In reaction, the Dallas Morning News has withdrawn its endorsement of Broden.
Ah, so the GOP is welcoming traitors into its ranks now.
“Now”? You mean you missed all the other ones?
I think one of the prevailing tenents of elements of the Tea Party movement is that if they can’t enact change through legislative channels and electing their people in, they’d stage violent revolts of the government. For better or for worse, Broden is channeling these feelings. It is just another indication that a Tea Party vs. GOP Establishment war is starting in many areas, Texas included.
If these guys want Civil War so bad, stop talking and just do it. Get off your asses, stop acting like poseurs and let the fighting commence. Just let us know how that shootey, insurrectioney stuff works out for ya.
As always, I would welcome the opportunity to watch these yahoos try to take on the US military. Bring it on, traitors. I’ve got five minutes to kill. That’s about how long your revolution would last.
And if there ever were to be a battle, despite all the talk of a revolution they espouse, I think you’d see Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Michelle Malkin, Rush Limbaugh, and Sarah Palin absent from the battlefield. But yeah, I think it’s safe to say these last two years have been a very interesting turn of events in the Republican Party.
It’s something of an extension of the shout-down strategy of the health care debate.
Based on discussions I’ve read on other boards, they seem to think the soldiers would be on their side.
You have a wonderful way with words.
And the snark, too.
Bravo.
To be fair, the head of the Dallas County Republican Election Committee, and Ken Emanuelson, a leading tea party organizer in Dallas do not agree with his statement. The first called the comment ‘disappointing’, and that he will be discussing the matter with the campaign staff. The other said that he did not disagree with the “philosophical point” that people had the right to resist a tyrannical government, but that the situation is not anywhere near that point.
That’s about as sensible as I could have hoped for, particularly in this climate. Sadly, things have gotten to the point where I was a little surprised at the push-back from his end of the political spectrum.
I know, but this is as absurd a fantasy as can be imagined.
So what do you think the proper response to Broden’s statement should be?
Do you agree with Broden’s statement? Or do you think that joebuck20 should just shut up and say nothing?
I haven’t been to church since I was a kid, so I’m a bit rusty, but I’m wondering which part of the New Testament allows for violent revolution?
You are playing with fire, sir. The whole point of democracy is not to eliminate conflict or disagreement but to manage it peacefully. This is not Iraq. This is not Afghanistan. This is not the former Yugoslavia. This is America. Such incendiary talk is highly irresponsible. You have shamed your party, your religion and your country. If you refuse to apologize, then your party and laity should do it for you.
Shame: have you any?
Well, there are some lines in the gospels that can be read that way. Not that Jesus was republican, capitalist, or conservative.
Usually, people point to this quote. I think this is cherry-picking one violent quote out of context to contradict a peaceful message, but for some people, confirmation of their existing beliefs is what they’re looking for, not actual spiritual guidance.
Who would trade a sword for a cloak? Sounds like a lousy deal to me.
Not if you stab the guy and take your cloak back.
No I meant the guy with the sword. Why would he trade it for a lousy cloak? I say throw in a horse if you want my sword.