A revolution was started on this day in 1776. A just revolution. Some things to ponder when you look at the current state of our union:
Thomas Jefferson:
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure."
Abraham Lincoln:
"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."
John F. Kennedy:
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
From the Declaration of Independence:
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
Right of Revolution:
The "right of revolution" is a fundamental right. It is the foundation of consent of the governed. It is the guarantee that you can take matters into your own hands if you must.
16 comments:
So which one of you tough talking weenies is gonna make the first move? One thing I have learned from cons (even ex-cons like our resident word perv, Daniel) over the years is that 9 & 9/10th times out of 10 your talk is nothing but that. Cheap no action talk.
The fact is, radicals from far left to far right always seem to talk out their asses ad nauseam about revolution, but can't even show up to a rally organized by their buddies. They evoke the nations founders, great leaders and even Jesus, but fail to live or even understand the true principles of what any of them said or stood for.
Look, the only "revolution" any of you nut balls are going to start is the dryer after your cloths finish washing. Maybe instead of talking fairytales and bitching, you loosers can get real jobs, work a little and pay some taxes. Maslows heirarchy of needs illustrates that you suckers have way too much time on your hands. Just remember the more time you spend wasting air on nonsence the more "American" jobs are being taken by "illegal aliens"....."they're coming to America...they're coming to America...TODAY!
Oh yeah,BTW Daniel, JFK also said this, "What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."
Maybe you misunderstood Georgia, I'm not advocating a violent revolution here. I am pointing out that we are the only country whose founding document gives us the right to revolution and whose leaders, including as recently as JFK have encouraged revolution.
and please, georgia, jfk was more conservative than President Bush. Proof exists in the reasons why (D) Zell Miller spoke eloquently of the failings of the Democrat party at the Republican National Convention. Kennedy wouldn't have supported the Kelo Decision. Modern-day liberals are not in agreement with Kennedy's "ask not" speech.
Zell Miller? What a joke. The only thing Zell spoke of that anyone could make out as english was challenging Chris Matthews to a duel. He is someone to envoke.
Bear as for "modern-day liberals" not aggreeing with Kennedy's "ask not" speech, I do and you are wrong.
"9 & 9/10th times out of 10"
Mightn't it be a little easier to say "99 times out of 100?"
"Maybe you misunderstood Georgia, I'm not advocating a violent revolution here. I am pointing out that we are the only country whose founding document gives us the right to revolution and whose leaders, including as recently as JFK have encouraged revolution."
Acknowledging a right is completely different from saying that people should use it. JFK did not encourage revolution; he warned "those who make peaceful revolution impossible" to stop it. Those are dangerous words to distort, particularly at a time when a revolution in this country is decreasingly improbable.
"Bear as for 'modern-day liberals' not aggreeing with Kennedy's 'ask not' speech, I do and you are wrong."
I second that.
Am I having a stroke or is Kaelri defending us "nut ball weenies"?
would it be better if we spent our time on something real, like border fencing instaed of something that could be(free to revolt) what a crock.voters rights is real any revolt must be done under the law.
As to the JFK "ask not" speech, made on his inauguration day in 1960, I, as a staunch conservative, also agree with it. But, I would venture to say that the majority of the liberals in our country, and especially in the US Congress, both houses, and in the States' legislatures, are of the opinion that they should "Ask not what our country can do FOR them, but, rather, what they can do TO our country".
As evidenced by the recent Supreme Court decision and by the treasonous publications by the New York Times and the LA Times, and all the other AmINO newspapers, that "principle" is occurring with all too much regularity.
But, that is par for the course for the majority of the ultra-liberals, and, of course, the Al qaeda Civil Liberties Union.
- "I would venture to say that the majority of the liberals in our country, and especially in the US Congress, both houses, and in the States' legislatures, are of the opinion that they should 'Ask not what our country can do FOR them, but, rather, what they can do TO our country'."
I really don't understand that... I never have. How can this be the only conclusion that you can come to? There are liberals who spend every day eloquently explaining their reasons for their positions. I don't understand why you refuse to believe that they're telling the truth. I mean, feel free to disagree, but to assume that it's all a cover for their real agenda, and that their agenda is to destroy the country? How could you possibly be more comfortable with believing the more absurd possibility?
kaelri, tell your nonsense to cindy (oh, how I hate America) sheehan.....sheesh.
If you'd read my post, Bear, you would have noticed that I was asking you (among others) a question. I'm surprised you didn't take the opportunity to answer it.
Kaelri,
Don't you know, Bear is a douche bag conservative that only hears what Hush Bimbo says.
And if that's true, I would like for it to change. And I think the best way of doing that is getting people like Bear to actually listen to the rest of us and think about what we say.
Bear, Kaelri and Anon 1034 are so busy forming and spouting attacks on conservatives, the Bush administration, and anyone else who does not agree with them that they cannot, or are unable to, look at the real reason what we conservatives say against their mantra of abject liberalism.
And, surely, even they cannot dispute that there are many within their own liberal circles that are doing all they can to harm this country because they are against everything conservative and pro-Bush.
Here, again, is evidence of the liberal duplicity.
I would like, Scottiebill, for you do a few things to substantiate your argument.
First: name one attack against conservatives that I have formed and spouted in this thread.
Second, answer the question that I asked in 2:51. I've been unable to "look at the real reason" because no one's given it to me yet.
Third, tell me what you think our liberal "mantra" is.
Fourth, name a liberal whose stated goal is to harm this country in the name of anti-conservativism or anti-Bushism.
Post a Comment