268
268
0
Henry David Thoreau writes that “All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable”. This may be a fact, but what is not a fact is that all men (and women) do not recognize, or at least agree, on when it becomes a necessity to revolt or conduct revolution. Although we may have differing ideas, I believe that we have already been given an exact measurement as to what constitutes an act of revolution against the American government.
In present day America, citizens riot and protest in the streets for any number of reasons. As of the announcement that Donald Trump won the election for President of the United States in November of 2016, it would seem that any reason is also a good reason to go out and call for civil war. That being said, I believe that this is absolute nonsense. I, however, seem to be the minority opinion. In September of 2017, Katie Williams wrote an article for the website “The Hill” in which she stated, “Anti-fascist activists, or ‘antifa’, increasingly mobilized in the wake of President Trump’s election, are unapologetic about what they describe as the necessary use of violence to combat authoritarianism.” Authoritarianism is defined as the enforcement of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom. Interestingly enough, the only authority that has been asked to be obedient to is the law and I do not believe that abiding by the law is any reason to riot or revolt against the President of the United States.
In fact, the founding fathers, in their ultimate wisdom and uncanny ability to foresee the trials of this country long before they ever occur, left all of us an exact set of circumstances in which it is proper to rise up against our government. In the second paragraph of the United States’ Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers wrote,
“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 of 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.”
It was stated outright at the very moment that our country became a country, when the founding fathers initiated their own revolution against the tyrannical government of Great Britain, the very circumstances that they say fit to begin revolution.
The opposition may argue that we are experiencing a similar state of affairs at present but I submit that in order for a government or, in the case of the always hated President Donald Trump, an individual in government to be considered to be acting in a fashion that constitutes being defined as destructive that one must first identify the laws or article of the constitution that is being violated or disregarded. I ask that those who believe the government has reached a point in which it is time to take up arms against it to point out where violations have been purposefully perpetrated, for without being able to clearly demonstrate that one’s government has overstepped their bounds into realm of tyranny the peoples who choose to arm themselves against a lawful government are not revolutionaries but terrorists; terrorists are defined as persons who use unlawful violence in the pursuit of political aims.
I submit that, as citizens of what, in my opinion, is the greatest country to ever be, that we understand that there is a need for revolution when our government turns on us, but that time is not now. I believe that if and or when the time to take up arms is upon us that every man and woman will be able to see it. I believe that it is time that the citizens of this country recognize not only that there may be a time for revolution but that they recognize the correct set of circumstances laid out for us by our founding fathers to know when that time has come.
In present day America, citizens riot and protest in the streets for any number of reasons. As of the announcement that Donald Trump won the election for President of the United States in November of 2016, it would seem that any reason is also a good reason to go out and call for civil war. That being said, I believe that this is absolute nonsense. I, however, seem to be the minority opinion. In September of 2017, Katie Williams wrote an article for the website “The Hill” in which she stated, “Anti-fascist activists, or ‘antifa’, increasingly mobilized in the wake of President Trump’s election, are unapologetic about what they describe as the necessary use of violence to combat authoritarianism.” Authoritarianism is defined as the enforcement of strict obedience to authority at the expense of personal freedom. Interestingly enough, the only authority that has been asked to be obedient to is the law and I do not believe that abiding by the law is any reason to riot or revolt against the President of the United States.
In fact, the founding fathers, in their ultimate wisdom and uncanny ability to foresee the trials of this country long before they ever occur, left all of us an exact set of circumstances in which it is proper to rise up against our government. In the second paragraph of the United States’ Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers wrote,
“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 of 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.”
It was stated outright at the very moment that our country became a country, when the founding fathers initiated their own revolution against the tyrannical government of Great Britain, the very circumstances that they say fit to begin revolution.
The opposition may argue that we are experiencing a similar state of affairs at present but I submit that in order for a government or, in the case of the always hated President Donald Trump, an individual in government to be considered to be acting in a fashion that constitutes being defined as destructive that one must first identify the laws or article of the constitution that is being violated or disregarded. I ask that those who believe the government has reached a point in which it is time to take up arms against it to point out where violations have been purposefully perpetrated, for without being able to clearly demonstrate that one’s government has overstepped their bounds into realm of tyranny the peoples who choose to arm themselves against a lawful government are not revolutionaries but terrorists; terrorists are defined as persons who use unlawful violence in the pursuit of political aims.
I submit that, as citizens of what, in my opinion, is the greatest country to ever be, that we understand that there is a need for revolution when our government turns on us, but that time is not now. I believe that if and or when the time to take up arms is upon us that every man and woman will be able to see it. I believe that it is time that the citizens of this country recognize not only that there may be a time for revolution but that they recognize the correct set of circumstances laid out for us by our founding fathers to know when that time has come.
Posted in these groups: 
Command Post
Command Post
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 126
12
12
0
THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated
Thomas Paine, The Crisis
SGT Joseph Gunderson
Thomas Paine, The Crisis
SGT Joseph Gunderson
(12)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
Thomas Paine may have been a pain, literally, in many ways, including his personal responsibilities. However, he was an early cheerleader in passionate support of the revolution with his prolific writing of pamphlets - and in those days pamphlets were sort of like the social media trending of today, reaching everyone.
(1)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
You got that right SCPO Morris Ramsey! Takes one to know one.<smile> (History was my first academic love after I took a serious interest in academics.)
(1)
(0)
12
12
0
Revolutions are funny things. As you pointed out not everyone agrees on when revolt should happen. That's true today and it was true in the time of our founding fathers. It's not like every colonist one day decided that it was time to revolt against England, many of them stayed loyal to the end. Also if we look at revolutions there is broad disagreement on why they should happen. But in general there has to be a critical mass of people who want them coinciding with enough organization to make such an endeavor successful.
In general, I don't think we will have one now. There is some civil unrest sure but we always have some level of that. Right wing militias don't have the numbers and left wing groups like Antifa don't have the numbers or organization (or from what I've seen a desire) to start a revolution.
In general, I don't think we will have one now. There is some civil unrest sure but we always have some level of that. Right wing militias don't have the numbers and left wing groups like Antifa don't have the numbers or organization (or from what I've seen a desire) to start a revolution.
(12)
(0)
8
8
0
In the 60s people revolted for true social reasons. In 2018 it all seems to be for political reasons, that's a big difference IMO.
(8)
(0)
SGT Mary G.
Truly! Big difference in the spirit of unrest. The political aspect of the 60s was an after thought with far left folks trying to agitate politically and take advantage to rabble rouse at flower power picnics. They didn't have much of a chance there or then. It is different these days.
I know too many whose dedication to "social Justice" issues and "progressive" issues simply mask their political agendas dedicated to changing our form of government. Not that some are not sincere, but those are folks who got on the bandwagon without really knowing what political bandwagon they are riding on or who is driving it, for what reason! They will never get further than riding to "victory" on the shirt tails of those who are working hard for their foreign masters to be worthy of being part of the 25% who are allowed to be "party" members and as such enjoy a "more equal" privileges and life style. In other words there are many more openly self-defined Stalinist and Marxists around today who are rabble rousing, and getting others to do what they won't so they don't get blamed. The Maoists are more low key, more confident, and not as pushy.
I know too many whose dedication to "social Justice" issues and "progressive" issues simply mask their political agendas dedicated to changing our form of government. Not that some are not sincere, but those are folks who got on the bandwagon without really knowing what political bandwagon they are riding on or who is driving it, for what reason! They will never get further than riding to "victory" on the shirt tails of those who are working hard for their foreign masters to be worthy of being part of the 25% who are allowed to be "party" members and as such enjoy a "more equal" privileges and life style. In other words there are many more openly self-defined Stalinist and Marxists around today who are rabble rousing, and getting others to do what they won't so they don't get blamed. The Maoists are more low key, more confident, and not as pushy.
(0)
(0)
8
8
0
I didn't read the post but based on the title and my 60 years, IMO we are fine and we will be fine. Stay American. We may see more turmoil and as long as cooler heads prevail, I think we have mostly gotten killing each other out of our system. There will always be nuts, so see something, say something. Plan B say more. Plan C defense in depth, say more, observe.
(8)
(0)
SGT Joseph Gunderson
I think that you should definitely read the post. I think that you will find that you like it (I make this statement after reading your comment on the topic).
(3)
(0)
CWO3 (Join to see)
SGT Joseph Gunderson - Well written. I was in a time crunch yesterday but read it today. I'm not seeing widespread support for bad actors at either fringe of the spectrum now. Lot's of talk and certainly actions behind the scenes. In our "instant info" age I believe we will know when things are becoming untenable. Most of the fringe groups are being totally selfish, by expecting the majority to adapt to their position. We have laws, and as long as they are upheld while still preserving definite rights, we have a good chance of prevailing. Nice share.
(2)
(0)
7
7
0
Protests are absolutely appropriate, right and legal. Riots and violence aren't. Yet we refuse to call events perpetrated by our own citizens against others terrorism, regardless of the definition above. I also despise authoritarianism, and will resist it every opportunity I get. Voting works--way too many citizens don't use that lawful weapon. I hope we never get to the point as a country where we seriously talk about arming ourselves against each other.
(7)
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
As I told one regressive leftist when he told me that they were exercising their constitutional rights - " I fully support every single one of you coming out and making a spectacle of yourselves - I also fully support peoples right to openly mock and ridicule you and them, the 1st amendment works for everyone" He absolutely lost it and started screaming racist, bigot, and Nazi at me. Most of these people do not understand that freedom is for everyone, not just the ones you agree with.
(5)
(0)
7
7
0
SGT Joseph Gunderson
As you pointed to those opposing Trump, I would also submit that the same was being talked about in the previous administration, except from the other side of the political spectrum.
As you pointed to those opposing Trump, I would also submit that the same was being talked about in the previous administration, except from the other side of the political spectrum.
(7)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
LCpl Ron Layton - troll? Someone states that there was no violent backlash against President Obama. You consider a reply containing a link with multiple cases of violent backlash against President Obama and, “This list only covers the first few months after Obama was elected. No violence, Kirk S.? Interesting perspective” to be trolling?
Interesting perspective.
Also let me help you. Kenya is in Eastern Africa, not West. “Obama is an ancient Kenyan surname. The name is found frequently among the Luo, the third largest ethnic group in Kenya. It is believed that the name derived from the root word obam, which means “to lean or bend.” Also, Barrack is derived from the Arabic word for ‘blessed’ (برك).
However, I’m not sure how any of this is relevant to the point of violent backlash against any President.
Here’s a fun fact. “Layton is a surname derived from various place names in England. Two known etymologies stem from place names in Lancashire (in Blackpool) and another in North Yorkshire. The former was named in Old English as ‘settlement by the watercourse’, from Old English lād ‘watercourse’ + tūn ‘enclosure’, ‘settlement’; the latter as ‘leek enclosure’ or ‘herb garden’, from lēac ‘leek’ + tūn”.
As you were implying that President Obama was somehow ‘crooked’ (and certainly not blessed), are we safe to imply that you are settled near water, or even somehow, an herb garden or herb garden proprietor near a watercourse?
Again, my name is irrelevant. The information is what’s important. While I’m sure your intent was purely disrespectful, I’m pretty sure I can handle it. Don’t worry, you’re not nearly as clever as you think. I don’t find you to be clever at all.
Also, the nonsense about the race percentages..that’s called a strawman argument fallacy. “A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.”
It’s one of the most common forms of argument of the weak minded who like to argue for the sake of arguing and cant really engage in whatever the topic at hand is.
best of luck.
Interesting perspective.
Also let me help you. Kenya is in Eastern Africa, not West. “Obama is an ancient Kenyan surname. The name is found frequently among the Luo, the third largest ethnic group in Kenya. It is believed that the name derived from the root word obam, which means “to lean or bend.” Also, Barrack is derived from the Arabic word for ‘blessed’ (برك).
However, I’m not sure how any of this is relevant to the point of violent backlash against any President.
Here’s a fun fact. “Layton is a surname derived from various place names in England. Two known etymologies stem from place names in Lancashire (in Blackpool) and another in North Yorkshire. The former was named in Old English as ‘settlement by the watercourse’, from Old English lād ‘watercourse’ + tūn ‘enclosure’, ‘settlement’; the latter as ‘leek enclosure’ or ‘herb garden’, from lēac ‘leek’ + tūn”.
As you were implying that President Obama was somehow ‘crooked’ (and certainly not blessed), are we safe to imply that you are settled near water, or even somehow, an herb garden or herb garden proprietor near a watercourse?
Again, my name is irrelevant. The information is what’s important. While I’m sure your intent was purely disrespectful, I’m pretty sure I can handle it. Don’t worry, you’re not nearly as clever as you think. I don’t find you to be clever at all.
Also, the nonsense about the race percentages..that’s called a strawman argument fallacy. “A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent.”
It’s one of the most common forms of argument of the weak minded who like to argue for the sake of arguing and cant really engage in whatever the topic at hand is.
best of luck.
(1)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
LCpl Ron Layton - so let me get this straight... you rudely call me ‘troll’ in post riddled with inaccuracies.
I reply in kind..accurately, no less...with no less respect than you showed me, yet somehow I’ve insulted you for pointing out your inaccuracies and weak style of arguments?
Interesting perspective.
If you think I’m a fraud...ok. Feel free to look up for yourself anything that I’ve written. I’m sure that you’ll find the same etymology of the name Layton as I did.
And look up all the four letter words you want. I’m sure the best you’d come up with would be “ass”. But sure, blame it on bing.
Face to face, I wouldn’t talk to you even slightly wrong? Sure. It’s important to note that I haven’t here, either. But please know you get what you earn. To this point, your ignorant, poorly written, disrespectful posts have earned you some free history lessons and some backtracking on your part. (Heck, you were thanking me in another thread for enlightening you). I’m not in the habit of letting people talk down to me, in person or otherwise. Nothing to copy on paste on this one...I guess you’ll just have to take my word for it.
I don’t portray myself to be intelligent. It’s not my fault that’s what you think after reading what I wrote. Sure, I can copy and paste. But knowing just WHAT to copy and paste, and in what context (you know, not using strawman arguments and stuff) is the key. Lots of fancy book learning and letters after my name have enabled me to get a solid grasp on a few things.
In everything you’ve written, if you can “copy and paste also”, you’ve failed to effectively do so in a manner so as to give the reader the impression of your intelligence. Remember that thread about your limited understand about the first few amendments? Yeah, that kind of stuff.
But I digress. Your status as a veteran means as much to me as...well, it doesn’t. Like I said, you get what you earn. Don’t hide behind being a veteran. That’s cowardly. Especially after being rude but backtracking after not liking what you get back in return.
Best of luck.
I reply in kind..accurately, no less...with no less respect than you showed me, yet somehow I’ve insulted you for pointing out your inaccuracies and weak style of arguments?
Interesting perspective.
If you think I’m a fraud...ok. Feel free to look up for yourself anything that I’ve written. I’m sure that you’ll find the same etymology of the name Layton as I did.
And look up all the four letter words you want. I’m sure the best you’d come up with would be “ass”. But sure, blame it on bing.
Face to face, I wouldn’t talk to you even slightly wrong? Sure. It’s important to note that I haven’t here, either. But please know you get what you earn. To this point, your ignorant, poorly written, disrespectful posts have earned you some free history lessons and some backtracking on your part. (Heck, you were thanking me in another thread for enlightening you). I’m not in the habit of letting people talk down to me, in person or otherwise. Nothing to copy on paste on this one...I guess you’ll just have to take my word for it.
I don’t portray myself to be intelligent. It’s not my fault that’s what you think after reading what I wrote. Sure, I can copy and paste. But knowing just WHAT to copy and paste, and in what context (you know, not using strawman arguments and stuff) is the key. Lots of fancy book learning and letters after my name have enabled me to get a solid grasp on a few things.
In everything you’ve written, if you can “copy and paste also”, you’ve failed to effectively do so in a manner so as to give the reader the impression of your intelligence. Remember that thread about your limited understand about the first few amendments? Yeah, that kind of stuff.
But I digress. Your status as a veteran means as much to me as...well, it doesn’t. Like I said, you get what you earn. Don’t hide behind being a veteran. That’s cowardly. Especially after being rude but backtracking after not liking what you get back in return.
Best of luck.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
LCpl Ron Layton - “if you are going to troll have the balls to use your real name. no disrespect intended all in fun”. No mind reading necessary. I don’t hear you say anything, as this is a written forum. But, I can read. While indeed you did write ‘no disrespect’ after, that’s akIn to staring at men in the shower at your local gym, but assuring them, “it’s cool bro, no homo.”
I’m sorry if on the other side, you took it as condescension. I told you your ideas were lacking, and then I explained why. Direct, for sure, condescending, hardly.
Life is definitely great. I’m gonna keep doing it.
Best of luck.
I’m sorry if on the other side, you took it as condescension. I told you your ideas were lacking, and then I explained why. Direct, for sure, condescending, hardly.
Life is definitely great. I’m gonna keep doing it.
Best of luck.
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
LCpl Ron Layton - um.. huh? Good try. Ultimately, however, unsuccessful.
Again, best of luck.
Again, best of luck.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
I am 70 year old, a combat wounded Marine Vietnam Veteran. I am a huge proponent of the Constitution of the United States - as 'it was written'. It has become "bastardized" by crooked politicians, greedy businesses and lobbyists, and uneducated inexperienced civilians.
I LOVE my country and everything it stands for - the kind of "democracy" that was originally specified by the Constitution, after our fight for freedom. It is LONG overdue to return our country to the kind of government that was designed by our 'founding fathers' - "a government of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE"! Our government should be working FOR US, NOT the other way around. They should doing 'what WE TELL THEM', NOT the other way around. They should serve at 'our request' NOT at each other's request. They should have benefits (any that are FAIR) that "WE DECIDE THEY DESERVE" NOT what they think they deserve. They should NOT be allowed to dictate any rules, laws, or guidelines that they don't feel they 'also follow'. Last but NOT least - our government officials should be elected at OUR DISCRETION/CHOICE and NOE of them are "above the same laws"!!!
If they are "not willing" to do that or follow these BASIC guidelines (the WE THE PEOPLE) lay down for all AMERICANS, then should NOT be allowed to hold any office or take advantage of any benefits, as set forth by our Constitution - "of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE"!
Any American who agrees with my basic feelings (and believe me when I tell you that I'm NOT the only person) about our government and what they continue to do to us daily, please research something called "The Convention of States", on the internet. This is NOT a revolution in the historical sense, but a gathering of loyal Americans who want change according to 'our Constitution', legally, morally, and ethically!
I LOVE my country and everything it stands for - the kind of "democracy" that was originally specified by the Constitution, after our fight for freedom. It is LONG overdue to return our country to the kind of government that was designed by our 'founding fathers' - "a government of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE"! Our government should be working FOR US, NOT the other way around. They should doing 'what WE TELL THEM', NOT the other way around. They should serve at 'our request' NOT at each other's request. They should have benefits (any that are FAIR) that "WE DECIDE THEY DESERVE" NOT what they think they deserve. They should NOT be allowed to dictate any rules, laws, or guidelines that they don't feel they 'also follow'. Last but NOT least - our government officials should be elected at OUR DISCRETION/CHOICE and NOE of them are "above the same laws"!!!
If they are "not willing" to do that or follow these BASIC guidelines (the WE THE PEOPLE) lay down for all AMERICANS, then should NOT be allowed to hold any office or take advantage of any benefits, as set forth by our Constitution - "of the people, by the people, and FOR THE PEOPLE"!
Any American who agrees with my basic feelings (and believe me when I tell you that I'm NOT the only person) about our government and what they continue to do to us daily, please research something called "The Convention of States", on the internet. This is NOT a revolution in the historical sense, but a gathering of loyal Americans who want change according to 'our Constitution', legally, morally, and ethically!
(5)
(0)
5
5
0
We the people will revolt when the government openly turns against the people. The conditions for a revolution are clearly defined, and have in no way been met. The current election, and political tempest, is not unlike those of the past. The President was duly elected and is doing everything he called out during the campaign. We may not like the outcome, we may not agree with the means by which the outcomes are met, but this is by no means grounds for revolution. I do not agree with the political pundits, or candidates, who have made their entire position to be against anything the President is working toward. Count me, as always, one who swore an oath to defend the Constitution, that there is no expiration date to that oath.
(5)
(0)
LT Michael Watson
The Constitution of the United States. Uphold and defend against all enemies, foreign or domestic
(1)
(0)
5
5
0
The time hasn't come yet, but even a blind man can see that our Constitutional rights are under attack by the very people that seek to govern us. Case in point, the 2nd Amendment. We now have representatives violating their oaths of office by calling for a complete repeal of the 2nd Amendment. What would the Founding Fathers have done? Challenged them to a duel and SHOT them.
(5)
(0)
LCDR Robert S.
It should be noted that even from the beginning, wanna-be-tyrants have been elected. It is only when things go from calling for the elimination of rights to the actual elimination of rights that the possibility of revolution even begins to become credible. And even then, the grievances need to approach the quantity and level of those in the Declaration of Independence - the mere passage of a few unconstitutional laws is not enough, the rights violations need to be numerous, rampant, and upheld by the courts. Before a claim to a right to revolution is valid, all other possibilities for remedy need to be attempted.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
ANTIFA should take note...
“One sect alone made a momentary stand. The Anarchists, strong in the traditions of Bakunin, conceived themselves unapproachable in extremism. If the Bolsheviks would turn the world upside down, they would turn it inside out; if the Bolsheviks abolished right and wrong, they would abolish right and left. They therefore spoke with confidence and held their heads high. But their case had been carefully studied in advance by the new authorities. No time was wasted in argument. Both in Petrograd and in Moscow they were bombed in their headquarters and hunted down and shot with the utmost expedition.”
The World Crisis, Vol. 4 — the Aftermath
Winston S. Churchill
“One sect alone made a momentary stand. The Anarchists, strong in the traditions of Bakunin, conceived themselves unapproachable in extremism. If the Bolsheviks would turn the world upside down, they would turn it inside out; if the Bolsheviks abolished right and wrong, they would abolish right and left. They therefore spoke with confidence and held their heads high. But their case had been carefully studied in advance by the new authorities. No time was wasted in argument. Both in Petrograd and in Moscow they were bombed in their headquarters and hunted down and shot with the utmost expedition.”
The World Crisis, Vol. 4 — the Aftermath
Winston S. Churchill
(5)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
Sgt Wayne Wood - There should be nos support of authoritarian thugs and fasism but they exist also, someone the alt-right and it verminous ilk do not offend you.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
1stSgt Nelson Kerr - On this we agree - both the left and the right have their fringe lunatics - I cannot in good conscious ignore that there WAS a true Nazi rally in Charlottesville - it happened, just like I cannot ignore the violence of Antifa - but honest Truth is - Neither of these fringe elements have the backing of normal sane Americans. They make great ratings and clicks for the media, and the media will push these things to the forefront, but in all reality - they are non issues.
(1)
(0)
1stSgt Nelson Kerr
The president called some of the racist protestor good people and a. open racist git almost half of the votes sp I am not as sanguine about the percentage of good people anymore.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Perrotto
1stSgt Nelson Kerr - you just cannot let a thing be - Trump NEVER said they were good people - He said that both sides of that Charlottesville idiocy were to blame - which is truth - each side was counting on there being a violent reaction, and it occurred. there is absolutely no difference between the Nazi's and Antifa - both are more then willing to utilize violence in order to create an environment of fear. there is NO degree of difference when a group wants to use violence in order to silence.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google