HCR: Threats of Violence

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
81

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

So you disagree with the violence of the original American revolutionaries?

And a tax on just living is slightly new. By the way, I am against most taxes.

The government operates on violence. It take by force at gunpoint. Stop paying your taxes and you’ll find out.

You cannot remove all threats of violence without removing the law itself. The law contains threats of violence against the people you are condemning for threatening violence.

Our country was founded on violent resistance to unfair taxation. Period. Quit trying to revise history.

82

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
While I don’t condone death threats, I’m glad that these fuckers are scared of their constituents.

It’s exactly why we have the setup we do.[/quote]

The only fear that any politician should have is that they lose their job. Insinuating that they should fear for their safety is absolutely ridiculous.

Our system is set up the way it is so that we don’t have to resort to violence to get things done. For everyone romanticizing the revolutionaries, keep in mind that they were part of totally different political system at the time of revolt and had no option other than violence. We have an option in the voting booth. Any pussy can grab a gun, or post an address hoping someone else will do the easy work. If the American system is really what these protesters want to protect, then they need to use that system, not short-circuit it.[/quote]

It is not what they want that is the point at hand. And, it has been changed (not by voters) to something else, something devoid of what our country was founded on liberalism. The Rule of Law is no longer obeyed. ‘Voters’ hardly have any power at all when you have politicos being assigned by other politicos.

You may believe that these people should not have to fear for their life, but how do you know? When they decide to impede on someone’s livelihood, should they not worry for their own livelihood? You may have this fantasy of ‘intellectual’ America, but remember we are still the country that duals were common place in Congress and the Judge house.

One’s that dismiss the ability of man to cut down his fellow man when his honor, family, or livelihood is at stake is usually the first one to be cut down.

83

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

db,

I advocate a political solution. Win at the ballot box. Remove pelosi/obama/reid and their minions at the ballot box.

I want you to think through why this is a different. Let me help: It was passed using corruption against the stated wishes of the majority of the United States. Further, it forces you to buy a product.

The implications of that is mind-blowing. Next crisis, what’s next? Forcing us to buy Chrysler so that it doesn’t go under?

If the Government can force us to buy one product, why not another?

JeffR

84

[quote]borrek wrote:

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:
Was there some singular alignment of people and contexts in early 18th century pre-Revolutionary colonies that will never be repeated? Why do we believe that?
[/quote]

The contexts will certainly never be repeated in this country. We all know the history. Political leanings will wax and wane, but we’ll never be under the rule that the revolutionaries were.

In my opinion, violence should always be the very last possible option, but you can never rule it out.[/quote]

I beg to differ. All socialism that has not been reversed towards liberalism has eventually been directed towards despotism.

85

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

Sorry, double post.

86

[quote]Jeff R wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

db,

I advocate a political solution.

I want you to think through why this is a different tax. Let me help: It was passed using corruption against the stated wishes of the majority of the United States. Further, it forces you to buy a product.

The implications of that is mind-blowing. Next crisis, what’s next? Forcing us to buy Chrysler so that it doesn’t go under?

If the Government can force us to buy one product, why not another?

JeffR[/quote]

They already forced us to buy Chrysler.

87

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

They already forced us to buy Chrysler. [/quote]

Actually, that’s a fair point. I meant the actual cars in preference to others. Again, fair point.

JeffR

88

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

So you disagree with the violence of the original American revolutionaries?

And a tax on just living is slightly new. By the way, I am against most taxes.

The government operates on violence. It take by force at gunpoint. Stop paying your taxes and you’ll find out.

You cannot remove all threats of violence without removing the law itself. The law contains threats of violence against the people you are condemning for threatening violence.

Our country was founded on violent resistance to unfair taxation. Period. Quit trying to revise history.[/quote]

You’ve been reading too much Harry Browne. When the govt comes to take your money through violence, if you feel taking taxes is unjustified then meet violence with violence. But right now, you’re advocating pre-emptive violence and dismissing the political process that our FF’s fought for. Stop referring to the mindset of people who died 200 years ago. We live in a much different society than we did then. Better in some ways, worse in some.

You’re living in this theoretical fantasy land that has you convinced that if the FF’s did it, then so can you. The revolutionaries fought for the political process that you are trampling all over if you resort to violence. It’s a slap in their face to jump right over it and start killing people whose views differ from yours. The political process got us here, it can take us from here as well.

89

[quote]Jeff R wrote:
[/quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

What is the theoretical difference between making us take paychecks to buy a product and taking our paychecks and using them to support a product. At least one way I’d get a new car.

90

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Jeff R wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:

They already forced us to buy Chrysler.

Actually, that’s a fair point. I meant the actual cars in preference to others. Again, fair point.

JeffR

What is the theoretical difference between making us take paychecks to buy a product and taking our paychecks and using them to support a product. At least one way I’d get a new car.[/quote]

The only practical difference would be that they aren’t showing up at your door and walking you to a Chrysler lot. With this bill, they are making you buy a product directly.

I see your point, however. They are making us buy the Chrysler Corporation and if we didn’t buy (pay taxes) they’d show up and throw us in jail.

JeffR

91

[quote]Jeff R wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

db,

I advocate a political solution. Win at the ballot box. Remove pelosi/obama/reid and their minions at the ballot box.

I want you to think through why this is a different. Let me help: It was passed using corruption against the stated wishes of the majority of the United States. Further, it forces you to buy a product.

The implications of that is mind-blowing. Next crisis, what’s next? Forcing us to buy Chrysler so that it doesn’t go under?

If the Government can force us to buy one product, why not another?

JeffR[/quote]

Obama received more votes than any other Presidential candidate ever. He defeated McCain by a wide margin. He ran on the explicit platform of universal healthcare. As ornamental as the changes are, there were changes to the bill to try to appease the opposition to it in a way. And I’m supposed to believe that this bill is so far removed from the wishes of the people that violence is justified?

And I’ll say this as well. I believe that the private sector is best equipped to enact social change, not the “coercive” way the govt does so. And I’m sure those who protest so vociferously against healthcare reform would agree. That being said, I donate a LOT of my time: I’ve been a volunteer coach for baseball teams of all ages, I donate regularly to the Salvation Army, my friend’s restaurant I mentioned earlier? I go there everyday and bring the day-old pastries down to a homeless shelter. I go to the county jail once or twice a month and work with inmates interested in the program of AA. I work with young adults whose lives have become destroyed by their alcoholism/addiction. I volunteer my time at foster children facilities. I go to a hospital once a week and pick up some real downtrodden people going through severe drug/alcohol withdrawals and I buy them dinner and take them to AA meetings. I don’t make a ton of money and I don’t ask to be reimbursed for any of this. I’m on the front lines representing the private sector all the time.

Are those who rant against taxes doing the same? Are those who rant against taxes and who believe in the private sector’s ability to enact social improvements going out there and doing so? I don’t think so, not enough of them are anyways. If you can answer yes to those questions, then fine. But I highly doubt anyone who would answer yes to those questions would turn around and advocate violence. I see what violence does to Americans; I see kids who come from horrific homes, abusive mothers and fathers, addicts, whores, deadbeats and so on. Some of these kids pull themselves up all by themselves, but a lot of them can’t. That’s where people like me come in. But it’s not enough. I’ve never been told “hey, we’ve got it covered next week, don’t worry about it”.

So if the govt wants to enact legislation to help fill this gap and if that makes me a bleeding heart liberal or if I’m living in some fantasyland version of what the govt does with some of our taxes, fine. I can live with that. I can’t live with people acting like violence is justified when they get taxed if they don’t turn around and help the poor and unfortunate with the resources they have. If you don’t give a shit about them, I can clearly see why the jump to violence against politicians isn’t a far one for some.

92

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:

That’s a bullshit distinction loaded with inaccuracies.[/quote]
No, it’s really not. The revolutionary spirit within the tea party movement is so utterly misguided. How can you not see how these methods of taxation are completely different? In one instance you have taxation without representation, in another the taxation is clearly justified by the fact that the majority of Congress voted for the bill!

93

[quote]Schlenkatank wrote:

[quote]katzenjammer wrote:

That’s a bullshit distinction loaded with inaccuracies.[/quote]
No, it’s really not. The revolutionary spirit within the tea party movement is so utterly misguided. How can you not see how these methods of taxation are completely different? In one instance you have taxation without representation, in another the taxation is clearly justified by the fact that the majority of Congress voted for the bill! [/quote]

So you are sayuing that if someone taxes you who is king by right of birth, i.e. chosen by God, it is unjust wheras if people tax you who have been “elected” may do that.

Interesting.

What is this “election” and how does it bestow magical powers on those “elected”?

Is it irrelevant how much they tax you and what they do to you as long as they have been “elected” or could someone who is only anointed and taxes you less be the better choice.

You have no idea how many unchecked premises are in your paragraph, none of which I happen to share.

94

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

So you disagree with the violence of the original American revolutionaries?

And a tax on just living is slightly new. By the way, I am against most taxes.

The government operates on violence. It take by force at gunpoint. Stop paying your taxes and you’ll find out.

You cannot remove all threats of violence without removing the law itself. The law contains threats of violence against the people you are condemning for threatening violence.

Our country was founded on violent resistance to unfair taxation. Period. Quit trying to revise history.[/quote]

You’ve been reading too much Harry Browne. When the govt comes to take your money through violence, if you feel taking taxes is unjustified then meet violence with violence. But right now, you’re advocating pre-emptive violence and dismissing the political process that our FF’s fought for. Stop referring to the mindset of people who died 200 years ago. We live in a much different society than we did then. Better in some ways, worse in some.

[/quote]
No. I have not. I specifically have advocated the exact opposite of what you are now accusing me of.

The reason that people 200 years ago are relevant is because we, as Americans, believe human rights to be universal.

[quote]

You’re living in this theoretical fantasy land that has you convinced that if the FF’s did it, then so can you. The revolutionaries fought for the political process that you are trampling all over if you resort to violence. It’s a slap in their face to jump right over it and start killing people whose views differ from yours. The political process got us here, it can take us from here as well. [/quote]

A couple of points here:

The revolutionaries did NOT fight for the constitution, they fought under the DOI. You may want to take a gander at that document. They specifically say that it is the right of the people to overthrow the government. This is confirmed by things like the second amendment.

If it was right to throw privately owned tea into the ocean in protest, how is it now wrong?

Fundamental truths donâ??tâ?? change with time.

95

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Jeff R wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
This condoning of violence is absolutely mind-boggling. There are at least a dozen states that have already filed lawsuits to block the HC bill and the GOP has forced Congress to re-examine the reconciliation bill, or something along those lines. There are people who are managing to protest loudly and are getting the attention of the govt without resorting to violence. THIS is how the American political process works.

Killing people because they don’t have the same political views and then calling it a defense of your civil liberties is more akin to how shit gets done in the Middle East. If these taxes are a violation of your civil liberties, then why haven’t the same who advocate it now been advocating it this entire time against ALL taxes? Why this tax and why now?

If those who support violence want to call me a pussy or disillusioned or idealistic or whatever, fine. I can certainly handle it. But don’t try to make me believe that the actions of those who threatened violence against these legislators are acting in the spirit of America. [/quote]

db,

I advocate a political solution. Win at the ballot box. Remove pelosi/obama/reid and their minions at the ballot box.

I want you to think through why this is a different. Let me help: It was passed using corruption against the stated wishes of the majority of the United States. Further, it forces you to buy a product.

The implications of that is mind-blowing. Next crisis, what’s next? Forcing us to buy Chrysler so that it doesn’t go under?

If the Government can force us to buy one product, why not another?

JeffR[/quote]

Obama received more votes than any other Presidential candidate ever. He defeated McCain by a wide margin. He ran on the explicit platform of universal healthcare. As ornamental as the changes are, there were changes to the bill to try to appease the opposition to it in a way. And I’m supposed to believe that this bill is so far removed from the wishes of the people that violence is justified?

And I’ll say this as well. I believe that the private sector is best equipped to enact social change, not the “coercive” way the govt does so. And I’m sure those who protest so vociferously against healthcare reform would agree. That being said, I donate a LOT of my time: I’ve been a volunteer coach for baseball teams of all ages, I donate regularly to the Salvation Army, my friend’s restaurant I mentioned earlier? I go there everyday and bring the day-old pastries down to a homeless shelter. I go to the county jail once or twice a month and work with inmates interested in the program of AA. I work with young adults whose lives have become destroyed by their alcoholism/addiction. I volunteer my time at foster children facilities. I go to a hospital once a week and pick up some real downtrodden people going through severe drug/alcohol withdrawals and I buy them dinner and take them to AA meetings. I don’t make a ton of money and I don’t ask to be reimbursed for any of this. I’m on the front lives representing the private sector all the time.

Are those who rant against taxes doing the same? Are those who rant against taxes and who believe in the private sector’s ability to enact social improvements going out there and doing so? I don’t think so, not enough of them are anyways. If you can answer yes to those questions, then fine. But I highly doubt anyone who would answer yes to those questions would turn around and advocate violence. I see what violence does to Americans; I see kids who come from horrific homes, abusive mothers and fathers, addicts, whores, deadbeats and so on. Some of these kids pull themselves up all by themselves, but a lot of them can’t. That’s where people like me come in. But it’s not enough. I’ve never been told “hey, we’ve got it covered next week, don’t worry about it”.

So if the govt wants to enact legislation to help fill this gap and if that makes me a bleeding heart liberal or if I’m living in some fantasyland version of what the govt does with some of our taxes, fine. I can live with that. I can’t live with people acting like violence is justified when they get taxed if they don’t turn around and help the poor and unfortunate with the resources they have. If you don’t give a shit about them, I can clearly see why the jump to violence against politicians isn’t a far one for some.[/quote]

db:

I’m not sure you are able to see the problem here. I’ll be clear here: This is an overreach by a willful majority.

I can’t say it any clearer. You may not like it, but, that is what it is.

You use obama’s election as a mandate for universal health care. I disagree. I know full well most people weren’t listening to him. Many people either didn’t care enough to listen or didn’t want to.

He misread his mandate. His mandate WAS/IS essentially to be the Anti-George W. Bush.

Now that people are paying attention, he’s being told CLEARLY that this is not his mandate.

He chooses not to listen.

Again, I advocate a political solution.

I thank you for your service to the poor. Sincerely.

What about those of us who believe we shouldn’t have this tax burden AND provide similar help to the poor?

How do you pigenhole us?

JeffR

96

[quote]borrek wrote:
What I find funny is that the same groups talking about revolution are the ones that are also saying this bill has destroyed their property rights. The rules of American government are well known, and by choosing to live here you are agreeing to that contract. Who are they to make the deciscion for me that the agreed upon system gets changed? Any revolutionary is just setting the example that contracts are okay to destroy when you’re on the raw end of one. [/quote]

By choosing to live here all I’ve agreed to is the fact that I have nowhere else to go.

mike

97

[quote]borrek wrote:

Violence as a political process goes directly against the Constitution. Any party who still has constitutional avenues yet shortcuts those avenues is very directly ignoring their agreed to political contract. [/quote]

Violence as a political process is the specific reason for 2A.

mike

98

[quote]borrek wrote:
What I find funny is that the same groups talking about revolution are the ones that are also saying this bill has destroyed their property rights. [/quote]

You may find it funny, but this bill is a violation of property rights.

I never signed this “contract” you speak of and I would bet you didn’t either.

Your statement has no basis in reality.

99

[quote]borrek wrote:
Any revolutionary is just setting the example that contracts are okay to destroy when you’re on the raw end of one. [/quote]

“Raw end of a contract”, huh? That is an absolutely bizarre characterization of what just happened considering the deception, manipulating, bribery, and threatening that went into passing the most far reaching legislation in 7 decades (some even say a marxist trojan horse) with no bipartisan support and by most accounts, against the will of a good majority of the people. This is not even to speak to the very possible unconstitutionality of it all, but that document has been largely rendered irrelevant by a corrupted education system and a host of lazy cowards that don’t deserve to be called Americans anymore.

“Raw end of a contract” indeed. You live in a nice house by the way? I’m looking for one and have a couple of good lawyers that I know who might simply be able to nullify your current contracted housing arrangement and just deed it over to me.

As far as these threats of violence and such, I don’t think they are really worth commenting on at this point as I am seriously considering the possibility that much of this is a purposeful disinformation campaign. Same goes with the alleged racial slurs at the TEA Party rally. One of the few things that the socialist left has proven themselves good at(aside from rampant drug use and stealing other people’s earnings) is rampant deception and subversion. I never met one that was capable on any other battlefield.

100

[quote]DBCooper wrote:
Well John, I agree that fighting for our liberties is never wrong, but don’t you agree that the method currently being pursued by these rogues within the TP are overboard? And I am still a bit miffed at what these people are fighting against. Look, I support healthcare reform in any fashion as long as it is effective and does not come at the cost of our civil liberties.

But the reality is that we will always “be forced” to pay taxes in this country. How much we pay can ebb and flow from administration to administration, but it will always happen to a certain extent. So we have the ability to stand up and fight against what we perceive to be an unjust use of our taxes. In a way, that is the essence of Americanism. But in my own personal opinion, I think these people are wrong to stand up so forcefully against taxes for healthcare. I mean look, there is some amount of ambiguity as to whether or not this bill will fail in the long run or else the debate wouldn’t be happening. But to me, it seems as if there is much less ambiguity concerning whether the taxes we are spending in Iraq or Afhganistan or the war on drugs or green technology or bailouts/stimulus packages and so forth are worth it.

Am I making any sense here? I guess what I’m getting at is this: if people are going to protest against where taxes go, why not protest against taxes being spent to rebuild Iraq instead of healthcare? And I’m sure that there are some who have protested against both, but I suspect there are very few in the TP who protested against the war in Iraq or the war in Afhganistan or the war on drugs. There are some people who protest against taxes period, no matter where they are spent, but I think those people are fighting for something that will NEVER happen.

I suppose protesting against certain taxes and govt policies is a matter of opinion, and I understand to a certain extent why they protest against healthcare reform, but I don’t understand why they protest against that INSTEAD of something else that, to me, seems to be a much more clearcut waste of our money.[/quote]

If you cannot understand why they protest you do not understand your enemy. I’ll give you a clue, 1) it goes against the Rule of Law, 2) it does not just tax your income, it forces you to buy something of be charged they are forcing you in order to stay out of prison to pay a fee for living in the country. On top of this, the Federal Government is taking over Health Care. They are telling people how to do things, they are telling people where to go, they are telling people who to see. This Bill not only taxes, it lacks tolerance for man’s ability to choose what is best for him.