Posted on 01/04/2016 10:33:31 AM PST by ObozoMustGo2012
Glad you understand the distinction. :-)
The tree of liberty is shriveling up and dying. The worms that are devouring it can only be stopped by frequent injections of hot lead.
Cruz didn’t “slam” the protestors, he merely asked them to stand down and pursue other tactics. What a dishonest journalist.
Same here. The way he phrased that statement is disconcerting, to say the least.
“Make the Government respond with force. They have backed down every time.”
Almost 200 civilian murder victims at Waco would dispute this, except that they are dead.
It was about the Tax on tea....not voting
You ever hear about the Whiskey Rebellion and how George Washington marched the U.S. Army into western Pennsylvania to crush it?
...
And he was president at the time.
My sense of the 60’s is that King’s vision of ‘non-violent’ resistance was a pathway to ‘violent’ resistance in the end.
Kennedy and his people were petrified because when people saw the police dogs, water cannon stuff on television and so on, it ignited various kinds of racial protest across the country in the late spring and into the summer of 1963.
Some of the protest was non-violent, other protests were the first of the riots that would get worse as the 60’s went on reaching a climax with the orgy of riots following MLK’s assassination in 1968.
Sympathy among the white population in 1963 turned to anger and backlash as the decade went on and the tempo of the protests deteroriated into violence.
NON VIOLENT CIVIL DISOBEDIENCE MAY BE A COURSE TO TAKE, BUT THE HISTORY REMINDS US THAT IT CAN DETERIORATE INTO VIOLENCE AND THERE CAN BE A BACKLASH.
Howard K. Smith, a journalist who worked at ABC during this time, did a TV interview in 1974 stating people turned against the civil rights movement ‘when it became violent’.
“But we don’t have a constitutional right to use force and violence and to threaten force and violence on others,†he said. “And so it is our hope that the protesters there will stand down peaceably, that there will not be a violent confrontation.
......................................................
Cruz is DEAD WRONG! What does he think the Second Amendment was written for? It was written to ASSURE the American people that they could always resist an overreaching government with ARMS. Cruz is supposed to be such a Constitutional Genius. Well his wizardry just took a plunge if he doesn’t understand the Constitutions Second Amendment. He is revealed as just another pacifist in the style of all the other lawyers in the government. Extensive writings by many of the forefathers bear out the defense provided to the citizens against an overpowering government. SOMEBODY has to stand up against the corruption in Washington. At the root of all this land confiscation is AGENDA 21 of the United Nations. Wake up, America.
By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled,
Here once the embattled farmers stood,
And fired the shot heard ‘round the world.
The Concord Hymn by Ralph Waldo Emerson
Lexington and Concord have been forgotten!
“I don’t get why non violent disobedience is frowned upon by the right these days for our causes - it is a Christian aka Conservative invention we should take back from the leftists. The leftists - if you recall - were the ones arguing for armed uprisings in the 60s and 70s.”
I don’t either, especially when the founders themselves set that precedent. Years of correspondence, essays and emissaries were attempted first by American patriots. YEARS.
Didn’t know thanJohn Wayne had endorsed Trump. Has Trump even said anything about this?
I say they will not, and OBozo will have his gun grab talking points, only now this may sway enough to his side when recent polls have shown the argument HAS BEEN going OUR way on the issue of guns.
There in lies the problem. A Constitutional problem.
Next thing you will see, is quartering of soldiers in private homes.
5.56mm
Trump wanted the government to seize land from an old lady who was standing in the way of one of his casinos (which went bankrupt anyway).
But I guess that’s different.
Indeed!
Who knows what Trump will do?
But given a chance to stand up for Kim Davis and her freedom...he didn’t!!
“Trump wanted the government to seize land from an old lady who was standing in the way of one of his casinos (which went bankrupt anyway).
But I guess that’s different.”
You must have missed the part when the old lady got a big fat check as compensation....
Do you think any candidate is going to advocate the threat of violence in this case?
Gosh. Emerson! Again!
A bridge too far...
Now,
A ranch too far...
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.