Posted on 09/30/2009 11:53:06 AM PDT by freed0misntfree
In a column published yesterday, Newsmax's John L. Perry wrote that there is a "gaining" possibility that the military will stage a coup to "resolve the 'Obama problem.'"
Newsmax has apparently removed the column from its site. Links are now redirected to the homepage, and Perry's author page has no mention of his latest work. You can read the full text here.
(Excerpt) Read more at tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com ...
The military is supposed to defend us from all enemies, so I guess this makes sense
I don’t think I would mind this.
I cannot see the troops allowing a military dictatorship- just hold onto the office until an election can be held... A nice CLEAN one
That would be a travesty if it came to that. That would only be necessary if he were impeached and refused to leave office and then tried to use the military to keep in him power.
So yes he’s wrong in saying this. That’s how dictators come to power. We lost the election and now we just have to fight harder to keep keep the Rats from getting their way.
No
The military pledged to defend the Constitution against enemies foreign and domestic. They owe allegiance to the Constitution.
The coup — which would be “civilized” and “bloodless,” according to Perry — would consist of a “patriotic general” sitting down with the President and working out a new system in which “skilled, military-trained, nation-builders” would “do the serious business of governing and defending the nation” while Obama would still be allowed to make speeches.
LOL
I know people who lived in countries where the Army picks the president and it really sucks.
Or, we can just remember to vote next time.
Needed or not, it won’t happen. And we don’t need it. Such a thing would be no more Constitutional than Hussein’s policies and would lead to some sort of dictatorship. Authoritarian rule by our friends would be no more beneficial or desirable than authoritarian rule by our enemies. Once you go there you can’t go back.
Sorry, this is treason. No matter how much you hate Obama, calling for the military overthrow of the civilian government is treason.
I would rather be living under temporary Martial Law making way for interim elections than under a communist dictatorship led by an enemy foreigner.
Batsh*t Crazy.
Yellow matter custard, dripping from a dead dog’s eye.
Crabalocker fishwife, pornographic priestess,
Boy, you been a naughty girl you let your knickers down.
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen.
I am the walrus, coup coup k’coup.
Bette has a long mustache
Wound my heart with monotonous langour
Bette has a long mustache*
Idiots. Trying to cover up an embarrassment (or, in this case, an act of sedition) once it hits the Internet is a fool's errand.
No better way to scare undecided voters back into the Democrat party.
What part of the Constitution allows the military to overthrow the elected government?
Won’t ever happen under this Constitution...
Never would happen. The military is not solely composed of right wing typical white people, you know.
I think that Zero will implement the American Federal Police Force soon .... AFPF coming soon to a neighborhood near you.
Chile. Haiti.
A popular dictatorship is not governed by the rule of law. What do you do when your fellow citizens are willing to give up their liberty and require you to do the same thing? What if those willing to surrender their liberty are a majority? Does that make their elected dictatorship legitimate?
Who then is doing the pushing or pulling?
Interim election when? In 2012 when the term of the ceremonial president is over? What if the ceremonial president decides to run again? And what about Congress? Do you do away with them as well during your 'temporary martial law'? If so, the when do you allow them to be elected again and what runs the government in the mean time? The Joint Chiefs? What if the Democrats are the majority after your new elections, or what if someone that the Joint Chiefs don't like is elected? Do they refuse to allow the new president to be seated or do they hold elections until they approve of the winner?
Is that really what you want our military deciding?
Just plain stupid. Military coups rarely work out the way their progenitors intended (although, to the extent you choose to [mis]characterize Honduras as a coup, they’re doing ok so far. Turkey is another apparent exception.). Trying to maintain civil order in this multicultural, anti-authoritarian mix would be disastrous, meaning either the coup leaders need to step up control or abandon what they started.
That’s the policy reason for not supporting a coup. The real reason to not support a coup is because 53 percent of this country really, desperately, passionately, want to be able to force me to pay for their policy and lifestyle choices in a way that fundamentally alters the social contract between me and the state. At some point, it won’t be a state any more and it will dissolve fine on its own then. But a military coup amounts to nothing more than .3 percent of the country deciding to impose its values upon an extraordinary number of folks who don’t want that. We need a libertarian revolution, not a military one.
NewsMax and Perry need their pee-pees smacked for this. Talk like this is not only stupid, it borders on sedition and treason. Even posting it on FR makes us look worse than the morons at DU.
I hate what Obama is doing just as much as the rest of you, but he is the President, and he was elected to that office legally and Constitutionaly. We have a way to redress this grievance, it’s called an election. We have 2 shots in the next 3 years to put a hurt on the progressive scum. Vote their a$$es out!
A coup would do grave harm to our great Republic, harm that could never be undone!
Like hell.
Obama and his cabinet and his czars need to be gone.
There are many reasons a coup is a bad idea. For one, this is America and we’re above that.
Here’s one problem that few think of: historicly speaking, coups are followed by more coups. The party that is ousted in a coup usually stages another coup a few years later. Think of the Philippnes. This begins a cycle that ends up destroying a nation’s economy and infrastructure, and usually leads to a lot of bloodshed. I don’t want that in my country.
What you said. You can’t say that we are nation of laws and not men, and that that fundamental axiom of Anglo-American government and law applies to Obama, if you are going to turn around and special plead for a military insurrection.
And we won't even talk about throwing our allies, including Israel under the bus, going back on promises of missle defense with allies, announcing intentions to disarm the USA of its nukes, forcing Americans to have socialized health insurance, forcing Americans to accept unions, forcing Americans to pay higher and higher energy bills, forcing Americans to God knows what ELSE.
In my dictionary ...any government entity that would do any, much less ALL, of the above is a treasonous entity and should be dealt with accordingly.
Hey, if we didn't to it during Jimmuh's term, it ain't never gonna happen.
There’s a ‘gaining’ possibility that John Perry is an idiot.
Conversely, what part of the Constitution allows the government to do half of the things it's done and is planning to do, even as we speak?
A military coup is inadvisable. Hugo has every right to do what he is doing by popular mandate and how dare anyone suggest elected dictators be removed by the military. What’s good for Hugo is good for any Hugo wannabe.
Yeah....and you can bet that Hugo (we gotta help Obama) would send his commie thugs, along with Castro’s, here to “”assist”” his commie bud.
Lefty Outrage at ‘Conservative’ Article Misses Key Fact, Writer Isn’t Conservative
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2351819/posts
See post 37
It was a hypothetical. As a hypothetical, it is possible. What Obama and the Democrats are doing is treasonous.
Elected legally and constitutionally?
Does ACORN and a BC (lack thereof) come to mind?
[Sorry, this is treason. No matter how much you hate Obama, calling for the military overthrow of the civilian government is treason.]
There’s a difference between calling for it and believing that that is the path we are on. A very strong argument can be made that all the banks in the US are bankrupt. If we lose Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran and Israel is at war because of the CIC’s incompetence, plus there is a financial collapse, to think a coup of some sort impossible is to be blind.
Sounds like Satire to me.
Snippet: There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
The two presidents for whom Perry worked were LBJ and Jimma Carter.
HE’S A DEMOCRAT!!!
As another poster correctly pointed out, anything like this would HAVE to originate at the very top. And as another poster rightly remarked, these guys are as political as anyone on Capitol Hill or they wouldn’t have made it to the top.
Having said that, they ALSO have NON-MILITARY families and extended families who would suffer in a renegade, Constitutionless, totalitarian regime which history teaches only gets worse and more oppressive with time.
I sincerely believe that these traditionally honorable and honor bound men would do what they felt was necessary to keep that from happening lest their failure to act make a total mockery of their careers and lives.
The few I’ve ever met — among them the late General George Olmsted (my wife worked for him in D.C. back in the 60s) and the late General Lew Walt, USMC — would rather eat their service pistols than stand aside while the nation and the Constitution to which they swore that oath was systematically dismantled (as it is as you read this).
Yes, it would be treason if someone called for a military coup. The fact is, our country is the product of treason. Our founders were all traitors and could have been hanged for treason. If our founders heeded the warnings offered by some in this post, we might still be loyal citizens of the Crown.
Is it treason to forcefully oppose a government that betrays its oath to protect and defend the Constitution when peaceful means fail? Should we wait until the Constitution becomes a meaningless scrap of paper? I think we all need to grapple with that question.
Fixed it for you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.