Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
542 days ago.
by Munster
Caspiansynn
#1

Winds of revolution?

Has anyone else noticed that not only the rhetoric but general conversation has changed for the worse since the Newtown shooting? There have always been some crazy ideas coming from the extreme left and right but lately I've noticed that insanity seems to be infecting average citizens as well. People every where are talking rebellion, in bars, restaurants, shoping centers, online news sites, chat rooms, fitness clubs, the list could go on forever. From my observations it appears that the people are angry about health care, taxes, the economy, but mostly its gun rights and all the talk of restrictions and confiscation by the elected officals. Could an attack on the second amendment be the catalist that could launch this great nation into an armed rebellion?

 
 

Member Comments

luvthesouth

good morning bob. i think you may be combining proclamations with orders to arrive at your staring date. the actual first use of the term executive order was in 1862 by lincoln. nonetheless, approx. 13,000 or so exective orders have been issued since. i have googled and used ask. c om but have yet to find any executive order that seeked to limit or modify the constitution or any amendment. in particular, i don't think i have portrayed it as an invention by this administration. do you not view this as an obvious potential end-around the congress by the president to ensure "his" choice of outcomes? whether he uses his orders to proclaim a new holiday, create a new federal agency or paint the white house green is of no concern, but to begin the choosing of winners and losers in the constitution or bill of rights by a single person is indeed troubling. as i asked munster, who politely refused to answer, do you wish to have the president(current or any) choose what rights and fre

Posted 560 days ago.

BobDahler

You know, the executive order has been utilized by every President since the 1700's... Yes?

Thousands of times...

Usually they go un-noticed, but occasionally they stir up a controversy with associated exclamations of: Tyranny!, Dictatorship!, (and lately) Communism!

For over 200 years it has been the same old rhetoric about Constitutional desecration when executive orders have been applied... Yet we have managed to survive. This is not some new, evil invention of the Obama administration. It is as much of our method of governing ourselves as the Constitution itself. Relax.

Posted 560 days ago.

luvthesouth

executive order to modify a constitutional right. as a patriot, i would think you would be more protective of our constitution and less supportive of a dictorial move by our elected president, whom serves at our discretion. do you trust him or want him to decide what rights you have or don't have?

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

munster, forgive me...should i now refer to you as a constitutional liberal democrat-leaning independent? i have never said that you were not patriotic or that you personally did not care about the constitution. i do believe that i was refering to an earlier post of yours where you basically laid all of the countries woes at the feet of the nasty republicans. your point of interpretation..is it the same as the clinton struggle with the interpretation of the word "is" and sexual relations? just for arguments sake, you people allow a single shot rifle to be legal and just one person is murdered. will the next logical argument be that one person is too many and voila....all firearms will be banned and confiscated. take a moment and research ms. feinsteins bill for the depth of the control that is about to be reliquished by non-criminal lawful gun owners should her bill become law. the other issue i have is the ease at which the president uses/expresses the potential to use exec

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

how are you doing today munster? you have been rather hard on us consitutional conservative republicans regarding this subject. if anything, i hope we have learned from your parasitic labor unions on how to invade the state capitols and create social discourse when we don't get our way. i even liked the tactics of the democrats that fled their state and obligations when they were not going to get their way. i am having difficulty in finding anything specific in the constitution that guarantees a union verses the non-debatable existence of the 2nd amendment. will firearms become the peanut butter of the adult world? you have been silent during the last four odd years other than to deride us and blame bush and cheney. so i will have to assume that you are in full agreement with whatever this administration does. did you see the sign the democrats left for you? it is for you and all of the democrat lemmings and it says with an arrow..."the cliff this way"..enjoy the drop.

Posted 561 days ago.

Caspiansynn

I watched the Morgan/Jones interview also, its partialy why I posed this question. Normaly I would have wrote those two off as a just a couple of wing nuts but then I read the comments below the video, thats where things begin to get scary.

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

Munster, možno ste mali íst do komunistakrajiny pre vaše štastie.

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

???????, ???????? ?? ?????? ????? ? ?????? ????????????? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ???????.

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

beright, what you said may remain true unless House Joint Resolution 15 (thanks to R1KRA8 for informing) which would repeal the twenty-second article of amendment limiting the number of terms a president may serve as proposed by rep. jose serrano (d-ny15) somehow gets approved.

Posted 561 days ago.

BeRight

I saw that also: What the supporters of the second amendment have feared since Obama took office: Joe Biden said yesterday that the president is considering by-passing congress on gun control and will do it by executive order. “President Barack Obama is "determined to take action" against gun violence and is weighing possible executive orders”.

Welcome to Obamaland...............

No more elections for Barry to win: say good bye to the USA you know and love.

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

there you are bob. it is good to see you are well enough to post!

Posted 561 days ago.

luvthesouth

moderation, indeed they are. however our elected representatives do not always make the decisions that their constituants, the individual citizens that inhabit our great country, desire. such as the representatives that get elected as representative of a particular party but then switch parties once elected. to me that is plain and simple fraud. the evolving line of excuse is quickly becoming outdated and over-used.

Posted 561 days ago.

BobDahler

It is not my intent to diminish peoples' concern about taxation, the economy, our Constitution, etc., but, I feel the talk of "revolution" that Caspiansynn mentions is... "Wind".

Posted 562 days ago.

moderation

lts- the elected officials are the " United States"

Posted 562 days ago.

luvthesouth

is a glimpse into our future should there be a rebellion against a government that has stepped out of line and begun its path toward oppresion and tyranny. fred would have to step in and fill us in on the history, but i believe that a free poeple will always at some point in time come under control of a central government, which at its core will succumb to the frailty of the human nature. ok time for a snack.

Posted 562 days ago.

luvthesouth

Caspiansynn, i just finished watching the piers morgan interview with alex jones. very interesting indeed. i have yet to verify that ourselves and the swiss are the only countries that allow their citizens to bear arms. it does seem odd that while the united states by virtue of its elected officials are very willing and eager to arm citizens of other countries but are now seemingly rallying the troops to start the disarmament of its own citizens. in addition the stepping up of the internal "armed forces" within our borders which are neither to repel attacks from outside our borders or strictly deter invasion but seem to be designed to use against the citizens of the united states. i believe bob dahler had a valid point under the 2nd amendment topic when he basically said that our weaker(not according to some in the media mind you)firepower could not possibly compete with that of our military. although the attacks against the citizens of syria is unfortunate, i believe it is

Posted 562 days ago.

Caspiansynn

Disclamer- I'm not a seditionist or revolutionary.

I pray that I'm wrong but there seems to be a storm brewing.

Posted 562 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or