new poll shows 44% of rank-and-file Republicans believe a violent uprising may be necessary soon

[Douglas Carpenter]

Rise of the conservative revolutionaries

Almost half of Republicans think an armed revolution may be needed soon. What does it mean for guns and democracy?

By David Sirota


Tea Party supporter William Temple of Brunswick, Ga. (Credit: AP/David Goldman)

Almost half (44 percent) of all self-described Republican voters say they believe “an armed revolution might be necessary to protect our liberties.” Just as bad, more Republicans believe an armed revolution might be necessary than believe one isn’t necessary.

Typically, GOP leaders say that their opposition to minimal gun regulations has nothing to do with helping arm those who want to commit acts of violence, and everything to do with wanting to make sure people can defend themselves. Based on the poll, of course, it is certainly likely that many are buying such weapons in an effort to defend themselves, both for day-to-day life and in the event of a sudden armed revolution. But here’s the scary part: How many are buying weapons to arm themselves in order to foment an armed revolution? Maybe none, but maybe a lot. I don’t have an answer, but this poll suggests the question should at least be aired.

The other question is about republican democracy: Can it survive in an age when almost one-half of one of the major parties seems to support the concept of violently thwarting it?

Of course, GOP apologists will say that the poll just asked specifically about armed revolution “to protect liberties,” the idea being that almost half of Republican voters don’t support using violence to advance their own political agenda, they only support it in the face of a future dystopian nightmare whereby the population is terrorized by police-administered drone bombings and Waco-esque invasions of private homes.

But that’s the thing: We can’t be so sure that’s really true when conservative media voices and politicians are using the broad and incendiary language they now regularly employ. Today, those voices often claim that almost everything in the Democratic/liberal agenda — from Obamacare to taxes to environmental regulations to contraception policy — is an assault on “liberty.”

http://www.salon.com/2013/05/01/rise_of_the_conservative_revolutionaries/

[ladjf]

1. How could they be visualizing such a preposterous, impossible scenario? nt

[Bjorn Against]

5. When was the last time Republicans envisioned anything that was not completely insane?

I seriously think we may need to go way back to the Eisenhower days to answer that question.

[JHB]

46. Thirty years of "trust us, not the traitorous Liberal Media", normalizing what...

...used to be the stuff of paranoid ranting cranks probably has something to do with it.

[CanonRay]

51. Weren't they envisioning Sarah Palin as possibly President?

That leaves Repbulicans open to envisioning just about anything.

[ladjf]

69. That was john mccain's biggest blunder. nt

[CanonRay]

97. Yes, but rank and file Republicans loved her

and still do. They worship her.

[ladjf]

98. That may be true. However, for most Americans, her bloom has faded. nt

[Politicalboi]

2. Frankenstien's Monster

This is what THEY (GOP) created. So if for some reason the GOP gets their asses handed to them in 2014, is that the time for their revolution? They lose an election and take the 2nd Amendment remedy to fix it.

[arcane1]

3. Hmm, I wonder why. Propaganda has become privatized just like everything else. Big Brother LLC.

[think]

52. Bam.....

[freshwest]

86. You got it. Won't be much freedom after that, huh.

[MillennialDem]

4. Bunch of old geezers with guns and most with no training vs tanks, jets, and bombs

Yeah I wonder who will win.

[Bjorn Against]

9. No one will win, many would die

Yes the gun nuts would eventually get their asses handed to them by the National Guard, the FBI, the ATF and others, but many people would likely die before the government took them down. This is why gun nuts should not be allowed to own guns, many of them are openly stating that they want to turn their guns on other Americans.

[MillennialDem]

13. They would be confined to guerrilla war only. Any organization = death from above for them

[Bjorn Against]

17. And guerilla war can kill a lot of people

Look how much hell the Boston bombers unleashed in just a few days, and that was just two people. The government did stop them, but they did not stop them easily. An actual armed uprising of even just a few dozen people would be even more difficult for them to stop, they would stop it but there would almost certainly be several horrible tragedies before they did stop it.

[Lizzie Poppet]

53. Doesn't that presume an intact military fighting for the government?

That's not an assumption I'd be willing to automatically make. If some sort of civil war erupted, based on certain political/governmental actions, the sides would likely fall out based largely on socio-political views. The modern US military has a fairly pronounced rightward tilt (and its officer corps even more so), so if the "loyalist" side was under a left-leaning government, I think you could pretty much bank on a significant portion of those forces defecting to the opposition.

Among other ramifications of that scenario is that complex weapons and communications systems (the primary advantage of regular military forces over insurrectionists) would suffer from that fragmentation of the military. It requires intact, functional logistics systems to keep them operational, and with probably a bit more than half of your personnel defecting (if not engaging in outright sabotage), those logistics systems will be in shambles.

Any real scenario of widespread insurrection would see reasonably well-matched forces. And would be an absolute fucking nightmare for us all...

[MillennialDem]

64. Defecting is punishable by death, you know that right? Also, while many if not most in

the military have a rightward tilt, they are still serving their country, not any separatists.

[Lizzie Poppet]

67. Of course.

I also agree with the part about serving their country...but in most any situation of insurrection against a government, both sides tend to believe they are "fighting for their country." I think you'd have military personnel on either side who firmly believed that's precisely what they were doing.

[MillennialDem]

74. It's a huge gamble and you really have to believe in the cause that you're going for and that

you will have support to do it.

If you don't believe you'll have the support (and even talking to your fellow officers is grounds to be imprisoned or executed), then it won't happen.

I guarantee you any right wing militia movement would get squashed and almost no one would defect. It's been done before.

[mwrguy]

40. The tiny few that would actually fight

would be crushed out of hand.

[Bucky]

80. You're talking about "asymmetrical" warfare... which tends to lead to terrorism

I'd like to see these people grow the hell up instead of shot all to hell.

[Coyotl]

6. How many want to return to the days of slavery?

And how many want to deny African Americans voting rights or serving as President?

[GP6971]

10. Probably many more

than what we already suspect

[malaise]

44. Ding ding we have a winner

For these goons, freedoms and liberties equal white privilege

[Coyotl]

47. "freedoms and liberties equal white privilege" plus colonialism and empire

Or, as President Taft like to say, Our flag will one day fly from pole to pole because of the moral superiority of our race

[heaven05]

58. couldn't

agree with you more. In a nutshell, that's what this whole thing is about.

[freshwest]

88. They want to restore the Articles of the Confederacy, not the US Constitution. It's too 'librul.'

All of those amendment were put in by socialists. They say that women and several other groups should not be allowed to vote, either...

[truebluegreen]

7. I've found that conservatives in general cast themselves as heroes in the movies.

Every conflict is writ large, to them. The ACA is Tyranny! A Democratic president is Socialism! Communism! Fascism! All of the above! Gay marriage is the End of the World!

For conservatives the world is a dangerous place and they always have to be on their guard. Which makes them a danger to the rest of us.

[lpbk2713]

8. What is it with these clowns and playing dress-up?

Seems like every time they have a gathering some of them have to put some sort of costume on.

[Common Sense Party]

34. Ummm...

Don't look now, but...

[SpartanDem]

11. They're not afraid losing liberty, they're afraid losing of privilege

Republicans are the party of white, christian privilege. The only time these people spout off about "liberty" is when they can't use the Bible to discriminate or railing against some social program because they think it'll benefit people who don't look like them.

[heaven05]

57. couldn't

agree with you more.

[freshwest]

99. Nailed it.

[Douglas Carpenter]

12. not to sound superstitious or to suggest my dreams can tell the future -but I actually dreamed this

last night before I even knew about this article or such polling existed. I suppose with all the crazy rhetoric be tossed around - if people really believe that Democrats and liberals were leading them into a totalitarian socialist state - and it does appear that close to half of rank-and-file Republicans do believe that - it would make sense that many would think they need to prepare for revolution. After all IF I was sincerely convinced we really were marching into a 1930's totalitarian style fascist state and there was nothing we could do to stop it but resort to armed force - IF I genuinely believed that - I might think the same. Fortunately as dark as the future may look in some respects - I don't believe that it is quite that dark.

[Coyotl]

14. And the Global Plutocrats want to break up the USA to steal the minerals

Coincidence?

[LostOne4Ever]

15. 44% of 20%

44% of 20% of the US population is 8-9% of the US population. It would be the shortest lived revolution ever.

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. of course, they're not going to win..but they sure could cause a lot of problems

[Bjorn Against]

19. 8% of the population in armed revolt would mean millions dead, 8% of the population is a huge number

Look at Newtown, that hell was unleashed by one single person. 8% of the population taking up arms would result in millions of deaths, remember 8% of the population means tens of millions of people. Fortunately there is virtually no chance of a group that large taking up arms, a small militia of a few dozen people is far more likely. When one person with a gun can unleash carnage like Newtown, imagine the hell dozens of them could unleash. It is seriously frightening that so many people express hope that such an uprising actually happens.

[Dash87]

25. I wouldn't take this so seriously. These people are a joke.

If they were going to do anything, you would know it by now. Look at Glenn Beck's core fan base - if they aren't a basement dwelling loser that trolls YouTube videos all day, they're some massively out of shape hillbilly that has yet to grasp the English language. Most are probably both.

The far militant right in the US is a laughable joke and barely existent. In US militias, half of the members are undercover FBI agents, and the other half are braindead meth fiends.

[Gravitycollapse]

38. 8-9% of the US population would be a massive army.

[LostOne4Ever]

41. Well

That is assuming all of them fight.

Only a small number of them would fight and assuming that they would have the same percentage of people in the military as the US army that would put their army around 184,000-207,000 versus the US 2.3 million troops. Even assuming we lost some troops to them we would have a 10-1 advantage...not to mention more technology, and bases, and etc.

Either way, my post was meant to point out how small of a number of people feel that way. I did not mean for it to be taken as literally as it has been.

My apologies.

[Rex]

16. So guys like that one in the picture are going to fight the military?

Okay...nevermind thought this was something new, nothing new here. I am sure Foxnews will play up on this as much as they can.

Not much you can do with Wingnuts. They get hyped up on Glenn Beck and Alex Jones.

[Progressive dog]

20. What does it mean-that's simple

American military vs nuts with guns is not a fair fight. Even nuts with guns can't be that stupid, can they?

[Dwayne Hicks]

100. Yes they can..

They are so delusional that they think the US military will come running to their aid.

[flvegan]

21. Does that mean a month of pants-shitting to avoid doing anything for them?

Shitpants Chairborne Division checks in, who cares?

[Dash87]

22. It's funny because they aren't going to do a thing.

Glenn Beck's core audience - basement-attached whiners that burn in the sunlight.

[hedda_foil]

24. All they need is a charismatic leader.

They are more than ready.

[Dash87]

26. They're more than ready to commence whining some more.

Trust me - they have nothing more in them.

[newmember]

29. Ted Nugent

[Volaris]

31. Bullshit...for that "leader" to actually CHALLENGE anything, they have to EITHER:

Run for office, (and either lose so bad they will have a concussion, or win and quickly get "mainstreamed" enough to be called RINO's by their own voters)
OR--they have to actually tell the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT:
WHO we are and
WHERE we are, so that our DEMANDS FOR YOUR SURRENDER CAN BE MET.

And that, as they say, will be the end of THAT.

[Marr]

32. Unless that charismatic leader can cure diabetes, I won't be too concerned. /nt

[mick063]

23. I very seldom agree with the NeoCons

But in this particular case, I'm inclined to agree.


Hopefully they will eventually realize that bad government is simply a symptom of a much greater problem. I think it comes to a head when the 1% agenda is complete and the pseudo NeoCons (only conservative because brainwashed by FOX, etc.) realize that a powerless government (with respect to their needs) wasn't the solution.

A few more factory blowups. A few more Wall Street scandals. A few more middle class folks moving below the poverty line. It will happen with much greater frequency as government becomes increasingly powerless to stop it.

Perhaps, in the long run, paying the deficit down will truly be the solution, but for all the wrong reasons. The debt issue will no longer by the battle cry. The inept government will not be easily blamed. A process of elimination. Eventually, the only folks to point your finger at will be the psychopaths running corporations and banks.

At that time, we become united against a common evil. Perhaps in the long run, it is good that they are stocking up on ammunition. They will feel betrayed and take on a government that no longer represents all of us, but only represents a tiny few.

If it plays out like that, I will quietly, privately cheer them on from the sidelines. It could quite possibly be the only way to restore Democracy and the spirit of the Constitution.

[CAG]

27. Why don't they love America? Why would they rise up against our brave soldiers who fight for

their freedoms?

[rrneck]

28. Poll: 3 in 10 voters say “armed revolution might be necessary”

From the poll referenced elsewhere on Salon:

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2013/guncontrol/

Partisan divisions on gun control go deeper than the legislation being fought over in Congress. Supporters and opponents of gun control have very different fundamental beliefs about the role of guns in American society. Overall, the poll finds that 29 percent of Americans think that an armed revolution in order to protect liberties might be necessary in the next few years, with another five percent unsure. However, these beliefs are conditional on party. Just 18 percent of Democrats think an armed revolution may be necessary, as opposed to 44 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents

Democrats and Republicans continue to be divided over the need for new gun control laws, and the most recent national survey of registered voters from Fairleigh Dickinson University’s PublicMind finds that attitudes regarding the perceived likelihood of an armed revolution to protect liberties and the truth about the Sandy Hook shooting are helpful in explaining this partisan divide. Nearly three quarters (73%) of Democrats say that Congress needs to pass new laws to protect the public from gun violence, but the views of Republicans are almost completely opposite: 65 percent don’t think new laws are necessary. Overall, registered voters are divided over the need for new gun control legislation. Fifty percent agree it is needed, with 39 percent who disagree. “If there was a bipartisan moment after Sandy Hook to pass gun control legislation, it’s past,” said Dan Cassino, a professor of political science at Fairleigh Dickinson, and an analyst for the poll. “Partisan views have strongly reasserted themselves, and there’s no sign that they’ll get any weaker.”

[Common Sense Party]

36. And if they had taken this poll back in early 2005, the numbers would've been flipped. nt

[rrneck]

37. I wouldn't be a bit surprised. nt

[CJCRANE]

60. Do you remember early 2005

especially here on DU?

IIRC that was when the warrantless wiretapping story broke. It was vey subdued. I don't remember any talk of armed uprisings by liberals or even libertarians (they were mostly asleep during the Bush era apart from a few Ron Paul followers).

Back in those days if you spoke against the government you were a "traitor" and a "terrorist".

[Common Sense Party]

68. Yes, I do. Every few days there was a thread about the upcoming revolution.

We were always one spark away from the tinderbox going up in flames.

[CJCRANE]

78. You obviously remember it different to me. I'd be interested to see what other DUers say.

There was a lot of disappointment when Kerry conceded but I don't recall any calls for "2nd amendment remedies".

Plus of course calling for revolution or advocating violence is not allowed here on DU, so any explicit call for armed uprising was deleted in those days (and still is).

There was also the specter of the no fly list, warrantless wiretapping, Total Information Awareness, the enemies list, Gitmo etc. etc. so a lot of people were spooked at the time (or that's how it felt to me).

There was mostly a feeling of deflation, not the apoplexy we see nowadays with the Tea Party.

Plus you could count the number of people who spoke out publicly against Bush-Cheney or the neocons on the fingers of one hand, it was so rare. I remember George Galloway, Harry Taylor, Stephen Colbert (at the WH Correspondents Dinner), the Dixie Chicks and Cindy Sheehan.

[Common Sense Party]

82. Oh, they weren't explicit about it--those who were had their posts deleted. But they danced around

the issue, yet it was very clear what they wanted.

"2nd amendment remedies" is a RW term, so you wouldn't see that here.

You honestly don't remember the anger? It was much more than "a feeling of deflation."

[CJCRANE]

83. DU is a tiny corner of the internet, even moreso back in those days.

Even if there was a lot of anger, that doesn't translate into advocating violence or even represent mainstream liberals and Democrats.

[Common Sense Party]

90. I realize it's a teeny, miniscule, almost insignificant part of the American electorate.

I never said it wasn't.

Some here did advocate violence--or wished it would happen--but they're even the most laughable fringe of this small site.

[mrdmk]

91. Nope, you are mistaken! We did not want Bush or Cheney murdered

We wanted them impeached! For very good reasons too...

[high density]

96. Except the right-wingers today are up in arms over an alternate universe created by Fox News

that doesn't even exist. What the hell are they going to fight for? Tax cuts for billionaires?

[Marr]

30. And where do you suppose they'd strike, if they actually had the guts?

I'd bet cash money they'd hit a mosque or a university.

[BlueStreak]

33. Necessary for WHAT? They don't even know what they want.

I get really tired of this garbage. Even after 4 years, all they can say is they don't like Obama. Not a damn one of them can identify any policy that is so vile, such an assault to our heritage that it deserves a violent uprising.

They are like spoiled children. When you tolerate this crybaby shit all you get is more crybabies.

[LAGC]

42. And Boehner is the biggest crybaby of them all -- literally. (n/t)

[name not needed]

76. They know exactly what they want.

They want the liberals, blacks, gays, muslims, and immigrants dead and gone so they can go back to the "good ol' days".

[Common Sense Party]

35. And DUers called for Revolution throughout the * years as well.

"When are we gonna take to the streets? This is gonna get bloody. yadda yadda yadda, blah blah blah."

Both sides have their wackos that are not in touch with reality.

What is truly scary about this poll--if accurate--is how high the percentage is. 42%??? That's insanely high.

[Douglas Carpenter]

45. .Just 18 percent of Democrats think an armed revolution may be necessary, as opposed to 44 percent

of Republicans. Just 18 percent of Democrats think an armed revolution may be necessary, as opposed to 44 percent of Republicans and 27 percent of independents

http://publicmind.fdu.edu/2013/guncontrol/


Like crazy extremist - they certainly exist on the left, of course. But they are marginal and not taken seriously - while in the GOP they dominate and are the mainstream

[Lizzie Poppet]

54. Flip the White House and watch those numbers reverse.

Not in the same proportions (Democrats seem less prone to accepting warfare as a viable change mechanism), but I'd bet the farm you'd see a big shift.

[Douglas Carpenter]

75. oh come on - there is no equivalency - that's ridiculous

First of all the right-wing is deeply invested in the whole gun culture. There are few if any left-wing militias. Second whereas any extreme shrill voices of the far left are only on the margins and can only be found on obscure websites with a fringe following - Shrill extremist voices are the mainstream of today's Republican Party leadership. What were those Republican primary debates but "who can sound the nuttiest competitions"? Nothing like that has ever existed before in modern American history. There are no figures on the left who hold national media attention like any one of countless figures on the right. There are no left-wing equivalents in the House or Senate or holding any other mainstream office who are anywhere near as extreme as most of the mainstream political leaders of today's Republican Party. According to the mainstream media being far left simply means resisting any additional dismantling of what remains of the New Deal and the Great Society. Today's media would consider it way beyond the pale and downright crazy and wacko if someone were to suggest that we need a real first-world safety net and true universal healthcare. So what the American media calls far left is simply what moderate and liberal Republicans used to support. What the mainstream Democratic Party positions are today are simply what the old moderate conservative wing of the Republicans. There are not enough old style liberal New Dealers left to swing a cat at and the Republican Party has simply moved way outside the norms of western democracy.

[Bucky]

81. I think 20% would be our high water mark. I fear that theirs may be north of 50.

[Lizzie Poppet]

84. I'd sure like to think so.

I tend to be a wee bit more radical than a lot of folks here, and the people I hang out with IRL even more so,...so I heard a fair bit of extreme talk when W was in office. That might have skewed my perception of this matter a bit. But I think you're right on target...

[Rex]

61. No we did not, you are making that up.

This is one of the bigger lies about DU during the GWB years. I know some here hate liberals that they would lie about us...but no one called for armed revolt and if they did they are no longer with us.

More of this 'both sides do it' bullshit.

[Common Sense Party]

71. No, I am not making it up.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7175864

Many people did say that the 'revolution' should be peaceful and democratic...but many did not. They had wild fantasies of taking to the streets, a bloody conflict with the 1%, blah blah blah.

Hate to burst a bubble, it will be violent, it will be angry, it will make the last revolt look like a picnic lunch disagreement.

You can say those people are no longer with us, but you can't say we didn't have threads like that quite often.

[uponit7771]

70. link and quote? tia

[Common Sense Party]

72. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x285284#285493


backscatter712 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-29-11 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #26
51. Sometimes, violence can be used for good...
Just saying.

[krawhitham]

39. Yeah and 95% of them still believe the south is going to rise again

[davidn3600]

43. The issue is guns

Republicans believe the Democrats ultimate long-term goal is the removal and ban of all firearms from the civilian population. And a growing number of Republicans think they may have to go into rebellion in order to protect what they firmly believe is their right to keep and bear arms.

The reality is that the two sides of this debate cannot see eye-to-eye. There is a colossal difference in how each side views guns. The right wing feels as strongly about guns as the left does about abortion.

And this is why I opposed this debate and thought it was a bad idea for Obama to go into it. First off, he's not going to win. Republicans have enough votes in the Senate and House to kill it. Second, it will only end up further dividing the country.

If anyone should be calling for revolution, it should be the lower and middle class. This government is baling out the rich every day and leaving the poor holding an empty bag of promises. And yes, Obama is becoming part of the problem.

[zinnisking]

93. "Republicans believe the Democrats ultimate...goal is the...ban of all [civilian] firearms"

Liberals should make more of an effort to see eye to eye with these firm thinkers.

Republicans believe the Democrats ultimate...goal is the...ban of all firearms

Republicans believe the Democrats ultimate...goal is the...ban of all firearms

Republicans believe the Democrats ultimate...goal is the...ban of all firearms

Trying to feel the sensation of what it's like to be republican. I see the allure. It's like taking a vicodin or getting drunk. An escape from the monotony of reality.

Only with a conservative despot would debate be considered bad. Recent votes helped even the RED state Democrats. booya

[hobbit709]

48. They are only unwitting dupes of their corporate masters.

If they ever realize it's not the government that's screwing their perceived liberties over but the 1%, there will be trouble.

[n2doc]

49. And yet 40% of voters say giving up civil liberties to fight terrorism is ok

What's it gonna be, T-baggers? Because I suspect there is a whole lotta overlap in the two groups.

Their ideal situation seems to be having an arsenal of guns, ammo+ gold and canned food, all the while being monitored continuously....

[Faryn Balyncd]

50. Are these the same Republicans who won't respond to climate change because the end is coming?

[Arugula Latte]

55. Are you proud of your party, Republicans?

This is what it's come to? This is how fucking nutty you have to be to be a Republican these days?

I believe these numbnuts are all talk, though.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

56. The Grumpy Old Party is getting grumpier...and more ludicrous.

[moondust]

59. Was the West Fertilizer Co. stockpiling ammonium nitrate?

You never know when it might come in handy...

[grilled onions]

62. Our Liberties...Us VS Them...Hmmmm

They seem so "fair" to want to help ALL of us in this "cause" but them you can start peeling this banana and it looks like total,selfish,chaos. They are against so many things like taxes. Will they be willing to pay cash for a policeman's "service call" or fireman's emergency call? They want to stop virtually all social programs. How will they deal with granny if she is booted out of the nursing home? I can't imagine many of them would take her in. Programs like Meals on Wheels will just speed up the demise of many as food becomes in short supply,not very healthy and many will simply feel the world has forgotten them. They have! Programs like Headstart will make it harder for little ones to get caught up to their private school peers. Certainly no assault on the liberty of being poor,the wrong skin tone,speaking another language etc. Every time they speak "we" "us" they need to be honest and just say ME. my own kind,those on the better side of the track,those that think guns and flags are far more important than living, breathing things.

[DeSwiss]

63. ....

Will ya look at those silly, ignorant Republicans clinging to their guns! Ha!

I mean it's not like they don't have rock-solid rights, right?!

It's not like some unknown group in the DOJ and WH can secretly plot their extermination, right?!

It's not like the government can just wiretap your phone and emails without just cause, a judge and a warrant, right?!

It's not like your name can be put on a list that keeps you from flying on an airplane without any explanation nor justification, right?!

It's not like the government can give our money to banks and make us, our children and our grandchildren pay for it, right?!

It's not like the government would ever secretly kidnap people, torture them and hold them in prison without charge for ten years or more, right?

- I don't know WHY they're worried......

[CJCRANE]

87. But they weren't worried in the Bush era

when all of those things were equally applicable, probably moreso.

What changed?

[DeSwiss]

94. We both know EXACTLY what changed.

It changes nothing as their racism is irrelevant to the FACTS.

The FACTS speak for themselves.

I'm not defending anyone's racism but I could care less about that as opposed to having a president in power who deliberately kills women and children with drones for the effect. And murders an American citizen for the things he says. And claims that man had no right to a jury, a judge nor any form of due process because they've already checked his due process rights in-house. And then two weeks later murders that man's son for..... well, they won't tell why they did that. But at least 2 years later, we now know they're real, real sorry it happened.

Yes, ''they'' might have just started paying attention because a black man is in office, but not us. Not me. We have no such excuse. We've been paying attention all along. We know better (or claim to) and yet somehow we are giving passes to the current Oval Office holder on the women and children he murders -- because he's not Bush.

[kentuck]

65. Republicans are ripe for a Third Party candidate...

Who could it be? Rand Paul?

[Initech]

66. So let me get this straight:

The party that believes guns and fetuses have more rights than people believe that an armed revolution is necessary to protect our civil liberties (whatever those are) from the very people THEY CHOOSE TO ELECT THEMSELVES to ensure that guns and fetuses have more rights than people. Man they are fucking stupid.

[Scurrilous]

73. "Bring it on!"

[Deep13]

77. I means those most covetous of gun rights ...

... are people who are too crazy to own one.

[Bucky]

79. Who even thought to ask such a question in a survey?

I feel like the CIA waking up in 1989 to see the news about the Berlin Wall falling down. Who saw this coming? Where was our Harriet Miers to hand us the memo not to read?

[MadHound]

85. That's where we are headed,

Hell I was predicting that we would be having either another civil war, or a violent revolution within the next fifty years back in the late eighties. We're still on track for that in my opinion.

[librechik]

89. good thing they're mostly too old and fat to take to the streets

but does explain why they want guns. They sure couldn't run a revolution with fisticuffs or kung fu.

[zappaman]

92. I fear a sneeze could make this go hot. n/t

[RKP5637]

95. Well, now we know who the real terrorists and traitors are! n/t

[get the red out]

101. And 0% of them

have the guts to get off their fat-asses and start it.