They Didn’t Heed the Warning NOW You Must
Mar 25th, 2010 by David Anderson
We warned the leaders that their high handed action on the Health Care Law would push the nation closer to the boiling point. They did not listen so you must. This nation must not be allowed to devolve into lawlessness. We will remember in November not threaten people.
The Viet Nam peace movement grew from a movement of students and peace activists into one which had the sympathy of a majority of the American people. In 1968, it had pushed out of contention a sitting President in his own party. A President who had won 4 years earlier with 61% of the popular vote and 44 states. It had gained the elite opinion and even luminary figures such as Senator Bobbie Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. along with countless celebrities joined the cause. Everything was moving in its direction. Vice President Nixon was campaigning on a secret plan to end the war. Bobbie Kennedy was on the verge of winning the nomination with a California victory. Then the assassinations started. Kennedy and King were killed. The movement radicals were no longer believing in the system. Some like Dr. Ayers resorted to violence. It started simple enough with sit ins that destroyed draft records, but it devolved into assassination plots and bombings of government buildings. There were riots on college campuses. Some activists spit on returning troops. The American People turned against the movement in a big way. The anti-war candidate for President couldn’t even carry his own state and lost in a wipe out with less than 40% of the vote.
What is my point? The Tea Party movement can go the same way. If you hear any of your friends spouting off, tell them to cool it. Tell them that you want to organize their energy to make a difference. Hold a coffee/tea for your favorite candidate. Get them plugged into resources like Delaware Politics so they can be informed. We need a revolution in this country, but it has to be one ideas not one of violence.
For a matter of perspective, I have had my property vandalized, been spit on, and been threatened for my conservative stands such as my testimony and talk show guest appearances in defense of marriage in the 90′s. Even recently, I have been a target a vitriol by the left wing on the blogosphere and even in a letter to the editor for my pro-family leadership. Left wing radicals targeted people who donated to the pro-marriage amendment in California. If anyone would have a right to comment on this, I do. I personally know of conservative leaders who have had worse.
What happen to Ann Coulter is another example. The liberals are not used to getting back what they dish out. It disturbs me when this type of behavior starts to spread to our side. If we allow that, who will lead the way back to civility and sanity? We are better than that. We have to stop this before it starts. That is why I did a post Monday condemning talk of taking an open shot on the President. Some wondered why I would address something so obscure. It is because my gut tells me that it has to be addressed. Angry people do not always think rationally and it only takes 2 or 3 to tar a movement. This movement is just. Therefore it must behave according to law and order. Anyone who crosses that line will be condemned and rejected by myself and my colleagues in the strongest terms.
Enough said by me. It is your turn.
I suppose it’s not pertinent, but the ‘Tea Party’ name is derived, I would think, from the Boston Tea Party- an act of wanton vandalism and destruction of private property as a means of protesting actions of the British government.
True, and that led to our people getting shot in the streets later. The B. G. responded with armed suppression. They (the activists) had no other means to voice their opinion. We do. Mass protest is great. Be loud, be in their face, but don’t cross the line. That is all I am saying.
Paine’s Common Sense ‘voiced an opinion’..but, the British didn’t listen.
Anyway, as long as the left controls Hollywood, music, ‘art,’ the print media, television and academia, electing conservatives won’t help, long-term, any more than electing Reagan did. The left controls the culture, and thus, the future.
Um – Congress and the President did hear you. They heard you just fine; your whiny voices are hard to miss.
They heard both sides, and your side lost.
There isn’t anything in the Constitution about death threat “warnings” from nut jobs. The closest you will find is in the criminal codes.
Enough with your tinpot fatwas.
Please clarify anon, to what are you responding? I don’t think that Rick is advocating death threats in his comments. I know you know what I think. Thanks for helping me out.
Well, you can’t deny Mullah Rick has been issuing fatwas on your dime for like, forever.
Then, your opening sentence:
“We warned the leaders that their high handed action on the Health Care Law would push the nation closer to the boiling point. ”
Translation:
“I don’t advocate violence, but if others do, it is the Democrats’ own fault.”
“Um – Congress and the President did hear you. They heard you just fine; your whiny voices are hard to miss.
They heard both sides, and your side lost. ” – anon
Unless I missread you anon your statements show a fundamental lack of understanding of the role of Congress. Congress does not have a judicial role where the people are concerned. They are not elected or paid to sit in judgement of the citizens, but they are paid to represent the citizens. If in these matters they are judging the constituents that they are paid to represent than they are failing to accomplish their Constitutional role.
Oh, and David’s opening statement is akin to those found in the Declaration of Independence so I feel pretty comfortable with it. Advising your government when it is in error and reminding them of the ramifications of their behavior is not a death threat. It is an attempt to avoid further escalation and maintain the remaining threads of unity.
What are these “ramifications” Tim? An election was held, another is coming. Right now the winners are implementing their agenda – that is the only ramification I see.
One ramification is the next election.
Another ramification is that they are loosing the consent of the governed and gaining their discontent instead.
A third ramification, is that the federal government also faces states rights movements that are growing in strength the more they continue the over-zealous pursuit of their agenda.
A more severe ramification that we have learned from history is that when the federal governement continually refuses to acknowledge the sovereignty of its states and citizens, those who have been abused of their rights ceed from the nation. Once separated the Declaration of Independence describes the new relationship of the parties. “We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.”
That may not be a completely exhastive list, but I hope it helps to answer your question Pandora.
Actually, it does answer my question, Tim, and not in a good way. Elections are the only ramifications that count in my book.
So… define discontent. I get it in the context of the voting booth, but I sense you mean something more.
And is your third point referring to secession? Seriously?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by DelawarePolitics.net. DelawarePolitics.net said: They Didn’t Heed the Warning NOW You Must: We warned the leaders that their high handed action on the Health Care … http://bit.ly/bTdeXX [...]
Your book is not the only one that counts Pandora. The Constitution does too, and it specifies that discontented citizens have the right to petition their governement for redress (consider this an addendum to point 2). Our elected officials had better be prepared for a lot of petitioning. Perhaps they should consider some extra phone lines, because many of the citizens are very dissatisifed with our representation in the governemnt.
As to my third point it was actually about state’s rights movements. There are a number of states moving to enact soveriegnty legislation, as well as movements in the states to nullify unconstitutional legislation. As more states resume using the legislative power that the Constitution grants them the Federal Governement will find that their sweeping entitlements have less effect.
Now to my fourth and final point secession. Yes, I am serious. It is not just Texans anymore that talk about it.
And if your petition and state’s rights movement fails? Then what?
And keep in mind that only (approx.) 13% of Americans consider themselves part of Tea Parties.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1436
Pandora, if you are suggesting that conservatism is in a hopeless situation and can no longer succeed in America I don’t buy that for an instant. Things will become politicaly uncomfortable for our elected officials if the persist in ignoring their constitutents. Then those constituents will relieve their discomfort in the next election.
If there are options beyond the four I have already identified than feel free to let me know. However, if a suggested action can not be supported by the precedent of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution then I can’t advocate it.
I never claimed it was hopeless, altho…
I was saying, that while I understand you’re not happy with the way things are going, your views and “ramifications” are not majority opinion. Sure, some people are upset, but very few are heading down the secession path… and some people are thrilled.
It seems you want to overturn an election, and if you can’t do that at the voting booth…? It also seems that I may have backed you into a corner. You seem to be picking your words very carefully, and I’m really trying not to read between the lines.
Pandora lol, nice one.
I made it pretty clear that secession is the most extreme of the ramifications I listed, and I never claimed a majority in favor of it. However, it would be unwise to ignore the growing numbers that are starting to consider it a serious option.
I think you are either unaware or ignoring the power of states rights as an option to a lack of true representation on a federal level. There are at least a dozen states where not just the citizens, but the governments are actively pursuing nullification procedures for the health care bill. Others are pursuing more broad state soveriengty laws which will effectively declare that the state government will choose whether or not to accept health care reform or any other federal law.
I do attempt to choose my words carefully, and not just in this thread. America is in danger of fracturing. I will not back down from that fact. However, I’d rather not see that happen. Hence the warnings. Even if the elected offcials won’t heed the warning signs and a segment of the population feels compelled to break away from the federal government it does not have to be accompanied by violence.
Please do read between the lines if it intrigues you. You will either find the truth and we will both be happier for it, or you will imagine up a lie.
Short pandora: everything, including your rights, is subject to majority rule so deal with it. Typical leftist Democrat nonsense.
What has become obvious these last few years is that they are incapable of comprehending that the entire unique American project of self governance was specifically designed to prevent such a governing arrangement and to thwart galloping power grabs like we now see from their ilk.
The fauxgressives would be worth engaging if they would just be honest that the ultimate social political and cultural destination they so yearn for is wholly incompatible with the very core notions of liberty and self governance that have made the United States such a unique gem in an otherwise brutal world.
The American project was never about empowering the self righteous social schemers convinced they know what’s best for all of us. In fact it is/was about blockading such people from any permanent power they might accumulate by electoral stampede political fancy or through ruthless cults of personality or ideology.
The latest success of the shameless deceitful control freaks running the Obamanation would lead one sadly to believe this project is at best on life support if not all done.
Personally I choose to fight the tyranny of these corrupters to the bitter last.
Shorter anon: Pretend I said something I never did and then fight with yourself.
Nice strawman.
Wouldn’t that be “strawwoman” if it was true??
C’mon pandora. You support exactly what I said: leftist state power with no limits.
Just fess up this requires trashing the constitution – which you really don’t care much about anyway. It’s an obstacle to liberaltopia.
For your cult it’s all about unlimited power in the hands of the “right” people. Of course those are always YOUR people.
Wrong, anon. I’m not an extremist. But keep putting words in my mouth – words I’d ask that you back up, since my views are common knowledge.
Show me where I’ve ever stated that I support a leftist state power with no limits.
Show me where I’ve ever trashed the Constitution or said I didn’t care about it.
Show me where I said I supported unlimited power in the hands of the “right” people.
Go on, prove your claims. I double dog dare you.
I’m waiting…
Pandora, what a sneaky way to get people to read your blog. I won’t fall for it. :p lol
Still waiting, and still crickets. I’m not surprised.
While this is not my challenge I will poke my nose in again. I don’t believe that Pandora is as extreme as anon. describes her. I think that she does believe in a leftist govenment, but not one without limits. I’m not quite sure where all the limits would be, but I’m pretty sure that they would be there somewhere.
I doubt she directly trashes the Constitution, though she may rail against some of the principles I believe are contained in it. I am fully convinced that most people care less about the Constitution than they should, but that doesn’t mean they don’t care, at least when it is convenient.
Finally, while some of the policies she supports may open the door for unlimited power being held by the “right people” I doubt that ulimited power in anyones hands is her intention.
Tim, while I appreciate you jumping into this, you didn’t make the claims.
And, I’ll note, that I’m still waiting for Anon to prove his claims.
Sorry honey but I’m full up on mandates from leftists. Your support of Obamacare is proof enough. No offense but I won’t be wasting any precious moments of life doing homework assignments handed out by nandora for her amusement.
Shorter Anon: I got nothing.
I already knew you couldn’t back up words – now, everyone else knows as well.
Here’s even shorter anon for you: take a hike commie.
Everyone else gives a rat’s ass what you think you’re proving here. We all know damn well where you’re coming from sister.
And yet you offer no proof. Which means I win.