I withdraw my consent to be governed ...

[Skylar]

And who is to fight in your civil war then?

Not you. Not Uncen. Who then?

There is no civil war and you're making up your shit

There is no civil war. Which is exactly my point. Nor will there be when there's no one willing to bleed for it.

The Chickenshit Conundrum unravels all of the "Civil War' threats.

What are you babbling about? No one should voice their opinion unless they want to go to civil war? That's just stupid, even for you

Laughing...do you have any other rhetoric tool than the absurdly poor paraphrase?

I've said exactly what I mean: there is no civil war nor will there be while there is no one willing to bleed for it.

You can pretend that no one in this thread has brought up civil war. But its not like the rest of us are suddenly forbidden from reading such babble just because you pretend.

If I support a civil war, then I will be part of it. I don't give a shit about your dancing about I want and who I want to do what. What I want I will do. This coming from a liberal who wants other people to pay for your charity, classic

I'm not the one predicting a civil war. Nor am I the one arguing for its need. You have me confused with Uncen.

I'm the guy laughing at the arm chair warriors who talk about 'war', but aren't willing to bleed. And explaining to them why they have no path to victory.....not politically, not militarily.

Which you'd know if you'd actually read what you're responding to.

 

[Skylar]

[

I think 10 million is not enough

Perhaps not, but it is a minimum to get a movement going.

GT is a child, and assumes violence. I assume an uprising will be largely peaceful. The Marxists are convinced that the army is there just itching to fight Americans on their behalf, a laughably absurd belief.

Laughing......so when you say 'civil war', you don't actually 'civil war'.

If you can't even stand behind your words, there's zero chance you'll be willing to bleed for them.

If you want a civil war, start one

I'm not the one that brought up Civil War. Nor the one who has declared it must happen.

I'm the guy laughing at those who do, pointing out that the Chickenshit Conundrum unravels all their babble about 'civil war'. As they aren't willing to bleed for their 'war'.

Which is why there isn't one. See how that works?

I'm laughing at chicken shits like you who want other people to pay for your "charity." Charity is not something you can do with other people's money

Feel free to giggle to your hearts content about whatever you'd like. There will still be no civil war. Your 'declaration' is still legally meaningless clap trap. And the laws still apply to you regardless of your 'consent to be governed'.

See how that works?

 

[bodecea]

[

Laughing......so when you say 'civil war', you don't actually 'civil war'.

If you can't even stand behind your words, there's zero chance you'll be willing to bleed for them.

The goal is to restore the United States Constitution.

If that can be done peacefully, that is the best choice.

Regardless, HRC has not been anointed, nor has she appointed a Kagan type to subvert the Bill of Rights. When and if she takes office and moves to end civil rights, then we can decide what specific actions are called for.

Wolf! Wolf!

 

[Skylar]

But when Obama *did* appoint a Kagan type, you did nothing.

Even by your own standards, you've demonstrated what you'll do if Hillary repeats the process: nothing.

Enjoy the pizza rolls. They're probably done now.

When Obama put the radical anti-Constitution justice on the court, 5 who support the Constitution remained to offset her.

That is no longer the case.

Then explain the Obergefell decision, which you've denounced as violating the constitution. Obama appointed a 'kagan type', one of your red lines.

You did nothing.

The 'Kagan type' and 4 other justices ruled in a manner inconsistent with your view of the constitution, taking authority you insist they didn't have.

You did nothing.

And when Hillary appoints another 'Kagan type', when that "Kagan Type' contradicts what you believe the constitution is supposed to mean, you're doing to do the same thing you've always done when tested:

Nothing.

 

[kaz]

There is no civil war and you're making up your shit

There is no civil war. Which is exactly my point. Nor will there be when there's no one willing to bleed for it.

The Chickenshit Conundrum unravels all of the "Civil War' threats.

What are you babbling about? No one should voice their opinion unless they want to go to civil war? That's just stupid, even for you

Laughing...do you have any other rhetoric tool than the absurdly poor paraphrase?

I've said exactly what I mean: there is no civil war nor will there be while there is no one willing to bleed for it.

You can pretend that no one in this thread has brought up civil war. But its not like the rest of us are suddenly forbidden from reading such babble just because you pretend.

If I support a civil war, then I will be part of it. I don't give a shit about your dancing about I want and who I want to do what. What I want I will do. This coming from a liberal who wants other people to pay for your charity, classic

I'm not the one predicting a civil war. Nor am I the one arguing for its need. You have me confused with Uncen.

I'm the guy laughing at the arm chair warriors who talk about 'war', but aren't willing to bleed. And explaining to them why they have no path to victory.....not politically, not militarily.

Which you'd know if you'd actually read what you're responding to.

You think I'm the one bringing up "civil war" and you're asking if I'm reading what you wrote? Let's go with that.

Sadly, the majority of people in this country now want to be sheep. There is no point in a civil war until Americans regain their love of freedom. And at that point, overthrowing our government and reinstating our Constitution would be easy

 

[kaz]

Perhaps not, but it is a minimum to get a movement going.

GT is a child, and assumes violence. I assume an uprising will be largely peaceful. The Marxists are convinced that the army is there just itching to fight Americans on their behalf, a laughably absurd belief.

Laughing......so when you say 'civil war', you don't actually 'civil war'.

If you can't even stand behind your words, there's zero chance you'll be willing to bleed for them.

If you want a civil war, start one

I'm not the one that brought up Civil War. Nor the one who has declared it must happen.

I'm the guy laughing at those who do, pointing out that the Chickenshit Conundrum unravels all their babble about 'civil war'. As they aren't willing to bleed for their 'war'.

Which is why there isn't one. See how that works?

I'm laughing at chicken shits like you who want other people to pay for your "charity." Charity is not something you can do with other people's money

Feel free to giggle to your hearts content about whatever you'd like. There will still be no civil war. Your 'declaration' is still legally meaningless clap trap. And the laws still apply to you regardless of your 'consent to be governed'.

See how that works?

I'm not calling for a civil war, are you reading what I write?

 

[Skylar]

Laughing......so when you say 'civil war', you don't actually 'civil war'.

If you can't even stand behind your words, there's zero chance you'll be willing to bleed for them.

If you want a civil war, start one

I'm not the one that brought up Civil War. Nor the one who has declared it must happen.

I'm the guy laughing at those who do, pointing out that the Chickenshit Conundrum unravels all their babble about 'civil war'. As they aren't willing to bleed for their 'war'.

Which is why there isn't one. See how that works?

I'm laughing at chicken shits like you who want other people to pay for your "charity." Charity is not something you can do with other people's money

Feel free to giggle to your hearts content about whatever you'd like. There will still be no civil war. Your 'declaration' is still legally meaningless clap trap. And the laws still apply to you regardless of your 'consent to be governed'.

See how that works?

I'm not calling for a civil war, are you reading what I write?

And as anyone who reads the thread can see, I'm responding to what Uncen has said about civil war.

Which, of course, you know.

 

[Skylar]

There is no civil war. Which is exactly my point. Nor will there be when there's no one willing to bleed for it.

The Chickenshit Conundrum unravels all of the "Civil War' threats.

What are you babbling about? No one should voice their opinion unless they want to go to civil war? That's just stupid, even for you

Laughing...do you have any other rhetoric tool than the absurdly poor paraphrase?

I've said exactly what I mean: there is no civil war nor will there be while there is no one willing to bleed for it.

You can pretend that no one in this thread has brought up civil war. But its not like the rest of us are suddenly forbidden from reading such babble just because you pretend.

If I support a civil war, then I will be part of it. I don't give a shit about your dancing about I want and who I want to do what. What I want I will do. This coming from a liberal who wants other people to pay for your charity, classic

I'm not the one predicting a civil war. Nor am I the one arguing for its need. You have me confused with Uncen.

I'm the guy laughing at the arm chair warriors who talk about 'war', but aren't willing to bleed. And explaining to them why they have no path to victory.....not politically, not militarily.

Which you'd know if you'd actually read what you're responding to.

You think I'm the one bringing up "civil war" and you're asking if I'm reading what you wrote? Let's go with that.

Sadly, the majority of people in this country now want to be sheep. There is no point in a civil war until Americans regain their love of freedom. And at that point, overthrowing our government and reinstating our Constitution would be easy

And again with the ludicriously inaccurate paraphrase. Do you have any other rhetorical tool at your disposal but that same tired fallacy?

I've made it quite clear that its Uncen that has brought up Civil War. You jumped into the middle of our conversation as a way of trying to avoid discussion of the glorious legal irrelevance of your 'declaration' in the OP.

A declaration you now refuse to even discuss. Which makes a certain sense, I suppose. It legally meaningless clap trap from the moment you posted it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

You think I'm the one bringing up "civil war" and you're asking if I'm reading what you wrote? Let's go with that.

Sadly, the majority of people in this country now want to be sheep. There is no point in a civil war until Americans regain their love of freedom. And at that point, overthrowing our government and reinstating our Constitution would be easy

In all fairness, if a significant number "withdraw their consent to be governed," that is a civil war.

It can be done without bloodshed, but it is still civil war.

 

[whitehall]

It seems that the poster (who ironically uses the Liberty Bell for a logo) is confused about the whole system of government. The people don't consent to be governed. Governments derive their powers from the consent of the people. Hating the Hildabeast is a given but most of the people who hate Trump also spent a lot of time making fun of the Tea Party which tried to get the best candidates by getting off their asses and getting involved in the system while risking ridicule from low information idiots who think government is in charge and the people have no power.

 

[Skylar]

[

You think I'm the one bringing up "civil war" and you're asking if I'm reading what you wrote? Let's go with that.

Sadly, the majority of people in this country now want to be sheep. There is no point in a civil war until Americans regain their love of freedom. And at that point, overthrowing our government and reinstating our Constitution would be easy

In all fairness, if a significant number "withdraw their consent to be governed," that is a civil war.

It can be done without bloodshed, but it is still civil war.

So when you said 'civil war', you didn't actually mean 'civil war'.

Wow. Went to the Trump school of "I say what I mean unless I didn't mean what I say' of rhetorical incoherence?

 

[Uncensored2008]

It seems that the poster (who ironically uses the Liberty Bell for a logo) is confused about the whole system of government. The people don't consent to be governed. Governments derive their powers from the consent of the people. Hating the Hildabeast is a given but most of the people who hate Trump also spent a lot of time making fun of the Tea Party which tried to get the best candidates by getting off their asses and getting involved in the system while risking ridicule from low information idiots who think government is in charge and the people have no power.

The people don't consent to be governed. Governments derive their powers from the consent of the people.


You appear to be contradicting yourself.

 

[Skylar]

It seems that the poster (who ironically uses the Liberty Bell for a logo) is confused about the whole system of government. The people don't consent to be governed. Governments derive their powers from the consent of the people. Hating the Hildabeast is a given but most of the people who hate Trump also spent a lot of time making fun of the Tea Party which tried to get the best candidates by getting off their asses and getting involved in the system while risking ridicule from low information idiots who think government is in charge and the people have no power.

Who said that the People have no power? My argument is that the People do have the power. The power to delegate their authority to create laws, enforce them, adjudicate them, to create a government.

A power that an lone individual does not have.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So when you said 'civil war', you didn't actually mean 'civil war'.

I mean overturning an established government by the citizens within the state.

Commonly that is revolution or civil war.

Wow. Went to the Trump school of "I say what I mean unless I didn't mean what I say' of rhetorical incoherence?

Your lack of comprehension has no bearing on the precision of my words.

 

[Skylar]

So when you said 'civil war', you didn't actually mean 'civil war'.

I mean overturning an established government by the citizens within the state.

Which citizens? As you clearly you don't have the majorities you need to enact your policies politically. So what you're proposing is a MINORITY of citizens overturning the will of the majority through the overturning of the government.

AKA, sedition.

Commonly that is revolution or civil war.

Neither the revolution nor the civil war were done non-violently. So you're speaking of the violent overthrow of the will of the majority through violent overturning of the government.

AKA, treason.

No wonder you won't actually fight in your civil war.

 

[kaz]

[

You think I'm the one bringing up "civil war" and you're asking if I'm reading what you wrote? Let's go with that.

Sadly, the majority of people in this country now want to be sheep. There is no point in a civil war until Americans regain their love of freedom. And at that point, overthrowing our government and reinstating our Constitution would be easy

In all fairness, if a significant number "withdraw their consent to be governed," that is a civil war.

It can be done without bloodshed, but it is still civil war.

I agree, and it doesn't contradict what I said

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


Which citizens? As you clearly you don't have the majorities you need to enact your policies politically. So what you're proposing is a MINORITY of citizens overturning the will of the majority through the overturning of the government.

AKA, sedition.

Under the old Constitution, minority rights were protected by codified law. You Marxists will change that. If you have an opportunity and more in that direction, it is incumbent on the patriots of this land to stop you through any and all means.

Neither the revolution nor the civil war were done non-violently. So you're speaking of the violent overthrow of the will of the majority through violent overturning of the government.

AKA, treason.

No wonder you won't actually fight in your civil war.

You Marxist have subverted the nation and crushed our Constitution with minimal violence. You have waged war on this nation for 30 years. What you have done is indeed treason.

 

[Skylar]

[


Which citizens? As you clearly you don't have the majorities you need to enact your policies politically. So what you're proposing is a MINORITY of citizens overturning the will of the majority through the overturning of the government.

AKA, sedition.

Under the old Constitution, minority rights were protected by codified law. You Marxists will change that. If you have an opportunity and more in that direction, it is incumbent on the patriots of this land to stop you through any and all means.

Under the constitution, the interpreters of the meaning of the constitution are the judiciary. With the judiciary placing the constitution above legislation that would

You're proposing that YOU get to authoritatively interpret the meaning of the Constitution. And through violence, impose your interpretations on the majority of the people by overthrowing their government.

That's sedition and treason.

And you know you don't have majorities, else you would impose your will politically. But you can't....because you're an extreme minority. In a nation of 320 million people you speak of working your way up to 10 million who might agree with you.

Your best case scenario is about 3% of the population violently overthrowing the government and the will of 97% of the population.

And of course, that's not happening as your 3% doesn't have the will to bleed for their civil war. Which is why there is none.

You always, always run headlong into the Chickenshit Conundrum. And you have no solution for it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

... by the US government. I no longer accept the legitimacy of the US government. The two major parties are running candidates who say they oppose capitalism and free trade. Both parties give us more war, more government, and less liberty. Government run education and now healthcare, free redistribution of money, free access to our country for illegal aliens and criminals, policeman to the world.

To Hillary and Trump, you are not acting in my name, I do not consent to be governed by either of you

It's consent of the governed, not consent of the retard kaz.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[


Which citizens? As you clearly you don't have the majorities you need to enact your policies politically. So what you're proposing is a MINORITY of citizens overturning the will of the majority through the overturning of the government.

AKA, sedition.

Under the old Constitution, minority rights were protected by codified law. You Marxists will change that. If you have an opportunity and more in that direction, it is incumbent on the patriots of this land to stop you through any and all means.

Neither the revolution nor the civil war were done non-violently. So you're speaking of the violent overthrow of the will of the majority through violent overturning of the government.

AKA, treason.

No wonder you won't actually fight in your civil war.

You Marxist have subverted the nation and crushed our Constitution with minimal violence. You have waged war on this nation for 30 years. What you have done is indeed treason.

You make Chicken Little look bold and sensible.