Eddie Bernice
Posted on 10/21/2010 8:20:52 PM PDT by Ira_Louvin
Republican congressional candidate Stephen Broden stunned his party Thursday, saying he would not rule out violent overthrow of the government if elections did not produce a change in leadership.
In a rambling exchange during a TV interview, Broden, a South Dallas pastor, said a violent uprising “is not the first option” but it is “on the table.” That drew a quick denunciation from the head of the Dallas County GOP, who called the remarks “inappropriate.”
Broden, a first-time candidate, is challenging veteran incumbent Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson in Dallas’ heavily Democratic 30th Congressional District. Johnson’s campaign declined to comment on Broden.
In the interview, Brad Watson, political reporter for WFAA-TV (Channel 8), asked Broden about at a tea party event last year in Fort Worth in which he described the nation’s government as tyrannical.
“We have a constitutional remedy,” Broden said then. “And the framers say if that don’t work, revolution.”
Watson asked if his definition of revolution included violent overthrow of the government. In a prolonged back-and-forth, Broden at first declined to explicitly address insurrection, saying the first way to deal with a repressive government is to “alter it or abolish it.”
“If the government is not producing the results or has become destructive to the ends of our liberties, we have a right to get rid of that government and to get rid of it by any means necessary,” Broden said, adding the nation was founded on a violent revolt against Britain’s King George III.
Watson asked if violence would be in option in 2010, under the current government.
“The option is on the table. I don’t think that we should remove anything from the table as it relates to our liberties and our freedoms,” Broden said, without elaborating. “However, it is not the first option.”
(Excerpt) Read more at dallasnews.com ...
Oh, shoot. I was hoping we could get rid of Eddie Bernice once and for all, but he’s sounding a little over the top.
I mean you can think stuff, but not say it.
On the other hand, I totally do NOT trust the Dallas Morning News.
You should see the list of candidates they endorsed.
“I’ve read the constitution and noticed that there isn’t any provisions legitimizing violent overthrow of the government.”
I am far from an expert on the Founding Documents, but perhaps a reading of the Declaration of Independence would clarify what is being discussed on this thread.
Consider that most of the offenses against what was to become America, committed by King George, are being done to us now by Barak Hussein and his crowd of Chicago, urban black thugs, and Moslims.
I agree with every word he said, but politically, he’s dumber than a box of rocks for saying it at this time and in that setting.
It’s how we overthrew the first tyrant.
My fear is that we are no longer the rough and ready folk who suffered and sacrificed during the unpleasantness with George, III in 1776+.
Thanks for making the issue so clear!
You said, “No one can honestly take that oath of office while harboring plans to overthrow the government.”
The oath of office is to the Constitution, not to whatever man has any office. Government is a political animal created by the citizenry to serve them. When the beast gets too repressive, steps must be taken.
Lastly, the Constitution is the embodiment, in a legal document, of the concepts in the Declaration of Independence.
As the Founders said, on numerous occasions, when government becomes repressive, it is the right and duty of the citizen to correct or overthrow the government.
Perhaps more reading might help, particularly in terms of the “Original Intent” of the Founders.
You're right about the Declaration of Independence, but a Congressman takes an oath to defend the Constitution, not the Declaration. Overthrowing a government is an extraconstitutional act.
The signers of the Declaration recognized that what they were doing was illegal under British law, that they were violating/renouncing any prior oaths to Britain's constitution that they may have made, and that they would be hung as traitors if they were unsuccessful.
I repeat that a new Congressman cannot honestly take an oath to defend our Constitution while harboring an intent to overthrow the government by force.
I think you'll have a hard time finding any of our Founding Fathers who made oaths to support King George III after they signed the Declaration of Independence.
There isn't any Constitutional way to overthrow the government by force.
Eddie Bernice
“they would be hung as traitors if they were unsuccessful.”
“We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
Benjamin Franklin
At the signing of the Declaration of Independence
And, be assured that King George would have killed each one of them in a very ugly, horrible way if they had failed.
You looked in the wrong document- check out the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.
Barak Hussein and many Democraps would happily kill the TEA Party people if they could. Arguably, little has changed since the revolutionary War. Surely, the issues and the nature of man have not changed.
I, and most of both the TEA Party and the FR community, are too old to be in the prime of health which is a prereq for combat. I am also appalled at the financial loss and probable loss of American society if things get to that stage.
However, a few thoughts keep coming back to me. The Constitution IS worth fighting for. Churchill said it best:
“You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves.”
Lastly, Paul Johnson was correct when he said that if the American experiment in self government failed, that which would come after would be unspeakably worse.
“Unspeakable” is the rude beast slouching through the White House as I write this.
Some things are worth dying for. That is just the way it is. The Founders knew it and we know it. This country is on a powder keg with a short fuse. Many, many people have pinned their hopes to this election.
IF there is discernable proof that this election has been stolen, or that those we elect have lied to us, all bets are off.
If the hard left loses, THEY will resort to violence against us and there is no doubt in my mind about that.
Either way, there will be war.
Oh bullcrap.
Still, if you will not fight for the right when you can easily win without bloodshed; if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than live as slaves. -Sir Winston Churchill
There isn't any Constitutional way to overthrow the government by force.
You can't be as naive as you're pretending to be.
The primary purpose of the Constitution is to state how the government which has been established is to function.
It's an oath to defend the Constitution.
That's right!
And when the government no longer functions according to the Constitution then the Citizens, and especially those Citizens elected to public office, are duty bound to overthrow the existing government, even violently if necessary, and reestablish the proper mechanisms of the Constitution that the government has strayed from if they so choose or form a new form of government all together.
There doesn't have to be a Constitutional criteria for overthrowing the government by force. It simply doesn't apply. By your way of thinking the American colonists couldn't ever have revolted because there wasn't a mechanism to overthrow a government in the Magna Carta or the English Bill of Rights of 1689!
You're doing yourself no good with your idiotic attempts to entrap others.
as a child I studied US history and the american system of government made sense
Now after 50 years of being pushed around and abused by a foolish insane government making stupid decisions, after being embarrassed,ignored, corralled, and taxed to death by arrogant silver spoon elitists, I see the government as the enemy , systemically corrupt and corporately evil, from the dog catcher on up to the POTUS
I’m not sure which one of the Federalist Papers it is, maybe in Federalist 30-40, but this exact question was answered. We do have a right to remove the current government if it is necessary. That’s the true intent of the 2nd amendments. I’m not saying we are at that point yet but we are getting there and quick.
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.