Posted on 04/29/2015 12:45:48 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The thing that always irks me about their "water the tree of liberty" types is their sheer stupidity. Seriously, you think you and your buddies are going to play Red Dawn against the full might of the U.S. government? Where do you suppose all that defense budget money went, folks?
And now we have Ted Cruz, egging them on. Dear sweet Jesus, this man has no conscience. Via Talking Points Memo:
WASHINGTON — It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.
But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.
"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."
This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.
"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."
Nor has the Supreme Court recognized a Second Amendment right to revolt against the government, Winkler said. In the landmark 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court established an individual's right to possess a gun for lawful purposes like self-defense.
Fiery rhetoric is a trademark for Cruz, who is battling to win over Republican voters in a crowded primary field where he has trailed Jeb Bush, a former Florida governor, and Scott Walker, the governor of Wisconsin, so far in early polls.
Cruz declared that he's "the only candidate running for President who not only believes in the Constitutional right to keep and bear arms -- but has the record of fighting for it, tooth and nail."
I think Susie must have missed this somewhere:
From the Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.”
It was the very first step in destroying the country, it turned families against each other instead of unifying them like Marriage Did. Until then Families voted as a FAMILY with the Husband casting the vote for the FAMILY.
You alsoi had to OWN PROPERY to vote, if you have No Skin in the Game you have NO RIGHT to vote against those that do.
On my laptop at home I have a great quote from James Madison on this issue, I am sure someone here will post it, this is where I got it.
Where do you suppose all that defense budget money went, folks?
Susie, what you don’t understand is that we have our
own personal “defense budget” and it is spent on our
own personal defense of ourselves and our PROPERTY.
When the government misapplies the powers we give it
against ourselves, we have the right and DUTY to see
that it doesn’t continue.
Susie, have you sworn an oath to the defense of our
constitution? Many of us have, and laid our lives
on the line along with our signatures and oaths.
Get back to me when you have done the same.
t.
How do they get a voice?
For the Marxist/socialist/progressive democRATs to see.
5.56mm
He's not the only one Susie;
"This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or exercise their revolutionary right to overthrow it." --Abraham Lincoln
Resistance is futile! You may as well surrender your guns and lay your submissive necks under the boot of your Communist overlords. /s
As sure as night follows day.
What they will do is send the "neighbors" of one state against the "neighbors" of a different state. And Yes, they will take up arms. This happened once before a long time ago.
At this point I usually quote the Anti-Federalist papers.
Thirdly, the absolute command of Congress over the militia may be destructive of public liberty; for under the guidance of an arbitrary government, they may be made the unwilling instruments of tyranny. The militia of Pennsylvania may be marched to New England or Virginia to quell an insurrection occasioned by the most galling oppression, and aided by the standing army, they will no doubt be successful in subduing their liberty and independency. But in so doing, although the magnanimity of their minds will be extinguished, yet the meaner passions of resentment and revenge will be increased, and these in turn will be the ready and obedient instruments of despotism to enslave the others; and that with an irritated vengeance. Thus may the militia be made the instruments of crushing the last efforts of expiring liberty, of riveting the chains of despotism on their fellow-citizens, and on one another. This power can be exercised not only without violating the Constitution, but in strict conformity with it; it is calculated for this express purpose, and will doubtless be executed accordingly.
This was written December 12, 1787. How prophetic it was.
“Nor has the Supreme Court recognized a Second Amendment right to revolt against the government, Winkler said”
If there is a arm revolt i doubt the revolt-ers will recognize the less than supreme court.
OMG! I always thought Susie was a girls name!
Our founders went Red Dawn against the largest military in the world at the time.
Ah... I’m always looking at things “worldviewishly”...
She puts the authority of the Supreme Court above the Constitution itself, and inversion of the way this country was founded,
and a very predictable conclusion of having a Humanist worldview.
That is one ugly lesbian.
Doesn’t sound fevered to me.
Not long ago 5000 some-odd “fevered” idiots showed up at the Bundy ranch. Didn’t notice any big flash of US governmental might at any point during that one...
Ugly goes to the bone.
Now THAT looks like a low-information Liberal!!!!
Honey, we might never have another revolution in this country, but we certainly will if you and your ilk keep regulating arms.
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.