Is the intention a Civil War ?

[Avatar4321]

Liberals lose elections and they protest, Repubs lose elections and talk about open rebellion

This is one of the problems with the left. They have an incredibly short term memory. When Bush won in 2004, they were openly talking about secession and rebellion. They were also talking about assassination of President Bush to the point where they created books and movies depicting it.

Funny how it's conveniently forgotten.

 

[tjvh]

Is the intention a Civil War ? I doubt it. Even Democrats know the troops would likely side with the Constitution and the people before siding with an ideological dingbat like Obama, and his progressive minions.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Is the intention a Civil War ? I doubt it. Even Democrats know the troops would likely side with the Constitution and the people before siding with an ideological dingbat like Obama, and his progressive minions.

You gotta hope so. But he is trying to hook up some military leaders who dont mind shooting at his country men.

 

[Redfish]

Obama's current plan is to continue his campaign of demonizing republicans and trying to gain control of the house and hold the senate. If he does that then his last two years will see all of his marxist bullshit ideas rammed up our collective asses.

It will be the end of the USA as a free republic and the beginning of the socialist states of america.

be careful who you vote for, be very careful

 

[Dot Com]

Liberals lose elections and they protest, Repubs lose elections and talk about open rebellion

This is one of the problems with the left. They have an incredibly short term memory. When Bush won in 2004, they were openly talking about secession and rebellion. They were also talking about assassination of President Bush to the point where they created books and movies depicting it.

Funny how it's conveniently forgotten.

we were talking about seperating from "jesusland" If you thought that was seriously considered than you're more of a rube than you come-off being

Jesusland map - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Jesusland map is an Internet meme, created shortly after the 2004 United States Presidential election, which satirizes the red/blue states scheme by dividing the United States and Canada into "The United States of Canada" and "Jesusland"

 

[Saigon]

You gotta hope so. But he is trying to hook up some military leaders who dont mind shooting at his country men.

Actually, no, that is just another of those pieces of laughable nonsense that 99% of people are too smart and too cynical to believe.

You believe it (or, more likely, pretend to believe it) because you dream of a society in which your own hatred is reflected in other people - not because it is at all real.

 

[Saigon]

We may not "need" a civil war or even "want" one. But you can't expect the rhetoric to increase and both sides to build up this kind of armament without something unwanted or unneeded happening.

But aren't you the person on this thread increasing the rhetoric most?

 

[Truthmatters]

Liberals lose elections and they protest, Repubs lose elections and talk about open rebellion

This is one of the problems with the left. They have an incredibly short term memory. When Bush won in 2004, they were openly talking about secession and rebellion. They were also talking about assassination of President Bush to the point where they created books and movies depicting it.

Funny how it's conveniently forgotten.

go get proof anyone in the democratic party did any of that?


BTW Bush cheated in both elections.

He would not have won either election without cheating

 

[Katzndogz]

We may not "need" a civil war or even "want" one. But you can't expect the rhetoric to increase and both sides to build up this kind of armament without something unwanted or unneeded happening.

But aren't you the person on this thread increasing the rhetoric most?

You betcha!

 

[Dot Com]

We may not "need" a civil war or even "want" one. But you can't expect the rhetoric to increase and both sides to build up this kind of armament without something unwanted or unneeded happening.

But aren't you the person on this thread increasing the rhetoric most?

yes she is. I guess she's taking over for WillowTree

 

[ArmyCowboy]

We may not "need" a civil war or even "want" one. But you can't expect the rhetoric to increase and both sides to build up this kind of armament without something unwanted or unneeded happening.

But aren't you the person on this thread increasing the rhetoric most?

yes she is. I guess she's taking over for WillowTree

When all is said and done, there's a lot more said than done.

If the shit hit the fan, most of these republicans talking big smack about civil war would be hiding in their basements.

 

[Saigon]

We may not "need" a civil war or even "want" one. But you can't expect the rhetoric to increase and both sides to build up this kind of armament without something unwanted or unneeded happening.

But aren't you the person on this thread increasing the rhetoric most?

You betcha!

Then stop blaming other people for inciting warfare. It's your fantasy - not Obama's.

 

[Dot Com]

But aren't you the person on this thread increasing the rhetoric most?

You betcha!

Then stop blaming other people for inciting warfare. It's your fantasy - not Obama's.

true. as another said its the rw base' wet dream but in reality, they'd be cowering in the basement.

 

[tjvh]

Is the intention a Civil War ? I doubt it. Even Democrats know the troops would likely side with the Constitution and the people before siding with an ideological dingbat like Obama, and his progressive minions.

You gotta hope so. But he is trying to hook up some military leaders who dont mind shooting at his country men.

Yeah, I heard that... But they still have to get the troops behind them. And the troops are the real professionals that do the dirty work. It's one thing to get some Guard troops to fire on some Kent State hippies that hated troops to begin with, it's quite another to convince the troops to fire on civilians when the people trying to convince them are hippies that hate the troops as well.

 

[bodecea]

Obama is attacking our rights from all angles and you want to call us crazy for defending them?
He's starting shit on purpose so he can further his agenda. And it's obvious.

What rights have you personally lost in the last 4 years?

List them please.

 

[Saigon]

Yeah, I heard that... But they still have to get the troops behind them. And the troops are the real professionals that do the dirty work. It's one thing to get some Guard troops to fire on some Kent State hippies that hated troops to begin with, it's quite another to convince the troops to fire on civilians when the people trying to convince them are hippies that hate the troops as well.

I can see the saliva dripping from here....

 

[bucs90]

Is the intention a Civil War ? I doubt it. Even Democrats know the troops would likely side with the Constitution and the people before siding with an ideological dingbat like Obama, and his progressive minions.

Then why is the right wing so paranoid about having to be armed to fight off the government?

The only people who they'd have to fight would be the military and police.

If the right is so sure they'd side with the Constitution, then whats the big worry?

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Is the intention a Civil War ? I doubt it. Even Democrats know the troops would likely side with the Constitution and the people before siding with an ideological dingbat like Obama, and his progressive minions.

You gotta hope so. But he is trying to hook up some military leaders who dont mind shooting at his country men.

Yeah, I heard that... But they still have to get the troops behind them. And the troops are the real professionals that do the dirty work. It's one thing to get some Guard troops to fire on some Kent State hippies that hated troops to begin with, it's quite another to convince the troops to fire on civilians when the people trying to convince them are hippies that hate the troops as well.

"Hippies?"

Seriously?

Come on man, it's 2013, join the rest of us here, the '60's are over.

 

[slackjawed]

SHUT UP HIPPIES!!!! - YouTube

 

[Tech_Esq]

If you stuck it out to the end of the piece, I think he made some legitimate points near the end of it. I thought the beginning was a bit weak and overzealous.

Some of you, I see on these comments, think that this is a recent phenomenon, this leftward tilt and the right's reaction to it. It's not. This is a continuation of an 80 year experiment in social democracy that got its first major push with FDR and Truman in their 20 year reign. I won't go into the history of it, but suffice it to say that we are now at a critical turning point. I actually believe we've already past the point of no return with the health care law. Once that goes into effect, we cannot go back to a being a Constitutional Republic the two systems are diametrically opposed.

Of course, the fledgling social democracy is fragile at this point, it could be crushed by the next president should the country choose a Repub next time, but in all likelihood, they will not crush it. The Repub. party is doomed to be the Tory party of GB it seems. Be that as it may, enough of the people may not wish to become a social democracy (without so much as a straight-forward vote on the subject) that they may not go quietly into the night. Hence the desire to disarm them at this critical point in time.

I don't know which way it will go. It certainly depends on a lot of factors, but you folks on the left are deluding yourselves if you think there aren't a lot of people in this country who are in the process of screwing up their courage and making alternative plans. Don't worry though, just keep pushing. I'm sure it will be fine.