‘Three Percenter’ Mike Vanderboegh: Enforce Laws And Somebody Is Going To Get Shot
Mike Vanderboegh, a member of the Three Percenters, a “Patriot” movement which is anti-government, was a guest on the Alan Colmes radio show on Monday night. On Saturday, Vanderboegh made the startling claim that we/they need tovote with our guns and he hasn’t toned down the rhetoric.
Vanderboegh announced his spot on the show in a one sentence post titled, “About to be on the Colmes Collectivist Communication Coital Cluster,” and that’s probably his nice side.
Vanderboegh started the show by talking about paranoia which is a really good place to start. The paranoid Three Percenter went on to say, “If you don’t want to fight, get out of our face.” “All we want is to be left alone, Alan, take your nanny state government, take your supposed good intentions that you wrap around this iron fist, take it and shove it,” he said.
You see how nice he is?
Colmes responded, “The people you are calling tyrants were elected as part of due process in a representative government.” The Fox radio host asked, “Why don’t you run for office and show us the way it’s supposed to be done?…These are not dictators. We elected Barack Obama.”
To which Vanderboegh said, “Then go ahead and enforce your laws and watch what happens.” “Your laws are unconstitutional. Somebody is gonna get shot,” he added.
At that point, Colmes had the audacity to explain the legal, nonviolent process in addressing laws which some perceive as unconstitutional. Silly Alan! Vanderboegh explained that that’s when the militarized cops will come and kill him.
“Who is coming to kill you?,” Colmes asked.
Warning: Put on your Collectivist Coital Cluster Hazmat suit before watching just in case Mike’s contagious.
After all of that, Vanderboegh wrote in another post,”We are not of their body, and we might as well forget arguing about it. The only thing to do when Landru sends his minions for you is to militarily defeat them. That will be my last Colmes Collectivist Cluster Coitus.”
Someone needs to attend anger management therapy.
Onward Collectivist Coital Army of Black Muslim Tyrants, onward!
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Anomaly100
rick dalton July 15th, 2014 at 17:28
Restore it to what it hasn’t change since it was wrote. Just people who suffer from intellectual disability like this guy has
Skip Patterson July 15th, 2014 at 21:24
The Constitutional arguments they come up with are just pathetic and clearly demonstrates that these right-wing nuts have zero understanding of the Constitution and how it works.
Dana King July 16th, 2014 at 04:13
Actually I’ve demonstrated that you know exactly d1ck about the constitution. For some reason your damaged brains cannot understand that winning an election doesn’t empower one to run roughshod over the US Constitution and violate everything in it and the BoR.
rick dalton July 15th, 2014 at 17:28
Restore it to what it hasn’t change since it was wrote. Just people who suffer from intellectual disability like this guy has
Skip Patterson July 15th, 2014 at 21:24
The Constitutional arguments they come up with are just pathetic and clearly demonstrates that these right-wing nuts have zero understanding of the Constitution and how it works.
Dana King July 16th, 2014 at 04:13
Actually I’ve demonstrated that you know exactly d1ck about the constitution. For some reason your damaged brains cannot understand that winning an election doesn’t empower one to run roughshod over the US Constitution and violate everything in it and the BoR.
Teapubliturd Hater July 15th, 2014 at 17:37
Can’t wait to see this guy get blown away when someone with real rifle talent takes him and his merry band of pussies on. I’ll pay for the sideline seat on that one! OH YEAH!
Dana King July 16th, 2014 at 04:11
Ah so much tolerance and peaceful love from the other side of the isle. Do you people even listen to the vile and evil bile you spew from your holes? Wishing death on someone? Party of tolerance, LOL, what a joke. More like anti-liberty party of jack boot thugs.
Earl Scheib July 16th, 2014 at 09:01
Actually that ‘tolerance and peaceful love’ comes from both sides of the isle and from all directions in between.
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:51
See what I mean Dana ! Hate is an all consuming evil that you have taken to heart and soul .
pelletfarmer July 16th, 2014 at 23:32
“I’ll pay for the sideline seat on that one!”
No need. That’s what you’ve chosen for your life, for free.
Teapubliturd Hater July 15th, 2014 at 17:37
Can’t wait to see this guy get blown away when someone with real rifle talent takes him and his merry band of pussies on. I’ll pay for the sideline seat on that one! OH YEAH!
Dana King July 16th, 2014 at 04:11
Ah so much tolerance and peaceful love from the other side of the isle. Do you people even listen to the vile and evil bile you spew from your holes? Wishing death on someone who has done NOTHING but speak his mind? Party of tolerance, LOL, what a joke. More like anti-liberty party of jack boot thugs.
Serendipity July 16th, 2014 at 09:01
Actually that ‘tolerance and peaceful love’ comes from both sides of the isle and from all directions in between.
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:51
See what I mean Dana ! Hate is an all consuming evil that you have taken to heart and soul .
pelletfarmer July 16th, 2014 at 23:32
“I’ll pay for the sideline seat on that one!”
No need. That’s what you’ve chosen for your life, for free.
Um Cara July 15th, 2014 at 18:55
He loves the constitution, but wants to shoot folks carrying out laws passed under its structure. He thinks his 3 percenters are going to take down the rest of us, even though we have half of the world’s entire military force directly under our control, and probably another 25% of the world’s military force who would join us in fighting back these kooks.
So he is picking a fight w/ 75% of the world’s military force and 97% of his fellow Americans. What a sad, pathetic little man. I’ll continue to feel sorry for him right up until he murders a police officer or soldier or one of the rest of us ’97 percenters’.
Dana King July 16th, 2014 at 04:05
Passing a law is NOT DUE PROCESS. An election is NOT DUE PROCESS. Do you even have the slightest inkling of what due process is? It must really really hurt to be you.
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 10:38
Dana King writes: Passing a law is NOT DUE PROCESS. An election is NOT DUE PROCESS.
Actually, these are both clear examples of due process, which my MW10 tells me is:
1 : a course of formal proceedings (as legal proceedings) carried out regularly and in accordance with established rules and principles —called also procedural due process
Sorry about your discomfort, but the fact is, nobody is voting to remove any of your rights. Get some sleep.
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:50
Well Dana, you appear to have the Hate part down pat, congratulations ! Next the fear that accompanies it will twist your little mind into justifying murder. You are on your way. Get help now !
Um Cara July 15th, 2014 at 18:55
He loves the constitution, but wants to shoot folks carrying out laws passed under its structure. He thinks his 3 percenters are going to take down the rest of us, even though we have half of the world’s entire military force directly under our control, and probably another 25% of the world’s military force who would join us in fighting back these kooks.
So he is picking a fight w/ 75% of the world’s military force and 97% of his fellow Americans. What a sad, pathetic little man. I’ll continue to feel sorry for him right up until he murders a police officer or soldier or one of the rest of us ’97 percenters’.
Dana King July 16th, 2014 at 04:05
Passing a law is NOT DUE PROCESS. An election is NOT DUE PROCESS. I don’t care if 99.99999999% of the entire world voted to remove my rights that is tyranny, evil, wrong, AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Everything you typed is complete meaningless idi0tic bunk. It’s obvious that you know exactly d1ck about the US Constitution or you wouldn’t have mumbled something that ignorant. Do you even have the slightest inkling of what due process is? It must really really hurt to be you.
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 10:38
Dana King writes: Passing a law is NOT DUE PROCESS. An election is NOT DUE PROCESS.
Actually, these are both clear examples of due process, which my MW10 tells me is:
1 : a course of formal proceedings (as legal proceedings) carried out regularly and in accordance with established rules and principles —called also procedural due process
Sorry about your discomfort, but the fact is, nobody is voting to remove any of your rights. Get some sleep.
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:50
Well Dana, you appear to have the Hate part down pat, congratulations ! Next the fear that accompanies it will twist your little mind into justifying murder. You are on your way. Get help now !
Skip Patterson July 15th, 2014 at 21:22
I’ve seen other videos of this guy and he is one vile individual. Guess things didn’t work out in life like he thought they would and he has to have someone of something to blame his failed life on. Eventually the American people are going to have to deal with the right-wing terrorist threat in America today and we need to deal with it in a very permanent way.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 00:20
Obviously you don’t read or know history and what happens after forced disarmament.
We have a 2nd amendment which, as it may surprise you, that all politicians including Imam Obama, swore to uphold. While the Imam and his liberal ilk are working to gut it, along comes a man who says no. Not only no, but he draws a line in the sand, along with over 80% of those in NY and CT who refuse to comply with the registration and upcoming gun grab.
Punishing law abiding gun owning citizens for the acts of insane criminals who due to mainstreaming mental cases caused this issue anyway.
BTW, my gun has killed less people than Teddy ‘the swimmer’ Kennedy’s car.
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 06:16
When you have something besides right-wing stooge talking points, get back with me.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 07:54
When you actually read history and understand what is taking place under the Imam then you may actually have a intelligent post.
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 08:19
You should practice what you preach. I have studied history for over 30 years and would be willing to bet the farm that I could run circles around you. Not to mention I have studied world theology for 30 years now, and did research at seminary for 3 years. So come on, tell me what history is all about.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 08:36
Skippy is your history lesson from a little red book authored by a man named Mao who slaughtered 80 million after disarming them?
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 09:28
It was certainly one of the books I have read over the years, although that was years ago, when I was studying Communism. Why? What makes you ask, is there something you would like to know about it?
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 10:01
Skippy, how many people did Mao slaughter during the great leap forward which took place after he disarmed them?
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 10:21
Here’s a good article that can explain what the facts are with the Great Leap Forward.
http://monthlyreview.org/commentary/did-mao-really-kill-millions-in-the-great-leap-forward/
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 10:42
Here is a good book that tells the truth about your communist hero..
http://www.amazon.com/Maos-Great-Famine-Devastating-Catastrophe/dp/B0044Y1TGC/ref=sr_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405521660&sr=1-11&keywords=mao+great+famine
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 10:53
LOL. A book by a known historical revisionist. O.K son, you just go back to drinking the kool-aid as I thought I would try and see if you could actually be taught something but clearly that is not the case. So, thank you for your excellent display of right-wing ignorance but it is now bu-by.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 11:01
So Skippy,
How many people did Mao slaughter in the glorious great leap forward, you never answered that question?
R Gale Pomeroy July 16th, 2014 at 08:40
Maybe you should read your history. The first thing Hitler did was not taking away gns as so many fools like to claim. The first thing he did was to establish a national religion. So if I where you I would be less concerned about the guns that the librals are not after and more concerned with the religion that the conservatives want to establish as our national religion, just like Hitler did.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 08:43
The first thing Hitler did was establish a national healthcare plan to gain control of the population…
sound familiar?
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:45
Horse Hockey, you are on the wrong site again ! Kookaide, you can look up “how to force breast feed a wild boar” on Faux Gnus under Hannity….have at it !
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:51
The last refuge of a right wing Beck licker.
Cuz….cuz…..Hitler…and um…Benghazi
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 10:54
Typical retort when the truth about the National Socialists who Imam Obama and the progressive scum in America love.
William July 16th, 2014 at 11:14
“The religion Little Adolph established was to compete with the largely independent Lutheran majority ”
Oh yeah I can totally see how that is just like the ACA.
Well cupcake, you’ve rolled out, Hitler, Mao, Ted Kennedy, Mein Kamph, and Lutherans. So do you actually have anything real to add to this debate, or are you actually a writer for the Blaze?
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 14:38
Little Willie the truth and facts are something that eludes you aren’t they.
William July 16th, 2014 at 14:45
Question? Just how many Liberal land ID’s are you up to now?
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:37
Cuz Godwin and choadular inadequacy too!
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:36
“The first thing Hitler did was establish a national healthcare plan to gain control of the population”
No.
The first thing Hitler did was nullify the legislature through the Enabling Act.
The second thing Hitler did was dissolve all labor unions and sanction or ban all opposition parties.
Enjoy your Kool-Aid, Imbecile.
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 09:45
Hitler also drank water and — wait for it — so do you. OMG, you are literally Hitler!
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:43
Sometimes (like now) R Gale Pomerboy, it is better to keep your mouth closed , and appear a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:41
Kool aide freak, “a vs an” , look it up weenie, you embarrass yourself and anyone remotely considering agreeing with your drivel .
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:38
Obviously koolaide fool, no one has explained to you that Faux Gnus is NOT a news show, it is rightly classified as a big money maker for Rupert Murdoch as an “entertainment” source for the inane.
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:49
Don’t ya’ love it when they spew the Faux news talking points?
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:09
It must be very convenient for you, Don, to ignore icky poo things you don’t like, like the truth, by calling it a bad name and moving on.org. Name one fake news story presented as a news story by Fox News. One. Just one, Don. Mike is right, arguing with you is like arguing with a petulant child.
Richard July 16th, 2014 at 01:41
Nothing vile about the inplication of “in a very permanent way”, though. You seem like a nice, sunny individual yourself.
Kungfoochimp July 16th, 2014 at 04:55
Define permanent. Since you feel so strongly about it…..
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:35
Do you NOT have a dictionary app available Kungfoochump ?
Kungfoochimp July 17th, 2014 at 23:49
No. I am but a humble “bitter clinger” of marginal intelligence and slim intellect. Do please share how you wish to end our lives. Will it be as Bill Ayers desired – in a remote, desert slave camp in the Southwest? Or perhaps you are a patient man, and would enjoy a weaponized Obamacare? Or perhaps you enjoy the excitement of homes being bombed from above? Oh what fun you could have watching the videos of your countrymen you despise being incinerated.
You are a sick person. I pity you.
Johnny July 16th, 2014 at 13:39
By “we need to deal with it in a very permanent way” you don’t mean YOU. You mean armed LEO’s or military. You wish to use armed men and women to disarm law abiding citizens. Cowboy up. Put your chips in the middle, be the point man and knock on a door. Yeah, like that will happen.
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 13:41
By “we need to deal with it in a very permanent way” you don’t mean YOU. You mean armed LEO’s or military.
Eh, whatever, as long as it gets done.
Johnny July 16th, 2014 at 13:43
So by your logic, it’s ok to use violence against people who have broken no laws. Typical collectivist logic. Again, take point and knock on a door, don’t just tell someone else to do it. Man up.
Brent Bushardt August 7th, 2014 at 08:34
Very good Skip! By the way, will you be participating in the “we”
part of “dealing with the threat”? No? oh….gee, I wonder why?
/s
“Eventually the American people are going to have to deal with the
right-wing terrorist threat in America today and we need to deal with it
in a very permanent way.”
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:07
Skip, you make my point and the point of others very well. You are right, this will have to be dealt with in a permanent way. You relish it. Mike shakes his head sadly and accepts it reluctantly. You don’t know that Mike used to be a communist radical and has spent most of his life trying to make up for that. He, more than you, understands what ‘permanent’ means.
Skip Patterson July 15th, 2014 at 21:22
I’ve seen other videos of this guy and he is one vile individual. Guess things didn’t work out in life like he thought they would and he has to have someone of something to blame his failed life on. Eventually the American people are going to have to deal with the right-wing terrorist threat in America today and we need to deal with it in a very permanent way.
Richard July 16th, 2014 at 01:41
Nothing vile about the inplication of “in a very permanent way”, though. You seem like a nice, sunny individual yourself.
Kungfoochimp July 16th, 2014 at 04:55
Define permanent. Since you feel so strongly about it…..
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:35
Do you NOT have a dictionary app available Kungfoochump ?
Kungfoochimp July 17th, 2014 at 23:49
No. I am but a humble “bitter clinger” of marginal intelligence and slim intellect. Do please share how you wish to end our lives. Will it be as Bill Ayers desired – in a remote, desert slave camp in the Southwest? Or perhaps you are a patient man, and would enjoy a weaponized Obamacare? Or perhaps you enjoy the excitement of homes being bombed from above? Oh what fun you could have watching the videos of your countrymen you despise being incinerated.
You are a sick person. I pity you.
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 06:16
When you have something besides right-wing stooge talking points, get back with me.
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 08:19
You should practice what you preach. I have studied history for over 30 years and would be willing to bet the farm that I could run circles around you. Not to mention I have studied world theology for 30 years now, and did research at seminary for 3 years. So come on, tell me what history is all about.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 08:36
Skippy is your history lesson from a little red book authored by a man named Mao who slaughtered 80 million after disarming them? Or Mein Kampf written by a man who used ovens as the final solution after disarming a whole race in his country?
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 09:28
It was certainly one of the books I have read over the years, although that was years ago, when I was studying Communism. Why? What makes you ask, is there something you would like to know about it?
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 10:01
Skippy, how many people did Mao slaughter during the great leap forward which took place after he disarmed them?
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 10:21
Here’s a good article that can explain what the facts are with the Great Leap Forward.
http://monthlyreview.org/commentary/did-mao-really-kill-millions-in-the-great-leap-forward/
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 10:42
Here is a good book that tells the truth about your communist hero..
http://www.amazon.com/Maos-Great-Famine-Devastating-Catastrophe/dp/B0044Y1TGC/ref=sr_1_11?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1405521660&sr=1-11&keywords=mao+great+famine
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 10:53
LOL. A book by a known historical revisionist. O.K son, you just go back to drinking the kool-aid as I thought I would try and see if you could actually be taught something but clearly that is not the case. So, thank you for your excellent display of right-wing ignorance but it is now bu-by.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 11:01
So Skippy,
How many people did Mao slaughter in the glorious great leap forward, you never answered that question?
R Gale Pomeroy July 16th, 2014 at 08:40
Maybe you should read your history. The first thing Hitler did was not taking away gns as so many fools like to claim. The first thing he did was to establish a national religion. So if I where you I would be less concerned about the guns that the librals are not after and more concerned with the religion that the conservatives want to establish as our national religion, just like Hitler did.
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 08:43
The first thing Hitler did was establish a national healthcare plan to gain control of the population. The religion Little Adolph established was to compete with the largely independent Lutheran majority which was opposing Adolph’s plan to actually set the state up as god.
Sound familiar?
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:45
Horse Hockey, you are on the wrong site again ! Kookaide, you can look up “how to force breast feed a wild boar” on Faux Gnus under Hannity….have at it !
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:51
The last refuge of a right wing Beck licker.
Cuz….cuz…..Hitler…and um…Benghazi
William July 16th, 2014 at 11:14
“The religion Little Adolph established was to compete with the largely independent Lutheran majority ”
Oh yeah I can totally see how that is just like the ACA.
Well cupcake, you’ve rolled out, Hitler, Mao, Ted Kennedy, Mein Kamph, and Lutherans. So do you actually have anything real to add to this debate, or are you actually a writer for the Blaze?
Drinkingthekoolaide July 16th, 2014 at 14:38
Little Willie the truth and facts are something that eludes you aren’t they.
William July 16th, 2014 at 14:45
Question? Just how many Liberal land ID’s are you up to now?
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:37
Cuz Godwin and choadular inadequacy too!
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:36
“The first thing Hitler did was establish a national healthcare plan to gain control of the population”
No.
The first thing Hitler did was nullify the legislature through the Enabling Act.
The second thing Hitler did was dissolve all labor unions and sanction or ban all opposition parties.
Enjoy your Kool-Aid, Imbecile.
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 09:45
Hitler also drank water and — wait for it — so do you. OMG, you are literally Hitler!
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:41
Kool aide freak, “a vs an” , look it up weenie, you embarrass yourself and anyone remotely considering agreeing with your drivel .
donschneider July 16th, 2014 at 10:38
Obviously koolaide fool, no one has explained to you that Faux Gnus is NOT a news show, it is rightly classified as a big money maker for Rupert Murdoch as an “entertainment” source for the inane.
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:49
Don’t ya’ love it when they spew the Faux news talking points?
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:09
It must be very convenient for you, Don, to ignore icky poo things you don’t like, like the truth, by calling it a bad name and moving on.org. Name one fake news story presented as a news story by Fox News. One. Just one, Don. Mike is right, arguing with you is like arguing with a petulant child.
Skip Patterson July 16th, 2014 at 13:41
By “we need to deal with it in a very permanent way” you don’t mean YOU. You mean armed LEO’s or military.
Eh, whatever, as long as it gets done.
Brent Bushardt August 7th, 2014 at 08:34
Very good Skip! By the way, will you be participating in the “we”
part of “dealing with the threat”? No? oh….gee, I wonder why?
/s
“Eventually the American people are going to have to deal with the
right-wing terrorist threat in America today and we need to deal with it
in a very permanent way.”
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:07
Skip, you make my point and the point of others very well. You are right, this will have to be dealt with in a permanent way. You relish it. Mike shakes his head sadly and accepts it reluctantly. You don’t know that Mike used to be a communist radical and has spent most of his life trying to make up for that. He, more than you, understands what ‘permanent’ means.
Barry Sucks July 16th, 2014 at 03:24
Liberal obama voters are Insane.
cwazycajun July 16th, 2014 at 10:37
and people like you vote for people like mccain palin and mittens romney and eddie munster wanna be paul ryan??? and you call liberals insane??? you better look up the definition of insane cause anyone voteing for those wackjobs have lost all control of there mental capacity
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:05
You try to form a coherent point and have to deal with comments about weight. You try to make a succinct point and you are accused of being stupid. There is no debating those who simply refuse to think. Mike’s response to this site is very apt: Some people you simply can not debate with. They hold irrational points that can only be defended by name calling and silence. Good luck in the Civil War people like you foment by trying to make other people believe what you believe simply by force or inference.
Hope you bring your guns … oops,that’s right, you don’t believe in them. You believe in Government. Read up on how that helped the Chinese, the Germans and the Ukrainians.
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:43
“Liberal obama voters are Insane”
WOW, what a thoughtful and intriguing post.
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 10:44
He’s such a skilled debater.
doc July 16th, 2014 at 05:39
Be liberal in a mental disorder * Its like trying to explain a circle to someone who truly believe it will always be a square.
doc July 16th, 2014 at 05:39
Be liberal in a mental disorder * Its like trying to explain a circle to someone who truly believe it will always be a square.
Tolerance of the left July 16th, 2014 at 06:25
It’s nice how so many of you keep mentioning that he is fat. Very kind. Also, untrue. I don’t know how old that picture is, I’m guessing over 10 years, but Mike is quite slim now. Not that it should matter.
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 10:21
Trollerance of the Left writes: don’t know how old that picture is, I’m guessing over 10 years, but Mike is quite slim now
That’s good hearing. He’s still crazy, though, right?
Tolerance of the left July 16th, 2014 at 06:25
It’s nice how so many of you keep mentioning that he is fat. Very kind. Also, untrue. I don’t know how old that picture is, I’m guessing over 10 years, but Mike is quite slim now. Not that it should matter.
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 10:21
Trollerance of the Left writes: don’t know how old that picture is, I’m guessing over 10 years, but Mike is quite slim now
That’s good hearing. He’s still crazy, though, right?
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 08:37
Liberal Theology 101: Facts are dangerous so, whenever you get the chance, lie, name call and denigrate. Alan believes in the importance of government in all aspects of life while Mike wants to be left alone. Liberals and their theology can not allow a single person to be left alone. You keep backing someone into a corner don’t be surprised if there is a fight; unless you are a liberal and think you have the sole right to be right. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:41
I really can’t believe someone would actually come in here and try to use the Hypocrit foundation (AKA the Koch brothers sounding board) as a source of anything credible.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heritage_Foundation
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:02
Life looks real good when you can pick and choose what not to believe based on mere opinion then NOT suffer the consequences. So, if you choose to disbelieve gravity can you then jump from a building and not fall down? I think, William, your problem is found blatant in the first four words of your post… life is easy for people like you when you can avoid honest debate by sulking and finger pointing.
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 16th, 2014 at 17:46
No, you see, what Mike really wants is a fight. Mike wants to model an America based on his understanding of freedom, the Constitution, etc., irrespective of the messy sausage making of democracy. In no small part, Mike finds the possibility of being a “hero” in a coming armed conflict terribly exciting — certainly much more so than the hum-drum reality of real life.
Mike is a teenage boy in a corpulent, older man’s body. The hot temper of youth, the illogical, sweeping justifications of half-baked notions of “right”, and the bank account to back up this toxic stew with large firearms.
Let stop pretending this man is a “patriot” and start calling a spade a spade: he’s a petulant bully.
Bill Cleveland July 16th, 2014 at 21:19
What are your credentials to talk bad about this old guy? You are still confused about the type of government that this country was founded under. Democracy – 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for lunch?? Please… This country is a Constitutional Republic. Or it is supposed to be at any rate. Until the ignorant among us can define the simple difference between the two forms of government – we’ll have those ignorant, that would be you bud, making rhetorical statements about a multitude of subjects, of which they know nothing not tainted by their own emotional hubris. After which they can congratulate themselves on their self proclaimed wisdom. You are certainly no better or worse than this Mike character- except of course in your own meager mind. And as cowards do – you won’t even sign your name to your drivel. At least old Mike isn’t in hiding.
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:33
Bill asked, “What are [WhamBamThanksBigO!’s] credentials to talk bad about this old guy?”
Well, for starters, he can read.
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 17th, 2014 at 10:30
Ahhh, the “democracy versus Constitutional Republic” line. Once someone brings that up, you know the rest of the thread is going to be dull and painful.
Mike in Illinois July 17th, 2014 at 12:30
Afraid of the meaningful distinction there and a real debate about meaning huh? Imagine that.
Democracy, both direct and representative is and should be a part of our governance but the truth is this – ALL power must be CHECKED so balance remains. This is present throughout our constitution, whether it be three coequal branches or the division of powers therein. It is there even within branches, for example the fact that we have a house and a senate ( the peoples house and the state governments senate). The bill of rights became law with that same premise – to protect the rights of the people by checking government of republican form and the democratic process from assuming powers not delegated to them.
Question – if the Second Amendment does not limit government authority over owning and carrying arms then how does the First limit government, a democratic vote, from deciding what religion you hold (or don’t) what words or how many words you use? What difference do you claim exists? How can one have power but not the other? Also, what is the point, then, of enumerating rights if government holds the power of permission mandate and ban anyway?
Seriously now, think that one through before you answer. If the Second only applies to muskets but not “assault rifles” then wouldn’t the first only apply to type sets but not laser printers…. and if one can say the First holds through time and technology then how cannot the Second as well?
See friend, those answers are found truthfully in the very debate you shun – form of government and what that means to RIGHTS.
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 17th, 2014 at 12:58
Fascinating stuff, indeed, except for the fact that you are “debating” no one. The difference between representative democracy and Constitutional Republics does not pro forma lead to a debate on the Second Amendment, except in the case where that’s what you really wanted to talk about in the first place.
Moreover, you’ve taken the opportunity to jam in a bunch of assumptions about beliefs that I do not, in fact, hold. I don’t think that the Second Amendment applies only to “muskets,” but it was an easy rhetorical layup for you, so you took it.
At the risk now of engaging you in a debate that I wasn’t having, I’ll put this out there. If we assume that the Constitution does, in fact, need interpreting — as you’ve done in several paragraphs above — then what are we to do when once person’s interpretation of the Constitution doesn’t align with another’s? This is the fundamental problem. For many, the answer to this difficult issue is found in the democratic process — painstaking and not-always successful. For others, like Mike and Cliven Bundy, the answer to this difficult issue is threats of violence and reminders that his guns are bigger than yours.
I am confident that you and I could have a reasonable discussion of the many issues you’ve raised. However, my critique is directed toward Mike and those like him and their reliance on the argumentative shortcut of “Well, I have a gun.”
ubtaught July 17th, 2014 at 20:04
Article IV Section IV of the US Constitution guarantees a republic NOT a democracy. It’s only dull and painful to those who refuse to understand the truth and want a form of majoritarianism.
Bill Cleveland July 17th, 2014 at 20:49
And once again the light shines on the ignorant and they beg off the discussion with homilys and whining. Defining the difference between a democracy and a Constitutional Republic would force you remember the short and painful history of every democracy that has ever existed. Democracy is as unsustainable, as lawless and as brutal as communism – for many of the same reasons. That fact probably has a lot to do with why old Mike is so adamant about keeping his guns handy. History tells those that can comprehend that democracy leads to socialism which leads to fascism or communism – which ever the tyrant of the moment favors. People such as yourself are the pathetic reminder of the diminished intellect of this once great country. People like you are the low hanging fruit that the tyrant can dispose of immediately, without having to worry if you are going to object. Once you have served your purpose as a useful idiot to help the tyrant further his cause – you will be a mouth he isn’t going to need to feed, At that point you will be discarded and forgotten. Read the Russian histories, the Greek histories – you will find yourself in there, if you have the mind to comprehend. So – Since you have no rational argument to forward – you refuse to participate in the discussion. That is what makes it so dull and painful for you. You’re only any good at the easy part of the discourse. And again, as cowards do – you won’t even sign your own name to your own drivel..
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 18th, 2014 at 17:24
You seem to be struggling with the fact that I am not arguing about the difference between “democracy” and “constitutional republic.” For the sake of all of our sanities, I concede all of your points on this topic. You win. I surrender entirely on that.
Now, let’s get back to what really matters to me: citizens deciding that, when decisions don’t go their way, it’s time to remind everyone in hearing distance that they have a really big gun. Because no one actually took Mike’s gun away. Nor is anyone actually (in the really real world) threatening to do so. But Mike *feels* like tyranny is upon him and interprets (according to his own sense of things) that recent developments represent intrusions upon his personal liberties.
No problem with that at all — work to change the laws if you don’t like them. But unilaterally deciding that the solution is therefore “weapons!” makes folks like me, who support responsible firearms ownership and the teaching of those principles to the younger generation, look like chumps lumped in with the clowns who take long guns to Chipotle.
ubtaught July 17th, 2014 at 20:07
Name calling is easy. Real thought is much more difficult. Mike has made it clear he DOESN’T want a fight but is willing to defend himself and what he believes in. What do you know about this man other than an old photograph and how easily you latched onto ‘weight’ as you go to guy for denigration and ignorance. You will note that the US Constitution makes no mention of ‘democracy’ and Mike’s history, largely unknown to you, makes your statement above uninformed, arrogant and petulant and slightly childish…
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 08:37
Liberal Theology 101: Facts are dangerous so, whenever you get the chance, lie, name call and denigrate. Alan believes in the importance of government in all aspects of life while Mike wants to be left alone. Liberals and their theology can not allow a single person to be left alone. You keep backing someone into a corner don’t be surprised if there is a fight; unless you are a liberal and think you have the sole right to be right. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaE98w1KZ-c
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:41
I really can’t believe someone would actually come in here and try to use the Hypocrit foundation (AKA the Koch brothers sounding board) as a source of anything credible.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heritage_Foundation
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:02
Life looks real good when you can pick and choose what not to believe based on mere opinion then NOT suffer the consequences. So, if you choose to disbelieve gravity can you then jump from a building and not fall down? I think, William, your problem is found blatant in the first four words of your post… life is easy for people like you when you can avoid honest debate by sulking and finger pointing.
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 16th, 2014 at 17:46
No, you see, what Mike really wants is a fight. Mike wants to model an America based on his understanding of freedom, the Constitution, etc., irrespective of the messy sausage making of democracy. In no small part, Mike finds the possibility of being a “hero” in a coming armed conflict terribly exciting — certainly much more so than the hum-drum reality of real life.
Mike is a teenage boy in a corpulent, older man’s body. The hot temper of youth, the illogical, sweeping justifications of half-baked notions of “right”, and the bank account to back up this toxic stew with large firearms.
Let stop pretending this man is a “patriot” and start calling a spade a spade: he’s a petulant bully.
Bill Cleveland July 16th, 2014 at 21:19
What are your credentials to talk bad about this old guy? You are still confused about the type of government that this country was founded under. Democracy – 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what’s for lunch?? Please… This country is a Constitutional Republic. Or it is supposed to be at any rate. Until the ignorant among us can define the simple difference between the two forms of government – we’ll have those ignorant, that would be you bud, making rhetorical statements about a multitude of subjects, of which they know nothing not tainted by their own emotional hubris. After which they can congratulate themselves on their self proclaimed wisdom. You are certainly no better or worse than this Mike character- except of course in your own meager mind. And as cowards do – you won’t even sign your name to your drivel. At least old Mike isn’t in hiding.
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:33
Bill asked, “What are [WhamBamThanksBigO!’s] credentials to talk bad about this old guy?”
Well, for starters, he can read.
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 17th, 2014 at 10:30
Ahhh, the “democracy versus Constitutional Republic” line. Once someone brings that up, you know the rest of the thread is going to be dull and painful.
Mike in Illinois July 17th, 2014 at 12:30
Afraid of the meaningful distinction there and a real debate about meaning huh? Imagine that.
Democracy, both direct and representative is and should be a part of our governance but the truth is this – ALL power must be CHECKED so balance remains. This is present throughout our constitution, whether it be three coequal branches or the division of powers therein. It is there even within branches, for example the fact that we have a house and a senate ( the peoples house and the state governments senate). The bill of rights became law with that same premise – to protect the rights of the people by checking government of republican form and the democratic process from assuming powers not delegated to them.
Question – if the Second Amendment does not limit government authority over owning and carrying arms then how does the First limit government, a democratic vote, from deciding what religion you hold (or don’t) what words or how many words you use? What difference do you claim exists? How can one have power but not the other? Also, what is the point, then, of enumerating rights if government holds the power of permission mandate and ban anyway?
Seriously now, think that one through before you answer. If the Second only applies to muskets but not “assault rifles” then wouldn’t the first only apply to type sets but not laser printers…. and if one can say the First holds through time and technology then how cannot the Second as well?
See friend, those answers are found truthfully in the very debate you shun – form of government and what that means to RIGHTS.
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 17th, 2014 at 12:58
Fascinating stuff, indeed, except for the fact that you are “debating” no one. The difference between representative democracy and Constitutional Republics does not pro forma lead to a debate on the Second Amendment, except in the case where that’s what you really wanted to talk about in the first place.
Moreover, you’ve taken the opportunity to jam in a bunch of assumptions about beliefs that I do not, in fact, hold. I don’t think that the Second Amendment applies only to “muskets,” but it was an easy rhetorical layup for you, so you took it.
At the risk now of engaging you in a debate that I wasn’t having, I’ll put this out there. If we assume that the Constitution does, in fact, need interpreting — as you’ve done in several paragraphs above — then what are we to do when once person’s interpretation of the Constitution doesn’t align with another’s? This is the fundamental problem. For many, the answer to this difficult issue is found in the democratic process — painstaking and not-always successful. For others, like Mike and Cliven Bundy, the answer to this difficult issue is threats of violence and reminders that his guns are bigger than yours.
I am confident that you and I could have a reasonable discussion of the many issues you’ve raised. However, my critique is directed toward Mike and those like him and their reliance on the argumentative shortcut of “Well, I have a gun.”
ubtaught July 17th, 2014 at 20:04
Article IV Section IV of the US Constitution guarantees a republic NOT a democracy. It’s only dull and painful to those who refuse to understand the truth and want a form of majoritarianism.
Bill Cleveland July 17th, 2014 at 20:49
And once again the light shines on the ignorant and they beg off the discussion with homilys and whining. Defining the difference between a democracy and a Constitutional Republic would force you remember the short and painful history of every democracy that has ever existed. Democracy is as unsustainable, as lawless and as brutal as communism – for many of the same reasons. That fact probably has a lot to do with why old Mike is so adamant about keeping his guns handy. History tells those that can comprehend that democracy leads to socialism which leads to fascism or communism – which ever the tyrant of the moment favors. People such as yourself are the pathetic reminder of the diminished intellect of this once great country. People like you are the low hanging fruit that the tyrant can dispose of immediately, without having to worry if you are going to object. Once you have served your purpose as a useful idiot to help the tyrant further his cause – you will be a mouth he isn’t going to need to feed, At that point you will be discarded and forgotten. Read the Russian histories, the Greek histories – you will find yourself in there, if you have the mind to comprehend. So – Since you have no rational argument to forward – you refuse to participate in the discussion. That is what makes it so dull and painful for you. You’re only any good at the easy part of the discourse. And again, as cowards do – you won’t even sign your own name to your own drivel..
WhamBamThanksBigO! July 18th, 2014 at 17:24
You seem to be struggling with the fact that I am not arguing about the difference between “democracy” and “constitutional republic.” For the sake of all of our sanities, I concede all of your points on this topic. You win. I surrender entirely on that.
Now, let’s get back to what really matters to me: citizens deciding that, when decisions don’t go their way, it’s time to remind everyone in hearing distance that they have a really big gun. Because no one actually took Mike’s gun away. Nor is anyone actually (in the really real world) threatening to do so. But Mike *feels* like tyranny is upon him and interprets (according to his own sense of things) that recent developments represent intrusions upon his personal liberties.
No problem with that at all — work to change the laws if you don’t like them. But unilaterally deciding that the solution is therefore “weapons!” makes folks like me, who support responsible firearms ownership and the teaching of those principles to the younger generation, look like chumps lumped in with the clowns who take long guns to Chipotle.
ubtaught July 17th, 2014 at 20:07
Name calling is easy. Real thought is much more difficult. Mike has made it clear he DOESN’T want a fight but is willing to defend himself and what he believes in. What do you know about this man other than an old photograph and how easily you latched onto ‘weight’ as you go to guy for denigration and ignorance. You will note that the US Constitution makes no mention of ‘democracy’ and Mike’s history, largely unknown to you, makes your statement above uninformed, arrogant and petulant and slightly childish…
Earl Scheib July 16th, 2014 at 09:05
By Colmes logic if a genocidal maniac was elected as part of due process in a representative government then we would have to see it through until the next election, and in all likelihood because of this mindset Alan Colmes would peaceable dig his own grave and hand his killer the weapon.
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 09:42
Wrrong.
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 14:40
Nothing like coming out to the kitchen in the morning to put on the coffee, and finding these guys scuttling away, back into the baseboards, when you turn on the light, huh?
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 14:44
I blame Alan. He’s a troll magnet. Ever see his twitter timeline? OMFG!
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 10:16
He Who Will Paint Any Car for $39.95 writes: By Colmes logic if a genocidal maniac was elected as part of due process in a representative government then we would have to see it through until the next election
Well, isn’t that what we did with Dubya?
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:36
“By Colmes logic if a genocidal maniac was elected as part of due process in a representative government then we would have to see it through until the next election”
Would you mind posting a link to the sound byte or video that shows Alan saying that?
I can’t seem to find it.
Otherwise you’d be using that sad Limbaugh trick, IE, what he REALLY means/says/thinks/believes, etc. That only works on the gap toothed mouth breathers, and I KNOW you wouldn’t try that here.
Thanx in advance for a link to that sound byte.
Earl Scheib July 17th, 2014 at 09:32
There is a lot you can’t seem to find William
William July 17th, 2014 at 10:49
So you made it up?
No surprise there. Come back when you have some evidence that supports your accusations
Earl Scheib July 17th, 2014 at 17:25
Nothing surprises you Will-i-am and by the tone of your responses you are difficult to reason with…..logic isn’t so much what you say as it is a means of reasoning. In a perfect world where we all follow the rules and treat each other nicely Alan Combs idea of non-violence and following procedures works quite well. But when people cheat and skirt the system people quit believing in the system and in time reason/logic gets thrown out the window.
After your degrading reference to ‘gap toothed mouth breathers’ I would reason that you feel a since of superiority over the people as you discribed. It’s is like calling someone fat.
Have you ever ventured out in the world to learn more about these people you ridicule? My guess is no, you basis is what you watch on TV and if you have it is with a closed mind…..and the same can be said for many of them who might think of you as a metro sexual man child who lives in his moms basement and works the counter at Subway.
William July 17th, 2014 at 23:27
logic isn’t so much what you say as it is a means of reasoning.
Says the guy who professes to know what a talk show host is thinking.
Yes I have ventured out into the world. 20 plus years service and 11 deployments. Further I find you interest in my sexual preference or demeanor a little creepy.
So I’ll just close by wishing you well, and being a little disappointed that I vaguely hoped a right wing Limbaugh licker would (for once) post some sort of proof to his inane contentions.
Oh..and…about your statement ” your degrading reference to ‘gap toothed mouth breathers’ I would reason that you feel a since of superiority over the people as you described”.
Uh….YEAH.
Carl Stevenson July 16th, 2014 at 11:46
Yea … Like Hitler was duly elected by the German people. Obama has been different. Just because a tyrant managed to con enough dimwits to get elected doesn’t mean we have to tolerate the tyranny.
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:32
Nice Godwin ya got there, KKKarl.
Serendipity July 16th, 2014 at 09:05
By Colmes logic if a genocidal maniac was elected as part of due process in a representative government then we would have to see it through until the next election, or spend months, possibly years thumbing through legalese trying oust the genocidal manioc, all the while the genocidal maniac continues to murder masses of people while you are attempting out them in a legal and non-vbiolent manner…. and in all likelihood because of this mindset Alan Colmes would peaceable dig his own grave and hand his killer the weapon.
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 09:42
Wrong.
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 14:40
Nothing like coming out to the kitchen in the morning to put on the coffee, and finding these guys scuttling away, back into the baseboards, when you turn on the light, huh?
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 14:44
I blame Alan. He’s a troll magnet. Ever see his twitter timeline? OMFG!
ChrisVosburg July 16th, 2014 at 10:16
He Who Will Paint Any Car for $39.95 writes: By Colmes logic if a genocidal maniac was elected as part of due process in a representative government then we would have to see it through until the next election
Well, isn’t that what we did with Dubya?
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:36
“By Colmes logic if a genocidal maniac was elected as part of due process in a representative government then we would have to see it through until the next election”
Would you mind posting a link to the sound byte or video that shows Alan saying that?
I can’t seem to find it.
Otherwise you’d be using that sad Limbaugh trick, IE, what he REALLY means/says/thinks/believes, etc. That only works on the gap toothed mouth breathers, and I KNOW you wouldn’t try that here.
Thanx in advance for a link to that sound byte.
Serendipity July 17th, 2014 at 09:32
There is a lot you can’t seem to find William
William July 17th, 2014 at 10:49
So you made it up?
No surprise there. Come back when you have some evidence that supports your accusations
Serendipity July 17th, 2014 at 17:25
Nothing surprises you Will-i-am and by the tone of your responses you are difficult to reason with…..logic isn’t so much what you say as it is a means of reasoning. In a perfect world where we all follow the rules and treat each other nicely Alan Combs idea of non-violence and following procedures works quite well. But when people cheat and skirt the system people quit believing in the system and in time reason/logic gets thrown out the window.
After your degrading reference to ‘gap toothed mouth breathers’ I would reason that you feel a since of superiority over the people as you discribed. It’s is like calling someone fat.
Have you ever ventured out in the world to learn more about these people you ridicule? My guess is no, you basis is what you watch on TV and if you have it is with a closed mind…..and the same can be said for many of them who might think of you as a metro sexual man child who lives in his moms basement and works the counter at Subway.
William July 17th, 2014 at 23:27
logic isn’t so much what you say as it is a means of reasoning.
Says the guy who professes to know what a talk show host is thinking.
Yes I have ventured out into the world. 20 plus years service and 11 deployments. Further I find you interest in my sexual preference or demeanor a little creepy.
So I’ll just close by wishing you well, and being a little disappointed that I vaguely hoped a right wing Limbaugh licker would (for once) post some sort of proof to his inane contentions.
Oh..and…about your statement ” your degrading reference to ‘gap toothed mouth breathers’ I would reason that you feel a since of superiority over the people as you described”.
Uh….YEAH.
Carl Stevenson July 16th, 2014 at 11:46
Yea … Like Hitler was duly elected by the German people. Obama has been different. Just because a tyrant managed to con enough dimwits to get elected doesn’t mean we have to tolerate the tyranny.
Orrin Cratch July 17th, 2014 at 09:32
Nice Godwin ya got there, KKKarl.
cwazycajun July 16th, 2014 at 10:37
and people like you vote for people like mccain palin and mittens romney and eddie munster wanna be paul ryan??? and you call liberals insane??? you better look up the definition of insane cause anyone voteing for those wackjobs have lost all control of there mental capacity
ubtaught July 16th, 2014 at 15:05
You try to form a coherent point and have to deal with comments about weight. You try to make a succinct point and you are accused of being stupid. There is no debating those who simply refuse to think. Mike’s response to this site is very apt: Some people you simply can not debate with. They hold irrational points that can only be defended by name calling and silence. Good luck in the Civil War people like you foment by trying to make other people believe what you believe simply by force or inference.
Hope you bring your guns … oops,that’s right, you don’t believe in them. You believe in Government. Read up on how that helped the Chinese, the Germans and the Ukrainians.
William July 16th, 2014 at 10:43
“Liberal obama voters are Insane”
WOW, what a thoughtful and intriguing post.
Anomaly 100 July 16th, 2014 at 10:44
He’s such a skilled debater.
labman57 July 16th, 2014 at 10:45
These government-hating, gun-toting, faux patriotic nut jobs are little more than self-serving, tea-chugging, mayhem-inciting, conspiracy-addicted anarchists and seditionists eager to implement “Second Amendment remedies” to solve their differences with the Obama administration.
Hemidemisemiquaver July 16th, 2014 at 19:08
eager to implement “Second Amendment remedies”
I tend to disagree. They like to shout that they want revolution. None of them will ever actually go through with it. Revolutions are hard and people die during them. Every one of the people you refer to have zero interest in doing the hard work necessary for a revolution.
They don’t even want other people to revolt. Because, if you revolt, that means disruptions to the fabric of society. That means possible disruptions to the delivery of their Social Security checks or getting Medicare to replace their broken Hoverounds or traveling to Sizzler for Saturday night dinner out.
Besides, it makes ’em feel manly, sitting in their Barcalounger, firing off strongly-worded missives into cyberspace.
Mike in Illinois July 17th, 2014 at 15:03
Here again you are mistaken. Since when do you get to establish the intent of another? You say we shout FOR revolution, when in reality we scream warnings so it doesn’t happen!
When your dad taught you his to use a knife, or mom or grandpa or whomever, didn’t they teach you to cut away from your body instead of toward it? Of course! Why? Well, so you are far less likely to cut yourself if you slip. Was grandad calling you to cut yourself or was he warning you of the possibility of danger because you were making a mistake cutting toward your body?
Look man, we warn AGAINST danger, not lobby FOR it. Now that it’s been overtly explained to you, future claims that we call FOR civil war are easily demonstrated as known lies.
Now it’s your choice to either tell the truth or not. Please choose wisely.
Hemidemisemiquaver July 17th, 2014 at 17:34
“Look man, we warn AGAINST danger, not lobby FOR it. Now that it’s been overtly explained to you, future claims that we call FOR civil war are easily demonstrated as known lies.”
Of course, your first sentence is false, since many of your ilk are calling for civil war (or revolution). So any future claims I make about your guys frothing at the mouth for civil war are true. Overt enough for you?
Indeed, the truth is that you do not want civil war. What you want to do is call for civil war. You want the thrill of being a “patriot.” You want the thrill of being in a militia and defending We, the People from “tyranny.” You want to go out to the backwoods somewhere and prance about playing soldier/Special Forces/ninja. After all, you ARE a militia member. However, you do not want actual civil war.
No, none of you will never revolt because that means hardship and the possibility that you might die. None of you even want others to go out and revolt. It might disrupt the smooth flow of a civil society and disrupt going out to dinner or visiting friends and family. Civil war might destroy the electrical grid and then you couldn’t go on the Internet and be all patriot-like.
You’re not a hypocrite. You’re not even a coward. And, for sure you are not a special snowflake. You’re just a loon addicted to the endorphin high you get from the fantasy of going into action to “save” the country from “tyranny” and to “protect” the Constitution. In the end, you’re just a sad person. My advice: get a cat.
Mike in Illinois July 22nd, 2014 at 14:52
You don’t see your own failure there do you? If someone is calling FOR revolution and civil war, they cannot be my “ilk” because they are calling FOR what I’m arguing AGAINST, what I warn of in attempt to AVOID. Indeed, not only are they not my “ilk” they are quite the opposite.
Care to try again hemi? This time, let TRUTH be your guide. And follow it.
Hemidemisemiquaver July 22nd, 2014 at 15:40
Your ilk argue “against” revolution by calling for it. So, so many times, we read accounts of people like Vanderboegh saying that you might need to vote with your guns. That’s a call for revolution. Back in the day it was “soap box, ballot box, bullet box.” Sharron Angle is famous for her “Second Amendment solution.” Sarah Palin put gunsights on a variety of Democrats up for re-election and then called them something silly (I forgot what it was). There are your people, Mike. You own them.
What’s funny to me, all your “proof” aside, is that the calls for revolution are (1) couched carefully so as not to be an actual call for revolution (a “dog whistle” in other words) and (2) almost invariably accompanied with the call for money.
The truth is clear. None of you are going to revolt any time, ever. All your technical “arguments” like Heller vs DC is of no account because nothing like you desire will ever happen. The sad reality is that the guns laws will probably never be tightened and a few of the more unstable misguided folk of your type will shoot a few people over the next few years.
No action (like the recent one by the Millers) will ever result in a revolution. And, none of your leadership will ever actually implement a revolution. No, they just want your money. (I enjoy calling on wingnuts to send all their money to some wingnut like Vanderboegh. Didn’t do it? Why do you hate America? I bet you know Vanderboegh and all the others are 100% grifters.)
That is the truth. BTW, the large amount of unnecessary capitalization you use is a hallmark of wingnut writing. I can be dismissive of your calls to go educate myself because you’re on a far out fringe, way out of the mainstream of American thinking. I don’t have to rebut your “TRUTH” (as you so wingnut-ly put it) because I already know the truth and it has made me free.
Have a nice life. Don’t shoot anybody.
Hemidemisemiquaver July 22nd, 2014 at 18:35
I thought I’d add a bit more.
The Illinois State Constitution applies to Illinois. If it says everyone is a militia member, then so be it. For the state of Illinois only. You implied that some states do not have such a clause.
So much for your all-inclusive “all citizens are in the militia.”
You mentioned felons and the mentally defective. They are all citizens. They are all in the militia and should all be allowed to operate as militia members, including owning and using guns.
All children are militia members and, as such, should be allowed to be armed at all times, for the security of the State. After all, it’s right there in the Second Amendment. All children should be allowed to carry guns to school and, to defend the state, make their own decisions about where and where to discharge their weapons.
As an “member” of the militia, do you train with other recognized members of the state militia? Do you report for duty? (I do not mean go off to the mountains for “training.” You know what I mean.) Are you paid by the state? Do you use state-provided materials?
Here’s a hot one: what do you think will happen to you, if you report for “duty” when the Illinois National Guard is called up? Do you think you’ll be allowed to carry a weapon and participate in their actions?
Of course won’t be allowed to participate. You don’t want anything of the kind. You just want a justification to wave your guns around in public and act all militia-y. However, you will never, ever carry your guns out on an operation to defend the state or the country. Knowing that gives you the courage to cite Supreme Court decisions, knowing you’ll never be called to fulfill what you think they allow you to do.
Just another Internet tough guy.
Don’t shoot any one, especially a family member. Your guns offer no protection to you, your family or the state. In fact, the odds of an accidental death caused by you or a family member are way higher in your home than in my home.
Brent Bushardt August 7th, 2014 at 08:24
you are so very wrong:
US Code Title 10 Section 311.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311
in part:
(a) The militia of the United States consists of….
(b)…. (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Hemidemisemiquaver August 7th, 2014 at 10:31
Hey, I just responded to this. Did you double-post? In any event, I might suggest you stop “telling me off.” Although, I must admit that pointing and laughing at the likes of y’all is rather fun.
Say, why haven’t you gone to Texas, to “patrol” the border? There’s an “invasion” going on and you need to “protect” the Constitution.
See what I mean? You’re only good for mocking because your “ideas” about militia topics are so profoundly silly. Yes, yes, yes, you cite stuff, but it doesn’t mean what you claim it means. Since you will never be convinced you are in error, the only recourse is to either ignore or mock. I choose mocking.
Texas, Brent. Go there. “Patrol” for hours in 100+ degree heat. Get heat stroke. Have fun.
Frickin’ loser.