Posted on 09/06/2008 5:37:10 PM PDT by mnehring
In a radio interview earlier this week, U.S. congressman Ron Paul said it may become necessary for citizens to resort to physical opposition if the government continues to erode civil liberties and commit international acts of aggression.
Asked by radio show host Alex Jones if he believed in the use of violence or other physical action to oppose an unjust government, Paul, a one-time presidential candidate for the Libertarian Party and a contender for the Republican presidential nomination until he dropped out of the race earlier this year, answered in the affirmative.
"Well, there's always that possibility that, that time will come." he said. "I believe in that."
(Excerpt) Read more at macedoniaonline.eu ...
that’s the same gentleman(sic)
I’m sure Alex Jones will be fine with it, as long as it’s only 5’ 1” female Philipinas named Michelle Malkin that he has to bully. Any man would clean the streets with his POS fat ass is seconds.
There should never be any rush to civil war. It shouldn’t be joked about, or desired.
What he is saying is may possibly true, but talk about the last resort from hell. Who wants to be die fighting over this stuff? We should be more civilized than that.
I’ll attempt to (following McCain’s use of $5 million as rich - a artful way of stating the obvious without lowballing the figure, IMO) - when the day comes either the President has the entire Congress and/or SCOTUS rounded up and executed, or vice versa; or when like Putin, radio, TV and press are shut down because of oppostion views (and not sedition) and journalists and/or bloggers jailed, tortured or killed for same; when... -those types of things which would be in a futuristic novel or movie about a absolutely tyrannical govt.
To say nothing of being egged on (in more ways than one) by, among others, a Chicago machine pol who got dropped into the Senate somehow (with no little help from that humble carpetbagger who said it was God's will that he forget his previous scruples about carpetbagging Senate candidates) and now runs for the White House in the guise of a sleek if vapourising crypto socialist and the authoritarian "maverick" to whom no personal grievance is immune to political resolution---regardless of whether the political resolution is a) competent or b) Constitutionally sanctioned to apply.
And, to both these jackanapes (we've advanced so profoundly that we've gone from the Original Dads to the like of Barack Obama and John McCain between whom to choose?), the era of big, buttinski government ain't over until it's over.
Agreed.. I think we are in far more danger now of false revolutions being started by fake revolutionaries under the guise of fighting against invisible government and banking conspiracies. We’ve seen it happen before.
Uh. Yeah. Sure. That was tried once by a part of the country called “The South”. It didn’t go so well; cause you see, the “rebels” always lose and their reasons for rebelling are always cast as “evil” and “wrong” and history is redefined. Just as Bill Clinton has been busy rewriting history and will continue to do as long as Hillary holds such a position of power in government. People will try to scream a more valid version of the truth, but they will be shouted down by Clinton worshipers and die-hard liberals who will never give even so much as an inch to allow that some of what they say could have some validity. Clintons good, conservative Republicans bad will be real history forever. So, everyone else can just shut up.
South bad. North good. Learn it. Love it. Live it.
Just as any potential rebels must learn. So either fergit it or you better win it.
“..and who gets to call that ‘revolution’ on?”
Ay, there’s the rub. We’ve already seen some people start their personal version of the revolution. Invariably, they’ve gotten the ‘smack down’ from the government and as soon as the dust settled most of us have quickly remarked at how foolish they were or commented on their lack of good cause. Sometimes I think those remarks and comments are driven as much by a wish to blend in with the masses and thereby attract less attention than by actual conviction.
Be that as it may, we didn’t rise up for Randy Weaver, preferring to believe (?) the government line about him being a white supremacist. Nor did we rush to rescue the Branch Davidians, citing the false accusation that David Koresh was having sex with children. When police went door to door confiscating guns in New Orleans we reacted by suing and legislating after the fact... never mind that those people who lost their property still haven’t recovered it.
No, unless the government — properly elected or not — does something so heinous no one can excuse it we will continue to watch individual revolutions on the evening news and make excuses for the government that breeds it.
But not to defend Achmadinijad or to help Achmadinijad against Pres. Bush and/or Israel!
The Babary Pirates war was an undeclared war, too. Another plot by those Jooooo neo cons?
We all do. Very few of us, however, remember the circumstances in which he wrote it. Even fewer recall Jefferson's reaction to Shay's rebellion and the Whiskey rebellion.
Remember the right to revolution?
We all do. Some remember the circumstances that necessitate it. Some evidently do not.
Remember why we have a Second Ammendment?
We all do, hopefully. Its purpose is twofold - as defense against foreign invasion and as a defense against the misuse of standing armies.
Remember “Red Dawn”?
It's sad to have to point this out, but Red Dawn was a movie. Specifically a movie about the occupation of the USA by foreign armies - in other words, circumstances different from the ones Paul is addressing.
All Paul said was what our history books teach us.
None of my history books taught me that we should look to mentally ill conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones for our political principles. They taught me to consider the Founders, not dolts.
Someday, eventually, we may have to take up arms.
If we do have to take up arms again it will have to be for the same reasons that our Founders took up arms - namely that some usurper has managed to abolish representative government. Not because an elected body of representatives has passed a law that we don't like.
My Friend, you always seem to come up with the Checkmate argument..
My Solem Oath!
Duty, Honor, County.
I hate using movies as an example, but since it was brought up, remember the speech by Tanner (the pilot) on how it all got started? We basically ignored the Russians overrunning Europe and Cuba overrunning Latin America. We decided to not intervene and did nothing until it was too late.
A Missouri born, raised in Michigan, served 20 years in the Army and retired in Arizona boy working for a Defense Contractor supporting the War effort; How do you think that would play with True Texan’s?
Greetings brother.
Other than being raised a Yankee, just fine.
What?
Mom is from the Volunteer State. Does that help?
I have to learn to use a sarcasm tag. But seriously, I was only half-joking. Paul didn’t say that violence was necessary now, or when it would be necessary, just that it might some day be necessary.
“It’s sad to have to point this out, but Red Dawn was a movie. Specifically a movie about the occupation of the USA by foreign armies - in other words, circumstances different from the ones Paul is addressing.”
Joking!
“If we do have to take up arms again it will have to be for the same reasons that our Founders took up arms - namely that some usurper has managed to abolish representative government. Not because an elected body of representatives has passed a law that we don’t like.”
Here, here! We have democracy for one reason only, to peaceably pass on power. The rest of the time, the Constitution is enough. When the Constitution is no longer in effect, that is when violence is acceptable.
“None of my history books taught me that we should look to mentally ill conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones for our political principles. They taught me to consider the Founders, not dolts.”
My point was that the Founders revolted with good reason, as presented in our books. I don’t see proof that Paul was basing his right to revolt upon conspiracy theories.
“We all do. Very few of us, however, remember the circumstances in which he wrote it. Even fewer recall Jefferson’s reaction to Shay’s rebellion and the Whiskey rebellion.”
Jefferson was a ball of contradictions, which is to say he contradicted himself a lot. Big government/smallgovernment. Leave me alone so I can live as I see fit/Don’t you dare trade with France!, All men are equal/I saiud how that row, mongrel! His love of blood and revolution is well-documented in quotation books I’ve glanced at in line at Barnes and Noble. But just try to rebel from his rule, Aaron Burr (you curr!).
As far as revolution goes, I wish we could all give the nod to revolution without it ever, ever taking place again.
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.