Lawmakers Threatened

Originally posted by brainwrek

Originally posted by searching4truth
reply to post by brainwrek

 

SImply stating the case was overturned doesnt invalidate the entire precedent that was set, nor rule the opinion invalid.

Reversals arent a delete button.

The Supreme Court has and does reverse it's own precedents, and the current court has been on a roll.

Originally posted by searching4truth
Well, I support it and my vote and others like me weren't included either. That argument goes both ways.

Yeah, they didn't call me, either. Or maybe I was out that day.

Originally posted by ChrisCrikey
ATS administration and owners seem to thinks it's cool...advocating murder of elected officials. Unbelieveable!

Come on, you guys. That's not fair. If you see a post that violates the T&C, report it. The staff knows what to look for and can determine whether or not a post is dangerous to them.

On topic, I think it's pretty revealing that Republicans have been encouraging this kind of behavior with their rhetoric since before the election, but they aren't doing much to step up and and say something about these threats now. They're not addressing the people and telling them that they need to knock it off. It's almost like they like that it's happening. It's like they dangle the raw meat in front of the wolves and then step back and act like they have nothing to do with it. Yeah, Boehner put out a statement. Big deal. He's a big reason why it's happening in the first place. He should be ON TV denouncing this behavior every chance he gets. Palin, too. They're sitting back loving this.

reply to post by hawkiye


Simply combining two words does not make an established political system. To say that the US was founded as/is meant to be a "free republic" when such an ideology does not exist is a fallacy.

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


And sweetheart Sarah Palin is telling them to "reload" Good grief!

thehill.com...

I was listening to Glenn's radio show the other day, sometimes I take the opportunity of short car rides to attempt to understand what he is saying, I don't agree with it, but I feel it is important to hear the argument out.

Anyway, he was discussing how he had been questioned by the FBI for advising/inciting/mentioning his listeners kill, which of course he denied. Then the very next sentence he went to an example of how when the government fails you violent overthrow is the next step. Come on, I hope those same agents were listening to his show that day with a recorder.

There is no denying that he, Palin, and others are without a doubt advocating violence. Normally it wouldn't bother me, I tend to give humanity too much credit, in my mind no one would listen to this garbage with such desires. However, a few weeks earlier I caught a segment were an older sounding woman was going on and on about how she reads what he tells her to read, writes reps when he tells her (the audience) to write them, etc. Immediately he asked her if she did it because he told her to or because she wanted to, which she replied, that she wanted to. Truth is, it was fairly obvious to anyone listening that was not the case, she thought he knew what he talking about and she would follow him to the ends of the earth, it was really.....sad. Now, take this woman or some other listener who is listening to his endless rhetoric of unavoidable and immediate violent revolution.

Originally posted by searching4truth
reply to post by boondock-saint

 

Exactly whose blood was spilled over healthcare?

You want to discuss the spillage of blood and outrage over our 2 current wars where people are actually dying and being injured over lies then fine, but the government has yet to kill or injure a person over healthcare.

4,385 Americans have been killed in the war (according to Source).

It's said that 45,000 people die each year due to a lack of insurance (Source)

Those are both terrible. Where does the blood come in? Well, consider that the bill that was just passed won't kick in for four more years. That's 180,000 people that will die due to lack of insurance under the government's watch.

Whether you agree or not with the war, and/or agree or not with this heathcare bill, it's stupid to compare the two.

By the way, this is a fairly facetious post, in that I don't at all support this bill, single payer, or the 45k number (for reasons I won't waste the space in this thread to explain), but it's important to note that if you do support this bill, you support it also not kicking in for four years, and by the harvard sources (which I'd assume those who support this bill would take to heart, considering they're not doing any actual research anyway), you support allowing 180,000 people to die.

I would expect that those not supporting this bill are doing it for two reasons: Either it does way too much, or it doesn't do nearly enough. That in mind, you have to expect that both of the sides that don't agree with this bill have to be the ones sending threats. At least in violence we're bipartisan.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye
That in mind, you have to expect that both of the sides that don't agree with this bill have to be the ones sending threats. At least in violence we're bipartisan.

I disagree. I will not accept that this violence is being perpetrated by Democrats. Sorry. Occam's razor tells me exactly who is doing this.

On another note, I found your post interesting, especially this sentence:

I would expect that those not supporting this bill are doing it for two reasons: Either it does way too much, or it doesn't do nearly enough.

I find it interesting that unless the bill is 100% in line with what a person wants, they are considered NOT to support it. If it's too much or too little, people don't support it. Since when do the people support legislation 100%? If that's the case, I don't support it either! I don't agree 100% with this bill, by ANY means. It is both too much and not enough in different areas. But I consider that I support it because it has a lot of good things in it and it's a step toward better health care reform for this country, which is badly needed.

A big part of the problem with the spoiled whiners in this nation is that this bill isn't exactly what they would have written, and doesn't meet their expectations, so it sucks! There is no room for compromise. If it's not what they want, they're going to throw a fit and start threatening violence! I can't believe how spoiled rotten people are. It's like we're dealing with 2-year-olds.

/rant... Sorry.

[edit on 3/24/2010 by Benevolent Heretic]

reply to post by EsSeeEye


Mine was a fairly sarcastic reply to an ignorant post by someone else, I was simply comparing the pretend blood being spilled as he/she stated, versus actual blood being spilled daily.

I do appriciate your post, I clearly support this bill, granted I do not agree with the four year holding period, but I belong in the better than nothing boat.

Originally posted by searching4truth
reply to post by hawkiye

 

Your "authority" goes so far as to who you or rather your district or country elect (depending upon office of course).

Our founding fathers, thought "the people" were stupid thus creating the electoral college as a filter, and your representatives to vote for you. If you don't like it vote for some else but if others don't agree with you don't throw a tantrum, or in the case of this thread threaten physical harm and or death.

Wrong again it was to keep the delegations manageable but have the peoples voice. delegates were appointed as spokesman to convey the will of the people who they represented. Not do thier own thing. And they knew if they did anything other then the will of those who appointed them they would be yanked immediately. They also knew they had no authority to vote on anything in the personal lives of people. You need to study history. What you see today is not what they set up in most respects. The people today have no memory of how the free republics operated.

The federal government had no authority in the states or over the people it had 17 enumerated powers period it was mainly for mutual defense. The Constitution does not apply to the men and women on the land it was simply a restriction on the Federal government. i.e. This is what you can do and nothing more, if it's not in there you can't do it!

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


I'm only speaking out of assumption here because I don't support the idea of government health care in any form, so bear with me.

This isn't health care at all, by any stretch. This is mandatory consumption of insurance without "giving" it away, which is what I've heard from people who are on the "pro-government intervention" side complaining about. They'd be perfectly happy with the bill if it included the single payer option, but since it looks like it's just another handout, this time for insurance companies, they don't. That's just what I've heard, and it's very possible that I was mistaken in the amount of people that sentiment is actually coming from.

Now, when you say you're using Occam's Razor to see who's sending threats, that's just insulting. To me, it's very easy to see the far left wing threatening violence against this. They did it loads of times at Bush. I happen to remember a movie being made about his assassination.

Realistically though, I don't think the threats are as numerous or vicious as the media would like to have us believe (much the same as Obama's own made up threats). I'm sure they expected some, and they got what they expected, but they're just being reported now because of all the hysteria, and the government would like people being back on their side.

This is an instance of [snip] or get of the pot.

There is not going to be a revolution. A few idiots may start firing their guns but they will either be arrested or killed and the MSM will label them domestic terrorists.

The only hope for this country? Political Revolution.

Stop voting in Republicans, stop voting in Democrats, don't vote in brainwashed Glen Beck TPM candidates, vote for real Independents.

It's the only chance this country has. Because a violent revolution is not coming. Most of you who are pro violent revolution don't have the stones or the spine to do it.

So the question posed was wether or not the violent actions are deplorable or justified.....

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown 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. --Such has been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world. "

The declaration of Independance does hold up as law. That being the case, the RIGHT of the people to abolish a government that fails to listen to the people. They derive thier just powers FROM the goverened. So, the majority of America did not want this particular heallth care bill, and voiced it's anger over it. The government chose to not listen to the majority. What did they really expect? That the majority of Americans would bend over, lube up and take up the garbage shoot? They should have realised that there would be backlash on this.

[edit on 24-3-2010 by SM2]

reply to post by SM2



Dang, beat me to it. LoL

That's the exact portion I was going to post. Thank you for backing what I said in the OP (even though I could not find a source at the time)

That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

You would not believe how many people have no clue this little snippet is from the Declaration Of Independence. Sad, really, that they do not know.

Death threats are extreme, but as it has been stated before in this whole 4 pages of posts...what the hell did they expect? I have only been back in PA for about 6 months (after 15 years gone) and this seem like a pretty conservative state. Everyone I have talked to while I was out and about is pissed off over this. They did not want this.

Perhaps if we were moving in the direction of national healthcare, like Canada, maybe people would/could accept it more then being FORCED TO PURCHASE health care. People are having a hard enough time paying the already hefty taxes, mortgages, insane amounts for car insurance, high gas prices, ridiculous interest rates on credit cards and putting food on the table all while fearing losing their job (if they even have one)...now you add health care insurance on top of all that?

I am lucky enough to have health care through the military since I am a reservist and even that is $200/month. I also have VA coverage for my disability and it's free as long I go to the VA for service connected issues, otherwise I pay.

For some, this is just the one item in a very long list and there are going to be folks who have hit (or hitting) their breaking point. There is only so much we can take before we snap.

Let us just hope these are idle threat and no one acts on them.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Are you kidding??? I just read multiple posts openly advocating violence. They don't point out a specific target...but they are advocating not only violence...but the murder of elected officials.

my dear sir
nowhere in my post that you used as an example of,
did I threaten the use of violence or even murder.
I plainly ask that u retract ur reference.

Originally posted by EsSeeEye

It's said that 45,000 people die each year due to a lack of insurance (Source)

Could you please post the name of a single person that has "lack of insurance" listed as COD on their death certificate?

Originally posted by whatukno
Because a violent revolution is not coming.

ur right, it's not coming
it's already here!!!!
hence bricks through windows
cut gas lines
nasty e-mails

but I will say I had nothing to do with any
of the above.

Originally posted by brainwrek
Could you please post the name of a single person that has
"lack of insurance" listed as COD on their death certificate?

it will never say that, so I assume ur being sarcastic.
But one can say that no treatment for many ailments
that could have been treated to survive but couldn't
get treatment and dies cuz of no insurance is
unacceptable to qualify as a rebuttal.

It's just kinda evident from a coronor's perspective
to open up a body and find that person had high blood pressure,
diabetes, brain tumor, cancer and hadn't seen a doctor for
any of them. And the personal information sheet for the
patient states he has no medical insurance. And hasn't
seen a doctor in 20 years. It's not rocket science to
deduce that he's on the slab cuz he couldn't afford to
go to the doctor. Therefore, the COD INDIRECTLY was
lack of insurance.

reply to post by boondock-saint


Thats a revolution nowadays?

You kooky kids.

My bowels revolt more after my morning cup of coffee than this.

[edit on 3/25/2010 by whatukno]

reply to post by boondock-saint


Ok, lets make it easy on you.

Name a single person who has ever been denied medical care and died as a result.

It's funny since a lot of people on here call to bomb Iran into oblivion or to kill any ``suspected`` terrorist without any form of trial...

Iran and Al-CIAda having close to NONE effects on their daily life.

But when it comes to big bad government, doing all it can to rape, steal and destroy everything we hold dear... their message is peace.

The US government/tyrannical government have MORE AND MORE EFFECTS on our daily life, and yet, for them their policy is PEACE AND PROTEST.

Be consistent for once... or drop the warmongering BS.

[edit on 25-3-2010 by Vitchilo]