.
Again, not sure what your definition of "progressive" is, but the Founders believed in elected government that would do the basic things I said (they didn't envision GPS or airports of course). If by progressive you mean that government is part of the solution and not entirely the problem, I would say they were.
And I absolutely don't want the Fed doing anything. I want the Fed abolished. I do think it makes sense to pool the resources of the people and have everyone pay into a pension system that pays out when they retire based on its total value. The problem with individual retirement accounts as the sole source of income in retirement is that you may live to 100. I would have to have millions and millions in my account to prepare for that. But a shared risk pension plan takes in money from people who die at 50, so everyone can pay in less and those who are lucky enough to live longer receive more. It's just like insurance. You pay a thousand or whatever a year to insure your house against disaster. Those who need it get it. Those who don't need it pay in and get nothing, except peace of mind.
The reason SS is a joke is because the politicians spent the money paid into the system, meaning it is now a Ponzi scheme.
Hey, LTER, nice series of posts.
Thanks, jon dough. I'll post a drunken series of rants later about oligarchs and balance it out :).
Great post fella's!!! i was going to say something about waggin the dog but you guys, you guys!! Thanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6NV0aO_b4A
When a government can enable the will of its people without coersion and corruption, it most defintely has a role to play, but when it is simply a tool of the powerful to advance their agenda using lies and theft to do so, not so much. When we give a cop a gun to protect us, and then he turns on us and says we cannot have a gun to protect ourselves, we move from governing the consenting to voluntarily committing ourselves to an instititution with no means of escape. As I see it our constitution does two things. It seeks to define those powers held by our government as a restraint to the loss of our liberties and to prevent the eventual and well documented effects of unbridled democracy that uses majorities to remove rights and property of the minority. Our government fails on both counts and should be prosecuted for not following their oath to follow and defend the constitution.
Straw man much? I am a strong gun rights advocate. So go cast another stone you fucker.
No straw man. He got you. Govt is the problem. If they stuck to what their job is and just defended the border, built roads and maintained a legal system, we wouldn't have any of these problems. Govt will never run a retirement program fairly or efficiently because they don't have incentives congruent with running such a program. They can spend all the money; like they did, and still coerce more from the public. No accountability. Don't understand why people have such high regard for govt when it has done nothing to earn it.
I believe government is useful for things like roads, airports, space exploration (think GPS), helping poor people (not the bloated corrupt welfare system now but a true safety net), creating pensions given that the private sector can't or won't, funding but not necessarily running schools,
Oh, geez. Not necessarily running schools?? Wow. You sure?? And we need government to help the poor because private charities can't do it better???? LetThemEatRand sir, you're a Flamin Freakin liberal.
Yes, no way can private charities take care of the tens of millions of poor created by the Fed. Maybe one day.
Shouldn't you be on Michael Moore's chat board? ;)
wow. you have been here 12 weeks. and I have seen LTER duke it out with every idiot on this page for his 2+ years. You sir are an idiot.
So the answer to the Fed creating the poor is government? Nice one, LTER. But you hinted to the real solution in your own comment. How about just getting rid of the Fed cancer in the first place?
The Fed is not government. It is what usurped our government. People blame government when they should blame the Fed, a cabal of private bankers. And I repeatedly say End the Fed.
the ONLY reason the fed exists, is because govt made it happen. It may not be "federal", but it works hand in hand with the govt. ALL its damage was done with govt approval and assistance. If you fuck with the federal reserve, WHO is it that comes after you?
Well, the Fed is a creation of elected government.
Red and Blue are both collectivists, who care not for individual rights, including those that are afforded by the Constitution. So, the perspective is not liberal vs. conservative, it's individual vs. collective.
Red and Blue are the same team. Watch what they do, not what they say. Obama has been essentially nothing more than a follow-on of Bush in key aspects such as foreign policy and monetary policy.
Nothing fundamental has changed.
For an organization called "MoveOn" they sure do hold a grudge.
Thanks for the chuckle Agent P.
It is the purpose of government to be bribed. Stupid is the notion that an entity with a monopoly on violence over a geographic region, (a.k.a. government) can ever be of, by, and for, the people, and can ever result in that which is universally preferable.
I sent marc belisle a message through the move on website. I explained to him what the fed is, that aca is a tax collected by irs to help pay the ever increasing debt. Also, that aca is as affordable as fed is federal. I then closed by saying -
"Ignorance is dangerous, but curable".
Feel free to send him a message explaining reality.
MoveOn? These assholes will be the snitches and Gestapo of the NWO.
Sad but true. They were against the spying (when W was Prez) before they were for it (when Zero is Prez). I read a story on Huffington Post today where they were calling out some conservative think tank guy for being against NSA spying because he was for it (same problem -- he was for it when a Republican was in charge). And of course Huffington was against the spying, too, before Zero came to power. So long as it is all about the Teams and no one cares to think about they supposedly stand for, we're fucked.
I'm not even all that worried aboput the "government" we have now. I worry about the "Peoples republic of" after the collapse.
All the tools of state will still be sitting there, for drones like GetUp and MoveOn to use.
And the Heritage Foundation and all the other conservative groups too. All of the mainstream ones are funded by oligarchs who have the goal of controlling all of us. I predict the next President or the one after will be the cliche fascist who is wrapped in the flag and who will root out what is left of our free society. And he will probably belong to the Red Team. It's no coincidence that the Blue Team guy who is setting the stage is black and universally regarded by the Red Team as a socialist Marxist who hates freedom. I have little doubt that when the collapse comes he will be blamed instead of his owners. The next guy will have the same owners, and he be worse just as Zero is worse than W and W was worse than Clinton and so forth.
Yeah, spot on. We got red team in Australia right now.
Full bore suppression of information flow seems to be their strongest suit so far.
They fucked up though, and let their agenda for an internet filter leak out before they managed a media campaign for it first. I estimate it pushed back the internet filter by a good year or two.
Then we'll have a big child porn scandal and internet supression push... for the children....
How much ya wanna bet Zero Hedge gets slipped into a list of "extremist" websites soon after?
They are also after the 2nd ammendment.
Progressivism is the politically correct rendering of authoritarianism.
Fasism by any other name....
“Progressives” are actually Regressives, as they want to revert to failed collectivism. That was the failure of the 20th century. Too bad they weren’t paying attention.
Regressivism is neo-fascism.
Obama & his supporters have repeatedly shown themselves to be fascists, in the true meaning of the word (not their hyperactive Spanish Inquisition accusation version)
http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html
LOL, yeah, progress it terrible!!!
THe problem with progessives is they want to define what is and what is not progress. Public Schools are a fine example of great strides in progress according to progressives, backwards is progress. Lower the standards and proclaim victory. Sooner or later "progress" leads to the bottom.
That and the fact they cannot think for themselves, and thus cannot comprehend the big picture. These are people who believe what the media says without suspiscion, that history is as written by the state dept of education, that israel must be subsidized ( yet they cannot point Israel out on a map).
Your version of it is not progress.
It is regress.
"Progressivism"
A path to the old Soviet Union. The US is on it's way comrades.
Move the 4th to May day with the parade of military weapons.
The "Soviets" after the revolution were nothing like the Soviets during the revolution. For one, we need to look out for potential Stalins and weed them out.
But if we make a revolution it's important to note that if it is done violently more often than not the regime replacing the former will be more brutal than the current regime. It is also important to keep it non-violent and preserve as much of the infrastructure as possible in order to ease the transition into the new government.
Read the book "Waging Nonviolent Struggle" by Gene Sharp and you'll get a better idea about how to do this.
A totalitarian communist revolution only needs better administrators to reach its utopian goals. We have Obama, how can you do better than that, and he has been nonviolent too (so far)?
Would you count extrajudicial drone killings without due process on American citizens abroad nonviolent?
You're a mental disorder. Another conservative against progress and reform when we so badly need both. Maybe you think we are in pretty good shape and should leave things as they are?
And before you start, no, I'm no fan of Obama. Never did or would vote for that spineless clown.
44, 000 people all with Sharpden with the last name....Forward FSA....FORWARD!
Can you get drafted into the FSA?, or is that something you have to volunteer for?
In many cases you simply can not blame stupidity as the subject has attained a Doctorate and/or is demonstrably "intelligent". What they suffer from is an inability to distinguish the "reality" (programming) in their head from REALITY.
If grades can be given for effort they can certainly be given for agreeing with the professor or not agreeing with the professor for that matter.
esp when stupid cant do accounting.
Every politician in D.C. needs to be arrested for sedition. To single out just two is colossally stupid.
Yes there is - 44,000.
So the gestapo has roughly 2 billion rounds of hollow point .40 cal right?
In a better world these 'people' would become practice targets. When you track the extreme left (bozo variety), it's plain as day that not only are they failing BIG TIME, they know it full well. Consequently, the violence WILL COME.
It's as certain as the sun rising. These 'people' truly are pathological and sociopaths in the purest sense.
Hate to get all creepy, but the fact is that just as socialism is the precursor to communism/progressivism, this perverse construct we are presently subjected to (FARCISM?) is the manifestation of human sickness now having reached a scale so absurd as to be no longer merely miserable or even just sad, pathetic, or tragic. This shit is epic as in truly unprecedented. Blood is going to flow.
Lots of it.
forget the House R's, where do I sign to arrest them all?
nail head, meet hammer. arrest them all, try them for sedition and treason, roll the guillotines,
Brilliant ha! Yes, for the high crime of uncommon stupidity ha!
It's a shame idiocy isn't a criminal offense.
Miffed;-)
Must have a vild birth certificate to be stupid.
Naw, just make it painful. No need for more laws.
May the Farce be with us all, in perpetuity.
That should go far like the petitions to the whitehouse by 38 states to peacefully secede from the union.
Oh yeah, UKnowWho didn't respond to them, either, now, did he?
Sorry to burst your bubble, but he did. He pointed out that the matter needed to start in Congress, which is true.
Won't be long before anyone using cash or trying to sell PM's will be accused of "seditious conspiracy".
Also, anyone that cooks their own food or doesn't go shopping for shit they don't need.
Hey move on.org, I got a idea, head to the Alamo today and attemp to arrest those people for treason!
Isn't moveon.org one of Soro's zombies?
PS. Betcha all the signatures was from Obie's followers on Facebook
Most of the signatories probably don't even exist. I'd say they were robosigned.
Most of the signers voted "se"
Yes, you see, its now apparently seditious for anyone to take a principled stand or fillibuster as a senator...lol.
Fucking moonbats.
Ted Cruze, principle? ROFL.
lol...we're not talking about a small government subsidized car here.
We're talking about principle ;-)
"liberal advocacy group" my nut sack. Try authoritarian to the core.
Rep. Steve Cohen, the Memphis Marxist, is calling the "recalcitrant" House members "domestic enemies". This is all orchestrated and makes me sick. I suppose the new DHS chief arrived just in time to deploy drone strikes against these terrists.
Who the fuck red arrowed that?
Someone high on the blue pills no doubt.
Who the fuck red arrowed that?
It wasn't me but who gives a fuck. The Commie Ballwashing Cocksucking Bastards are running loose all over the Mother Fucking place.
Ya know, I just found out that 'Aaarrrrggghhh' is not a real word.
I can't even tell you how angry I am!
Try spell-check. I think that needs another g or 2.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ziZCg-6jMFI
Parts of this may be tinfoilly, but Cohen has a very large creep factor. (starts 1:38)
this civil war is all fun and games until someone gets shot. I wonder who will actually shoot first? any guesses?
How do we know the first shot hasn't been fired? If I were an evil P.O.S. like Dear Leader then I'd go after the revolutionaries, i.e. you and me.
"Ya, some hoodlum just came out of nowhere and put a cap in his ass, heart, and temple."
Not sure who will shoot first. I have no doubt who will shoot last.
Screw the arrests and then court hearings and crap- Long on short ropes and tall trees.
FUCK YOU OBAMA.
NARCISSIST PIECE OF SHIT.
Tell us how you really feel, JohnG. Let it all out. No need to bottle it all up and make it fester....
Humph. Apparently JohnG doesn't think of the children!
Cora Munro: He saved us. We're alive only because of him.
Colonel Munro: The man encouraged the colonials to desert in this very room and in my presence! Sir! He is guilty of sedition. He must be tried and hanged like any other criminal, regardless of what he did for my children.
Cora Munro: But he knew the consequences, and he stayed. Are those the actions of a criminal?
Last of the fucking mohicans FCS! What the fuck is wrong with you people. It's being reenacted right in front of you and you sit there with a blank stare on your face.
What has happened to this website? All uniqueness has abandoned ship and only the usual cast of ankle biters are left...
Are there any unadulterated, non-programatically enriched web stats for ZH traffic?
I call on the Justice Department of the United States of America to arrest Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Speaker of the House John Boehner, and other decision-making House Republican leaders for the crime of ... trying to take our free shit away.
(fixed it)
I call on the justice department to arrest John Boehner for thinking that the all appropriations must originate in the House.
First arrest Obama for his traitorous act of signing a secret agreement handing all of Americans' data (phone calls, emails, contact lists, everything) illegally obtained by the NSA over to Israel without any legal restrictions in March 2009. What did the US gain by such an agreement? It was handing over US sovereignty on a silver platter to a foreign power. That is orders of magnitude bigger than Watergate and no US media will touch this story.
Why is the NSA spying on Congress, all judges (even Supreme Court), White House, everyone? And who can be stupid enough to hand all that data to a foreign power?
I think we should all agree that Obama is a very smart man -- or something like that. He's been able to STEAL your LIBERTY and what the fuck can you do about it?
We are sure that O'blama did this single handed?
"We must pass this into law before you can read what's in it"!
Does it matter? Obama = Polarized Nation. Checkmate.
What....you have a problem with transparency?
***...handing all of Americans' data ... illegally obtained by the NSA over to Israel***
It is truly amazing how the "cone of silence" has descended over this revelation by Snowden. Almost total silence from the Zionist controlled corporate media. The New York Times wouldn't even report it. I'm willing to bet that there's a lot more to this story.
Hang the fuckers!
Stalin would be proud of these folks.
Stalin would be exceptionally proud of Obama, and his neo-fascism, correct.
It just goes to show Americans are no different than any one else and not exceptional.
Ding ding ding!
We have a winner.
For the very first civilian detainee in Fema Forever Happy Camp #1
U.S. debt jumps a record $328 billion — tops $17 trillion for first time
That was the headline screaming on Drudge all yesterday and this morning. ZH covered it too.
For weeks we heard those pretending to fight this deficit spending were terrorist and a myriad of other such inflammatory words. Yet those that added $328 billion of debt in one day are the learned and reasonable. I mean is shit fucked up or what?
Even now just the thought all of this shit lately make me want to go break something. It a surreal fucking time in history.