Breitbart: We have the guns...

CriticalBill wrote:

Wayne-O wrote: In other words, only tax the poor and unemployed?

Did I say that? NO.

CriticalBill wrote: Don't tread on the productive, don't tread on the job creators, don't tread on the risk takers.....

What did you mean by "don't tread on"?? I took it as "don't tax."

Are you against everyone, no matter what income, paying their fair share in taxes?

Are you for rising up with guns and fighting the political opposition with force?

Woohoo, sounds like a party!

Wayne-O wrote: Are you against everyone, no matter what income, paying their fair share in taxes?

That's a great catch phrase, isn't it Wayne. Tell me, what is the "fair share" of every citizen? Is it "fair" to tax one citizen a greater percentage of the fruits of their own labor than it is another citizen? What do you think is the "fair share" for someone who has earned $250,001.00 in a year versus someone who has earned $249,999.00 in a year? Shouldn't their share be the same to be fair?

Wayne-O wrote: Are you for rising up with guns and fighting the political opposition with force?

At this point, no - but I refuse to rule out that option in the future either for myself or the posterity of the nation. Jefferson perhaps said it most succinctly in his letter to William Giles in December of 1825:

Are we then to stand to arms with the hot-headed Georgian? No. That must be the last resource, not to be thought of until much longer and greater sufferings. We must have patience and longer endurance then with our brethren while under delusion; give them time for reflection and experience of consequences; keep ourselves in a situation to profit by the chapter of accidents; and separate from our companions only when the sole alternatives left, are the dissolution of the Union with them, or submission to a government without limitation of powers. Between these two evils, when we must make a choice, there can be no hesitation. But in the meanwhile, the States should be watchful to note every material usurpation of their rights; to denounce them as they occur in the most peremptory terms; to protest against them as wrongs to which our present submission shall be considered, not as acknowledgments or precedents of right, but as a temporary yielding to the lesser evil, until their accumulation shall overweigh that of separation.

Fair share for every citizen? Flat tax or VAT.

So the right came unglued when James Hoffa mentioned going to the polls and taking "these sons of bitches out.”

The criticism went on for pages.

But Breitbart mentions guns and an actual war between the right and the and left (apparently to protect his reputation) and guess what? Nobody on the right condemns it.

He looked like he just came off a three-day drunk in that video, BTW.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

That was Timothy McVeigh's favorite quote and his justification for the Oklahoma City bombing.

Guess what Wayne, it wasn't the right that attempted to create intrigue by intentionally misrepresenting what was being said when talking of "targeting" a district. It wasn't the right who falsely claimed the discourse was laced with shaded violence that needed to be expunged. Since it was the left who complained, the right is simply pointing out the disingenuousness of the left when they attempt to claim the high ground. The left doesn't believe in a kindler, gentler discourse any more than the right does.

The 2nd Amendment was put into place so that those who were no longer being governed with their consent would have recourse to address that lack of consent should they, not you, they, felt there were no alternatives left to pursue, just as the founders did when they reached a point where they felt there was no other alternatives left. Revolutions don't start overnight with no foreshadowing of what is coming Wayne, there are always plenty of warnings beforehand. Governments that listen to and address the discontent before revolution becomes necessary can avoid having the question settled by resorting to arms. Those that ignore the warnings and plow ahead regardless of the growing discontent generally are unable to avoid that same fate. King George was given the opportunity to continue having the colonies belong to the British Empire by allowing them to be self governed instead of centrally governed. He turned that option down. Will the federal government in its quest to become a national government make the same mistake that King George III did? Time will tell.......

In other words: Rhetoric about taking up arms against the other party is OK by me.

Wayne-O wrote: That was Timothy McVeigh's favorite quote and his justification for the Oklahoma City bombing.

Which takes nothing away from the wisdom that it contains. I'm sure that McVeigh felt fully justified in what he did just as Obama feels fully justified in using the force of government to realize a "fair share" of taxes being taken from millionaires and billionaires so that it can be redistributed to others. Feeling fully justified in ones actions, in either case, doesn't mean that one is right in pursuing them.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.