Sharpton To Black Community 'We Can Not Sleep Through the Revolution'

NEN ^

[Pacothecat]

‘We Can Not Sleep Through the Revolution’: Al Sharpton Tells Black Community to Join the Revolution Because Those Kids on Wall Street Are Right About Redistributing the Wealth

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/we-can-not-sleep-through-the-revolution-al-shapton-tells-the-black-community-to-join-the-revolution-because-those-kids-on-wall-street-are-right-about-redistributing-the-wealth/

[MuttTheHoople]

Sharpton to blacks: Stay on the Plantation, ‘cause you don’t wanna upset massa.

[Westbrook]

Will Al jump the shark with this one?

Hey, Al.

What have you done to distribute your ill gotten gains? Have you given to any REAL charities lately?

[Track9]

But resist, we much… we must… and we will much… about… that… be committed.” – Al Sharpton, August 9, 2011

[Yosemitest]

WINGLESS, BLOODSUCKING AND PARASITIC: MEET THE FLEA PARTY!

October 12, 2011


So far, the only major accomplishment of the "Occupy Wall Street" protesters is that they have finally put an end to their previous initiative, "Occupy Our Mothers' Basements."

Oddly enough for such a respectable-looking group -- a mixture of adolescents looking for a cause, public sector union members, drug dealers, criminals, teenage runaways, people who have been at every protest since the Berkeley Free Speech Movement, Andrea Dworkin look-alikes, people 95 percent of whose hair is concentrated in their ponytails and other average Democrats -- they can't even explain what they're protesting.

The protesters either treat inquiries about their purpose as a trick question, or -- worse -- instantly rattle off a series of insane causes: "No. 1, abolish capitalism; No. 2, because 9/11 was an inside job; No. 3, because Mumia is innocent ..."

Curiously, the only point universally agreed upon by the protesters and their admirers in the Democratic Party and the mainstream media is that "Occupy Wall Street" should be compared to the tea party. Yes, that would be the same tea party that has been denounced and slandered by the Democratic Party and the mainstream media for the last three years.

As a refresher: The Democratic National Committee called the tea partiers "angry mobs" and "rabid right-wing extremists." ABC said they were a "mob." CNN accused them of "rabble rousing." Harry Reid called them "evil mongers." Nancy Pelosi said they were "un-American." CNN's Anderson Cooper and every single host on MSNBC called the tea partiers a name that referred to an obscure gay sex act.

But apparently liberals couldn't even convince themselves that tea partiers were an extremist group unworthy of emulation.

At least they're embarrassed about what the OWS protesters really are: wingless, bloodsucking and parasitic. This is the flea party, not the tea party.

Contrary to all the blather you always hear about how lawless street protests and civil disobedience are part of the American tradition -- "what our troops are fighting for!" -- they are not. We are an orderly people with democratic channels at our disposal to change our government.

The very reason we have a constitutional republic is because of a mob uprising. Soon after the American Revolution, Shays' Rebellion so terrified and angered Americans that they demanded a federal government capable of crushing such mobs.

For nearly 200 years, Americans understood that they lived in a country capable of producing bad politicians and bad policies, but that was subject to change through peaceful, democratic means. There was no need to riot or storm buildings because we didn't have a king. We had a representative government.

Even when injustice existed, there were constitutional mechanisms to right wrongs.

For nearly a century after the Civil War, congressional Republicans kept introducing bills that implemented the civil rights amendments -- only to be blocked by segregationist Democrats. But then, attorney Thurgood Marshall came along and began winning cases before the Supreme Court, redeeming black Americans' constitutional rights through the judiciary.

As long as a Republican sat in the White House, those victories were enforced. In 1957, President Dwight D. Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Ark., to walk black children to school in defiance of the segregationist, Democratic governor of Arkansas, Orval Faubus -- Bill Clinton's friend.

This is what our Constitution was designed for: to use the force of the federal government to uphold the law when the states couldn't (Shays' Rebellion) or wouldn't (segregationist Democrats).

If Richard Nixon had won the 1960 election instead of John F. Kennedy -- as some say he did -- there never would have been a need for Rosa Parks, the Freedom Rides and the rest of the civil disobedience of the civil rights movement.

But as soon as the Democrats got control of the White House, enforcement of the Supreme Court's civil rights rulings came to a crashing halt. Elected Democrats in the states were free to violate legitimate constitutional rulings without interference from Democratic presidents.

The ingenious system given to us by our founding fathers faltered on the morally corrupt obstructionism of elected Democrats. They simply refused to abide by the rules -- with glee at the state level, and at the federal level, with cowardice.

Here, finally, was an appropriate case for nonviolent protest. There hasn't been another justification for civil disobedience in this country until the Supreme Court invented a "right" to abortion in Roe v. Wade -- another act of lawlessness by liberals.

(All this and more is detailed in the smash best-seller, "Demonic: How the Liberal Mobs Are Endangering America"!)

Now liberals compare their every riot, every traffic blockage, every Starbucks-window-smashing street protest to the civil rights movement –- which was only necessary because of them. These "Occupy Wall Street" ignoramuses seem to imagine they are blacks living in 1963 Alabama under Democratic governor George Wallace.

To the contrary, the Wall Street protesters have no specific objections and no serious policy proposals in a country that is governed, as Abraham Lincoln put it, "by the people." They protest because they enjoy creating mayhem, not because the law is being ignored or their rights violated without penalty by government officials.

They are not in the tradition of the tea partiers, much less our founding fathers. They are not in the tradition of the civil rights movement or Operation Rescue. They are in the tradition of Shays' Rebellion, the Weathermen and Charles Manson.

[Venturer]

Can anyone believe that this clown was hired to be a Journalist?

What kind of news agency would hire this worthless POS?

Al Sharpton hasn’t hit a lick of work in his whole life and has done more to promote black racism than any other black man in the world.

If there is a Revolution, Sharpton will be the first to go underground and in hiding.

[DCBryan1]

Why not Al? They sleep at my work!

[blam]

"Can anyone believe that this clown was hired to be a Journalist? "

It's indicitive of what's happened to the country.

We have to pretend that every thing is equal.

[SERE_DOC]

Sedition

This article is about the legal term. For other uses, see Sedition (disambiguation).

In law, sedition is overt conduct, such as speech and organization, that is deemed by the legal authority to tend toward insurrection against the established order. Sedition often includes subversion of a constitution and incitement of discontent (or resistance) to lawful authority. Sedition may include any commotion, though not aimed at direct and open violence against the laws. Seditious words in writing are seditious libel. A seditionist is one who engages in or promotes the interests of sedition.

Typically, sedition is considered a subversive act, and the overt acts that may be prosecutable under sedition laws vary from one legal code to another. Where the history of these legal codes has been traced, there is also a record of the change in the definition of the elements constituting sedition at certain points in history. This overview has served to develop a sociological definition of sedition as well, within the study of state persecution.

The difference between sedition and treason consists primarily in the subjective ultimate object of the violation to the public peace. Sedition does not consist of levying war against a government nor of adhering to its enemies, giving enemies aid, and giving enemies comfort. Nor does it consist, in most representative democracies, of peaceful protest against a government, nor of attempting to change the government by democratic means (such as direct democracy or constitutional convention).

Sedition is the stirring up of rebellion against the government in power. Treason is the violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or state, giving aid to enemies, or levying war against one's state. Sedition is encouraging one's fellow citizens to rebel against their state, whereas treason is actually betraying one's country by aiding and abetting another state. Sedition laws somewhat equate to terrorism and public order laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition

Sharpton, what you get with a race pimp, JMHO

[Yosemitest]

Al Sharpton is one of the main reasons we will never get rid of racism, until Jesus Christ returns.
Too many people are getting rich off of it!

[sickoflibs]

Ha-HA, Sharpton can't understand why poor unemployed blacks in Harlem don't join these rich privileged spoiled white (Marxist) brats camping out in Manhattan,

Easy answer Al:
Because the white liberals are not giving them a big paycheck to sell out like MSNBC is doing with you

[sickoflibs]

Ha-HA, Sharpton can't understand why poor unemployed blacks in Harlem don't join these rich privileged spoiled white (Marxist) brats camping out in Manhattan,

Easy answer Al:
Because the white liberals are not giving them a big paycheck to sell out like MSNBC is doing with you

[Calvin Locke]

What kind of news agency would hire this worthless POS?

Comcast. They got this poverty pimp to write a nice letter to the FCC
supporting the Comcast purchase of 51% of NBC.

Why the heck else do you think Comcast would want to put up with
the coming fecal storm Sharpton's surely going to bring upon
them as the election nears?

Remember that rare BHO vacation (the one in August on MV)?

Comcast's CEO had dinner with the one. BHO also paved the way for Sharpton to be eligible for our tax dollars again.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Communist Goal number 19:

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

These are happening all over the world where there are freely elected governments. They are spreading all over the USA. Sharpton and other blacks, specifically Tavis Smiley and Cornel West, are ginning up unrest. So are many black churches.

Look for civil unrest to expand and for the 2012 elections to be postponed. Then what happens? Be ready.

[vanilla swirl]

so, what church is he pastor of? So why do we listen?

[liberalh8ter]

He wasn’t hired to be a journalist, he was hired to rile Holder’s people via the airwaves.

[MrB]

We’re at that point.

In the communist playbook, there absolutely MUST be a violent revolution that eliminates the bourgeoisie and intimidates any opposition to the communist takeover.

You’re going to see more and more of these Leninists coming out of the closet trying to get it started.

Meanwhile, they, like the Underpants Gnomes, have left out a step. They forgot to disarm us first.

[Rummyfan]

Resist we much!!!!

[GOPJ]

Because the white liberals are not giving them a big paycheck to sell out like MSNBC is doing with you

Organizers chose NOT to hire black 'protesters'... that's an interesting development.

[Mind-numbed Robot]

The Rev. Sharpton nor the Rev. Jackson are real preachers. They just adopted the title reverend in order to avoid taxes. So, not only do they not give to charities but they avoid paying for the big government they demand. All liberal leaders do that to one extent or another.

Tax the rich? They know the rich will avoid the taxes because the liberals themselves have written the loop holes into the law. It will all fall on the average American either as a taxpayer, a consumer, and usually both.

At least the Fair Tax, part of Cain’s 9-9-9, would get them when they buy at retail.