DENVER VS. THE U.S. CONSTITUTION

Stanley for U.S. Senate Campaign ^ | December 15, 2001 - Bill of Rights Day | N/A

[Demidog]

That could be a catchy campaign slogan for Rick.

Brilliant. You should infiltrate his organization and report back to us about all of the evil things he's conjuring up with the green party. Like perhaps joint media buys and the like.

Be like a regular FR reporter. Go Barney Go!

[Demidog]

Better than the gloves.

[wcbtinman]

"Never in a million years are the real 2nd amendment advocates going to stand for federal permission and registration. That is folly and insanity.

You got that right! And some of the folks who try to impose that one will be right also....dead right.

[cardinal4]

I am for taking up arms against a government that doesn't understand the Constitution.

Me,too.But I dont think its the government who doesnt understand the constitution.I thinks its the people.It takes votes to pass something like the Brady Bill.I feel the citizens should be educated on the Document and read for themselves what it really says,not what the government tells them it says.Just my opinion.

[Buckeroo]

So how, within America, do we subdue revolution?

[cardinal4]

So how, within America, do we subdue revolution?

At the risk of a massive flame,education.For example;At the height of the impeachment brouhaha,68% of the people said they supported Bill Clinton.Now that he's gone,we are starting to see things in the media that we would have never seen before regarding the shenanigans the clintons pulled off.In fact people like Rosie Odonell have declared for Bush.It was just a matter of pointing out that the white house spin doctors and lawyers can no longer hide the truth about the crimes committed by the clintons.Just an example.The point Im trying to make is the 68% who condoned his behavior were misinformed.Educating the electorate in calm,positive way,goes a long way to swaying voters.Just my opinion.Keep in mind though,I dont see the makings of a revolution in this country.

[Roscoe]

You should infiltrate his organization...

Reading the phone book or watching paint dry would probably be more interesting.

[Demidog]

Reading the phone book or watching paint dry would probably be more interesting.

Don't sell yourself short.

[LIBERTARIAN JOE]

Rights are generally (yes, that's a qualifier) done away with incrementally, but are almost always attained or regained in large chunks that typically involve mass quantities of violence. Guess that's my way of saying that incrementalism works fine in one direction, but not so well in the other. And I think you would probably admit that civil disobedience has been a part of this nation since before we won our independence. This is basically The Sons of Liberty without the war paint and in the daylight. The Rosa Parks analogy fits nicely as well.

Exactly! Early in the history of our former Republic, maybe incrementalism could work both ways. Now, however, most people blindly accept each new infringement on our freedom. Those that don't only fight for the things they feel deeply about. They may occasionally win an isolated victory, but now there are tens of millions of faceless, mindless gov't bureaucrats whose 'jobs' are to ever tighten the screws on us, every day.

Today (maybe), a united citizenry composed of patriots like Rick Stanley could use a campaign of mass civil disobedience to bring the system to it's knees, but pretty soon the only thing that will reign in gov't madness will be armed insurrection. When that day comes, despite all the disadvantages we'll have, one thing in our favor is that our opponents will be gov't employees. The hardest thing 95% of them do is spend the paychecks they don't earn, so at least we'll have a fighting chance.

[Roscoe]

And in any case, Libertarian candidates typically churned out endless press releases trumpeting their activities, if anyone actually had an interest.

[Roscoe]

Today (maybe), a united citizenry composed of patriots like Rick Stanley could use a campaign of mass civil disobedience to bring the system to it's knees

And they could order the ocean tides about.

[LibertyRocks]

Not cozy with the greens, just intelligent enough to see where we agree on SOME issues... I emphasize SOME... Deep down we all hate corruption and that's where this particular Green Candidate might just help out the citizens in the state of Colorado.

We definitely don't agree on their socialist rooted agenda for economic slavery. Of course, the drug war is another area we agree and a strong State Attorney would be able to also keep the feds out of colorado and let our citizen voted initiative for medical marijuana much safer.

The Libertarians do not have a candidate for AG at this time and the only alternative is a DEMOCRAT who has prosecuted numerous gun owners... which would you choose in the race? Acknowledge things we disagree on? Seems republicans should understand the logic in this as well. They do work bi-partisan on most issues in the end.

By the way, no Green candidate is required to abide by their national or state platform. This particular candidate doesn't go "by the Green Book" on every issue. She is a lawyer who has found herself representing citizens on land use issues where the attorney general is on the other side of the aisle, and on the state's side is the defendent in the suit opposing the citizen. Things are not right here in Colorado. And it's not just with the unconstitutional laws.

[LibertyRocks]

See #232

[Robert Drobot]

"Do you advocate upholding the 2nd Amendment or do you advocate gun control?

I am all for the 2nd Amendment. But silly stunts like this take away from those of us that want national CCW.

Conceal carry is a government permit. You must apply for government's permission to carry a means of self-protection, and this mind-set is where you're coming from?

It's little wonder you refer to this very brave challenge as a "....silly stunt....". You have over 20,000 reasons as a foundation for arguing government is violating your God given freedom. That's not just "silly". That's surrender. The path of a fence sitter.

[BlackbirdSST]

Try following the law, until you can change it. Never mind, dopes like this belong in jail. They serve no purpose for the right to keep and bear arms.

So, defiance means nothing to you? Glad you're such a friend to the Constitution. In this case, the 2nd Amd is "The Law", not to be infringed. The Feds, the States, the Individual, have no right to tamper with it. It's clear and written in plain language, so as not to confuse even someone like you. You can't argue against it, and remain a friend to it. Blackbird.

[Bad~Rodeo]

EXCELLANT.Thanks for the update

[Dane]

Yep if you want Tommy Dashcle to keep on being Senate majority leader, vote for Stanley.

It is so funny in that your idealogical fervor, that the machinations of the Senate are lost on you,

[Maelstrom]

Re: Try following the law until you can change it

That strategy has rarely, if ever, worked.

Why do you think you can drive 65 MPH on open highways these days?

[LIBERTARIAN JOE]

And they could order the ocean tides about

Yea, but the mass civil disobedience thing would actually achieve something.

Too bad almost all people are like you, rolling over and licking the jackboots of the 'masters' and telling everyone that nothing can be done.

[Maelstrom]

I don't think stunts like this promote the right to bear arms

Funny thing...Repukelicans like to challenge Libertarians "put your money where your mouth is", and when we do "doesn't promote the agenda" comes back.

This is grounds for dismissal as the only natural conclusion is that the R's speaking seek nothing more complex than the elimination of dissent with 40 years of failure against a growing tyrant in government.