In case you missed it, NewsMax called for a US military coup.
This was posted yesterday, and then instead of retracted, it was "vanished" via deletion some time this morning. Simply put, conservative lol-news-lol site Newsmax.com had one of their regular op-ed columnists write a piece that called the US military to mutiny.
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America's military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the "Obama problem." Don't dismiss it as unrealistic.
...
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a "family intervention," with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama's exponentially accelerating agenda for "fundamental change" toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama's radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible. [Newsmax.com, 9/29/09]
This is just the latest in a ever-growing trend of violent rhetoric that's coming from conservatives.
Quote:
Jim Quinn tells U.S. troops: Obama "is gonna get you killed." Discussing rules of engagement in Afghanistan, Quinn stated on his radio show, "The only reason you put military anywhere is to win and win as quickly as you can, as ruthlessly as you can, because mercifully it will be over quick, instead of turning it into a meat grinder. I'm looking at -- guys, look, I love you all who go over there and serve, but I gotta tell you right now, run for your life, get out, this guy is gonna get you killed. Man, these people are scary." [Clear Channel's The War Room with Quinn & Rose, 9/29/09]
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Last edited by CrazyLittle : 09-30-2009 at 11:05 PM.
I can recall 8 years of people talking about Bush getting killed, and then saying 'Oh, if Bush gets killed, then we'll have Cheney! That's worse'. So clearly, this isn't a left vs. right discussion, like CrazyLittle would have us believe (Unless his point is that both sides talk about the President being killed).
Oh, and here's the full text that CL left out. How convenient
Quote:
There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Obama problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.
America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:
* Officers swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
* Top military officers can see the Constitution they are sworn to defend being trampled as American institutions and enterprises are nationalized.
* They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, under President Barack Obama, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election, in which he will surely seek continuation in office.
* They can see that the economy — ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation — is financially reliant on foreign lender governments.
* They can see this president waging undeclared war on the intelligence community, without whose rigorous and independent functions the armed services are rendered blind in an ever-more hostile world overseas and at home.
* They can see the dismantling of defenses against missiles targeted at this nation by avowed enemies, even as America’s troop strength is allowed to sag.
* They can see the horror of major warfare erupting simultaneously in two, and possibly three, far-flung theaters before America can react in time.
* They can see the nation’s safety and their own military establishments and honor placed in jeopardy as never before.
So, if you are one of those observant military professionals, what do you do?
Wait until this president bungles into losing the war in Afghanistan, and Pakistan’s arsenal of nuclear bombs falls into the hands of militant Islam?
Wait until Israel is forced to launch air strikes on Iran’s nuclear-bomb plants, and the Middle East explodes, destabilizing or subjugating the Free World?
What happens if the generals Obama sent to win the Afghan war are told by this president (who now says, “I’m not interested in victory”) that they will be denied troops they must have to win? Do they follow orders they cannot carry out, consistent with their oath of duty? Do they resign en masse?
Or do they soldier on, hoping the 2010 congressional elections will reverse the situation? Do they dare gamble the national survival on such political whims?
Anyone who imagines that those thoughts are not weighing heavily on the intellect and conscience of America’s military leadership is lost in a fool’s fog.
Will the day come when patriotic general and flag officers sit down with the president, or with those who control him, and work out the national equivalent of a “family intervention,” with some form of limited, shared responsibility?
Imagine a bloodless coup to restore and defend the Constitution through an interim administration that would do the serious business of governing and defending the nation. Skilled, military-trained, nation-builders would replace accountability-challenged, radical-left commissars. Having bonded with his twin teleprompters, the president would be detailed for ceremonial speech-making.
Military intervention is what Obama’s exponentially accelerating agenda for “fundamental change” toward a Marxist state is inviting upon America. A coup is not an ideal option, but Obama’s radical ideal is not acceptable or reversible.
Unthinkable? Then think up an alternative, non-violent solution to the Obama problem. Just don’t shrug and say, “We can always worry about that later.”
In the 2008 election, that was the wistful, self-indulgent, indifferent reliance on abnegation of personal responsibility that has sunk the nation into this morass.
How can you say violent rhetoric in one breath, and quote an article talking about a bloodless coup ?
__________________
“The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government” - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." – Robert Heinlein
Closed-bolt, because I can.
Repetition and Ridicule, the biggest tools of the Liberal.
He claims the article 'called the military to mutiny'. It was basically discussing a contingency in the quote 'remote [..] although gaining [..] last resort' situtation. Yes, Newsmax is trying to incite a mutiny!
Where did you pull this from, CL? democraticunderground.com? lol.
How can you say violent rhetoric in one breath, and quote an article talking about a bloodless coup ?
Bloodless coup? Yeah right.
The "violent rhetoric" is referring to the overall trend. There's plenty more where those two citations came from:
Quote:
Beck speaks for one third of the nation: "[Y]ou will have to shoot me in the forehead before you take away my gun" and "before I acquiesce and be silent." During the July 30 edition of his radio show, Beck warned "ACORN, GE, Obama, SEIU" that "you are awakening a sleeping giant, and I have nothing to do with it" and that "America is waking up. You know the American Revolution took place with 12 percent of the population? Twelve. Are you telling me there is not 30 percent of this population that you will have to shoot me in the forehead before I let somebody into my house to tell me how to raise my children; you will have to shoot me in the forehead before you take away my gun; you will have to shoot me in the forehead before I acquiesce and be silent." Beck further stated:
They cannot move on these things, because they are building a machine that will crush the entrepreneurial sprit and the freedom that our Founding Fathers designed. This machine, whatever it is they are building, will crush it. Do not let them build another piece.
So while I turn away, I want to make sure that I have at least 10 million eyes watching -- watching every single move they are making.
[...]
We know why they're doing what they're doing. You need to do what you need to do, and as long as that is peaceful, we will save our country. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 7/30/09]
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Last edited by CrazyLittle : 09-30-2009 at 11:32 PM.
Hey, YOU quoted it. If you wanted to show emphasis elsewhere, why the hell did you quote that? It really kills the argument
__________________
“The several states composing the United States of America are not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their general government” - Thomas Jefferson
"There is no worse tyranny than to force a man to pay for what he does not want merely because you think it would be good for him." – Robert Heinlein
Closed-bolt, because I can.
Repetition and Ridicule, the biggest tools of the Liberal.
The "violent rhetoric" is referring to the overall trend. There's plenty more where those two citations came from:
Quote:
Beck speaks for one third of the nation: "[Y]ou will have to shoot me in the forehead before you take away my gun" and "before I acquiesce and be silent." During the July 30 edition of his radio show, Beck warned "ACORN, GE, Obama, SEIU" that "you are awakening a sleeping giant, and I have nothing to do with it" and that "America is waking up. You know the American Revolution took place with 12 percent of the population? Twelve. Are you telling me there is not 30 percent of this population that you will have to shoot me in the forehead before I let somebody into my house to tell me how to raise my children; you will have to shoot me in the forehead before you take away my gun; you will have to shoot me in the forehead before I acquiesce and be silent." Beck further stated:
They cannot move on these things, because they are building a machine that will crush the entrepreneurial sprit and the freedom that our Founding Fathers designed. This machine, whatever it is they are building, will crush it. Do not let them build another piece.
So while I turn away, I want to make sure that I have at least 10 million eyes watching -- watching every single move they are making.
[...]
We know why they're doing what they're doing. You need to do what you need to do, and as long as that is peaceful, we will save our country. [Premiere Radio Networks' The Glenn Beck Program, 7/30/09]
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Wait, someone is proposing that a charismatic general come back from abroad with the army and stage a military take over of a faltering super power nation, usurping command from a populist politician?
Wait, someone is proposing that a charismatic general come back from abroad with the army and stage a military take over of a faltering super power nation, usurping command from a populist politician?
Important point, no reputable or legitimate (hell, no illegitimate) "liberal" news source called for a military overthrow of the US Government during the Bush administration.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha-Italian-Stallion
Well if newsmax calls for it.....
who's newsmax?
Also, where do you get your headlines?
Ran into that one on Newsmax's front page last night while I was chasing down scum's bogus links
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnakePlissken
CL, you do realize Fox News is not the spokesperson for anyone who isn't a liberal?
This is more than just fox news. Non-fox example:
Quote:
RedState's Erickson: "At what point do the people ... march down to their state legislator's house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp?" In a March 31 post on RedState.com, while discussing a Washington county's ban on certain kinds of dishwasher detergent, managing editor Erick Erickson wrote of politicians: "At what point do the people tell the politicians to go to hell? At what point do they get off the couch, march down to their state legislator's house, pull him outside, and beat him to a bloody pulp for being an idiot?" Erickson later added: "Were I in Washington State, I'd be cleaning my gun right about now waiting to protect my property from the coming riots or the government apparatchiks coming to enforce nonsensical legislation." [RedState.com, 3/31/09]
apunkjunkie - "Sorry to burst your bubble, but less than 1% of the southern citizens owned slaves and out of that, most were treated fairly well. So no, slavery wasn't a big issue."
Last edited by CrazyLittle : 10-01-2009 at 02:27 AM.
There will be no coup. There's no money or profit in a coup. People are getting more and more delusional by the minute. Obama is driving people crazy.
It's ****ing awesome to watch.
__________________
He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion. - Glenn Beck
In case you missed it, NewsMax called for a US military coup.
