Mulva;1439222 wrote:That's probably what all of those empires thought, too.

Yes, but here is the difference.
The time period now we live in, is not nearly as bad as previous ones.
So, in order to say we are near the end, and will break apart as a union, you have to make the argument right now is worse than any other time in U.S. history (save 1850-1865).
I'd argue we are in a better place now than we were in say, 1967 or 1979.
Honestly, do we really think we live in a worse place now than in 1968?

I mean think about it. Nuclear war was a real possibility, there was race riots, civil protests, political assassinations, 100s dieing in Vietnam each day, and the social and economic fabric was turned on its head. Yet, we made it.
What is worse now from then?

Sorry, I have American history on my side. We, as a nation, find a way. It is in our DNA.

The ending is pretty anticlimactic. Its the events leading up to the end that are more exciting. We have been planning our ending for the last 100 years at least and it may continue for awhile longer mainly because we still have the best toys. Our monetary policy will be our nail in the coffin.

What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance?

Thomas Jefferson excerpt from a letter written to Williams Stephens Smith, Nov 13, 1787.

http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=802&chapter=86685&layout=html&Itemid=27

What a nut job.

gut;1438857 wrote:All those numbers are really quite staggering. Where did they find these people? Or maybe people are just this stupid and can't read basic English - "necessary...within the next few years..."

The question is subjective. "May" be necessary in the next "few" years. "May" to many would indicate its possible necessity under given circumstances, not a certainty or desire for it. "Few" years to some could mean a period of 3-6 yrs or more.

Phrase the question: "Armed revolution will be necessary in the next three years and the numbers would shrink dramatically. Polls are not always designed to inform. Many are designed to push a political agenda.

gut;1438857 wrote:My next question would be how many of these people actually voted. If those numbers actually reflect reality, you might have expected every incumbent to lose the election, or at least a 3rd party/independent having some real momentum.

That is why this poll does not pass the smell test. There are active voters that abstain from voting at higher levels of governance when they are not satisfied with the national candidates , but yet actively participate in state and local elections that offer candidates tailored to their political ideology.

majorspark;1439252 wrote:The question is subjective. "May" be necessary in the next "few" years. "May" to many would indicate its possible necessity under given circumstances, not a certainty or desire for it. "Few" years to some could mean a period of 3-6 yrs or more.

I don't really disagree, but even then the result is still completely irrational. The gubmit doesn't move fast enough, or agree enough, to destroy that much liberty in that short of a time.

The popping of the debt bubble is far more likely to lead to major civil unrest, but far far from any sort of revolt or coup.

ptown_trojans_1;1439236 wrote:Yes, but here is the difference.
The time period now we live in, is not nearly as bad as previous ones.
So, in order to say we are near the end, and will break apart as a union, you have to make the argument right now is worse than any other time in U.S. history (save 1850-1865).
I'd argue we are in a better place now than we were in say, 1967 or 1979.
Honestly, do we really think we live in a worse place now than in 1968?

I mean think about it. Nuclear war was a real possibility, there was race riots, civil protests, political assassinations, 100s dieing in Vietnam each day, and the social and economic fabric was turned on its head. Yet, we made it.
What is worse now from then?

Sorry, I have American history on my side. We, as a nation, find a way. It is in our DNA.

uh huh, that may have been true in the past but the DNA of America now is lazy, government handouts, and giving up freedoms for security. It's true, more and more people would rather the government take care of them then ever do anything for this country. We have a massive spending problem, not to mention the cultural divides between liberal and true conservative, north and south. The budget alone will doom this country, I know we print our own money but that won't last forever. Eventually the money won't be worth toilet paper. We have more and more people on the government dole and no one seems all that worried about providing jobs and having taxpayers to pay for all these social programs. What will happen to this country when the people on government handouts outnumber the amount of taxpayers?

Even during the Cold War, and hell even in 1968, the country did not break apart.
We are no where near 1968 levels.
Geesh, it is like the sky is falling.
It is bad, yes, but is it worse than any other time in U.S. history? No.

Yes, but it is different. We didn't have the country as a whole being divided up into "blue" and "red" states. There definitely is a polarization between the D.C. class and urban elites and the rural areas

...and no "history" is not on your side P-town...150 years ago we fought a civil war when regional differences/opinions widened.

ptown_trojans_1;1439236 wrote:Sorry, I have American history on my side. We, as a nation, find a way. It is in our DNA.

Well, barack obama was never our 'leader' before.

QuakerOats;1439331 wrote:Well, barack obama was never our 'leader' before.

Oatie, there are people who still follow Adolph Hitler. Feel free to follow who ever you want, fortunately there are not enough of you to matter.

Hitler was an elected official --- a mere 70 years ago.

QuakerOats;1438873 wrote:Perhaps it is in reaction to the Fed's massive purchasing of ammo, and obama's lecture yesterday to OSU grad's about being wary of those who voice concern over government tyranny.



Unbelievable; it is as if we are in the twilight zone.

[LEFT]“This has never happened in this country before,” he added. “We’ve never had government trying to take that much control at the expense of the law-abiding citizens. And we’re not going to let it happen.”


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/06/inhofe-obama-administration-trying-to-dry-up-ammo-supply-audio/#ixzz2Sc4dpnlE[/LEFT]


My, my ........... imagine that.

ptown_trojans_1;1439236 wrote:Yes, but here is the difference.
The time period now we live in, is not nearly as bad as previous ones.
So, in order to say we are near the end, and will break apart as a union, you have to make the argument right now is worse than any other time in U.S. history (save 1850-1865).
I'd argue we are in a better place now than we were in say, 1967 or 1979.
Honestly, do we really think we live in a worse place now than in 1968?

I mean think about it. Nuclear war was a real possibility, there was race riots, civil protests, political assassinations, 100s dieing in Vietnam each day, and the social and economic fabric was turned on its head. Yet, we made it.
What is worse now from then?

Sorry, I have American history on my side. We, as a nation, find a way. It is in our DNA.

One big difference is media and internet. Civil unrest spreads sooooo much faster now.

National legalization of marijuana and we could TOTALLY bring back the 60's. Imagine Occupy Wall Street with completely unfettered, unencumbered toking.

ptown_trojans_1;1439236 wrote:Yes, but here is the difference.
The time period now we live in, is not nearly as bad as previous ones.
So, in order to say we are near the end, and will break apart as a union, you have to make the argument right now is worse than any other time in U.S. history (save 1850-1865).

Why would I have to make that argument? Why would society's "breaking point" be a constant that can only be reached if things are worse than they've ever been?

I don't foresee a revolution coming, but I think your argument is very flawed.

gut;1439404 wrote:National legalization of marijuana and we could TOTALLY bring back the 60's. Imagine Occupy Wall Street with completely unfettered, unencumbered toking.

Already been done.....

Empires only fall when they exceed 20 trillion in debt. Read a history book. Also USA AMERICANS are > any humans. Sure governments in OTHER countries could harm their people but not this goverment, it's ran by humans with a higher moral fiber. The fiber is so strong we make rope from it.

This is all so insane.

What I would love to see...is a bunch of these white men who think they've been persecuted here in 'Merica by the muslim/socialist/community organizer go to march on Washington with their loaded rifles and see what happens when a group of, say, brown Muslims wants to join them.

Imagine how that would go down...a bunch of Muslims marching around with loaded rifles demanding freedom from the tyrannical U.S. gubmint.

That is how you would get white conservative 'Murica to support gun control :laugh:

(The reason after all why there is such strong gun control in California is because the White Folks didn't like it when Black Folks started marchin on the capitol with loaded weapons).

I'm sure many of the Republicans polled would have a different answer if Bush or Romney were president. Still, the mad dash to put an end to our rights in Washington is in preparation for the unrest that will come when their phony economy comes crashing down. They need the American people unarmed and uneducated and obedient for that day, or their power and riches are at risk.

BoatShoes;1439686 wrote: Imagine how that would go down...a bunch of Muslims marching around with loaded rifles demanding freedom from the tyrannical U.S. gubmint.

That is how you would get white conservative 'Murica to support gun control :laugh:

Did you just equate guns and being conservative with being racist? You get more ignorant every day. What the hell do you read, because you get literally more out in left field every day?

gut;1439860 wrote:Did you just equate guns and being conservative with being racist? You get more ignorant every day. What the hell do you read, because you get literally more out in left field every day?

Thats exactly what he did. Leftists can't grasp the fact that if shit ever hit the fan (I'm speaking in context) freedom fighters would share their foxholes with other freedom loving Americans regardless of of the color of their skin or religious affiliation. It don't fit their template for these types of folks. See if you are black, hispanic, or muslim, you must adhere to their political ideology or you are a traitor to your own kind. Black, hispanic, or mulisim conservatives are anathema to the left. On the left individual thought is not is not valued. You must think like the group. Whatever group the wizards of big gubmint smart have herded you into.

QuakerOats;1439342 wrote:[LEFT]“This has never happened in this country before,” he added. “We’ve never had government trying to take that much control at the expense of the law-abiding citizens. And we’re not going to let it happen.”


Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/06/inhofe-obama-administration-trying-to-dry-up-ammo-supply-audio/#ixzz2Sc4dpnlE[/LEFT]



My, my ........... imagine that.

Americans citizens will rue the day the DHS was created. And that under republican watch.

If you look at the enumerated grievances in the declaration of independence you will find several that could be applied to the federal government. Granted their is a governing union contract involved.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

gut;1439860 wrote:Did you just equate guns and being conservative with being racist? You get more ignorant every day. What the hell do you read, because you get literally more out in left field every day?

I love it when leftists start going off the deep end (well, more so than usual anyway) because it means they're on the defense and cannot find a way out. They begin to behave like trapped animals or, at the very least, they scurry into the the darkness like cockroaches when the light of truth and reason is shown upon them.

gut;1439860 wrote:Did you just equate guns and being conservative with being racist? You get more ignorant every day. What the hell do you read, because you get literally more out in left field every day?

I did no such thing. I simply made a little joke. But I should've known how sensitive our "freedom fighters" are lol.

I'm sure this Adam Kokesh guy who wants to march on Washington with a bunch of loaded rifles and all of his right wing followers would welcome a bunch of Muslims with loaded weapons with open arms. :laugh:

majorspark;1439930 wrote:Thats exactly what he did. Leftists can't grasp the fact that if shit ever hit the fan (I'm speaking in context) freedom fighters would share their foxholes with other freedom loving Americans regardless of of the color of their skin or religious affiliation. It don't fit their template for these types of folks. See if you are black, hispanic, or muslim, you must adhere to their political ideology or you are a traitor to your own kind. Black, hispanic, or mulisim conservatives are anathema to the left. On the left individual thought is not is not valued. You must think like the group. Whatever group the wizards of big gubmint smart have herded you into.

And yet here you are speaking of "leftists" as a group. What you're saying here is a bunch of blah blah nonsense and typical talk radio/right wing website trope.

Hermain Cane and Dinesh Dizousa and any other conservatives are free to have whatever unjustified beliefs they want....such as believing that an armed uprising will occur in a few years.

But you're right, I'm sure Muslims shooting U.S. government agents in the name of freedom will be welcomed with open arms.