Patterico's Pontifications


Can You Imagine if Someone From the Tea Party Said Something Like This? (Example #27,342)

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 5:45 am

[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.  Or by Twitter @AaronWorthing.]

Via Pajamas Media we get video of a man saying the following:

One of the speakers said the solution is nonviolent movement. No, my friend. I’ll give you two examples: French Revolution, and Indian so-called Revolution.

Gandhi, Gandhi today is, with respect to all of you, Gandhi today is a tumor that the ruling class is using constantly to mislead us. French Revolution made fundamental transformation. But it was bloody.

India, the result of Gandhi, is 600 million people living in maximum poverty.

So, ultimately, the bourgeosie won’t go without violent means. Revolution! Yes, revolution that is led by the working class.

Long live revolution! Long live socialism!

Yeah, you are right.  Mind you, we are nowhere near true revolutionary violence like you fantasize about, but if it comes down to that, you are not going to take our property, our freedom and our right to pursue happiness.  As William Wallace didn’t actually say: “they may take our lives, but they’ll never take our freedom!”

And let me clue you into something else, Marxy-boy: there are more of us than there are of you.  And we practice our Second Amendment rights.  We are nowhere near any situation where there is any need for private violence, but let me suggest that you in the Occupy Wall Street movement adopt a non-violent approach if for no other reason than the fact you will lose.  Badly.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

34 Responses to “Can You Imagine if Someone From the Tea Party Said Something Like This? (Example #27,342)”

  1. I have many, many friends who are so enthusiastic about the Occupy Wall Street movement. These are the same people, of course, who exclaimed how “scary” and “violent” TEA party rallies were.

    I would love to believe that the media will show these violent nutjobs often, forcing people like my friends to denounce violence.

    But the media will cover this up, as it does. All they care about is whether there is a D or an R involved.

    And this image says it all:

    Simon Jester (615040)

  2. All this interest in Occupy Wallstreet?

    Haven’t any of you been to Berkeley or San Francisco?

    AZ Bob (ffd720)

  3. I just wish that they would occupy a shower from time to time, based on how they appear.

    Simon Jester (c8876d)

  4. Well said, Aaron — I was nearly cheering as I read your final paragraph.

    [note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]

    ClassicFilm (131cd5)

  5. I agree, they will lose badly. That explains why the movement didn’t last an entire day here in nearby Houston, even our liberal Democrat Mayor wouldn’t continue to put up with these smelly squatters. And we have concealed carry here as well. Many of my lady friends already have their license and I guess it is time for me to take the mandatory classes as well. Always prepared in our home but I now believe it is time to be prepared everywhere.

    Texas Mom 2012 (cee89f)

  6. In 18th century France the underclass had very little opportunity for advancement, regardless of an individual’s talent and level of skill.

    In 21st century America the working class have opportunity for advancement where the main impediment is the individual’s level of laziness and reliance on the state to provide support.

    Icy (ea0b42)

  7. I would again like to quote the great military philosopher Lando “… this will be the shortest offensive of all time.”

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  8. If the OWS criticized geithners riches they would be stabbed in the back and thrown under the lefts bus.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  9. Or Kerry, or Obama, or Pelosi, or etc.

    Scott Jacobs (d027b8)

  10. As we used to say in the ‘Nam, “Come get some, motherf**ker.”

    mojo (8096f2)

  11. Back in the ’60’s, the commies were telling us that they only had to control 5 percent of the population in order to take over a country. We are far beyond that statistic here with our Organizer In Chief’s commie friends. If they want to give it a try in a country with a 2nd ammendment, they can, but I hate to tell them that it is not going to work.

    TimothyJ (30d193)

  12. Underestimate the enemy and you help set the stage for his victory. He’s counting on your overconfidence. He’s much more cunning and much more calculating than appears from the antics of his dupes. That’s part of the deception, and it’s working.

    If it comes to armed struggle, it’ll be your 2nd Amendment rights against his tanks.

    ropelight (8700a0)

  13. 50% of the country?
    What are 60MM+ gun-owners?
    How will that work out?

    Whoever said “and the children shall lead them” certainly had Progressives in mind.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (199304)

  14. ropelight : Tanks without crews are no problem. Where would these people get either tanks or tankers?

    Michael M. Keohane (4e0dda)

  15. Afghanistan: Horse-infantry with rifles v. Soviet tanks and helicopters.
    Our Mujahideen will just have to get rocket-launchers from the same place that supplied the Afghans:
    Out the back door of U.S.Arsenals; and quite a few of those doors will be wide open.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (199304)

  16. I find it unlikely that we’re going to have a war between the US Military and the citizens, however, it’s easy to lose perspective on these things.

    Historically, countries in our condition can have severe problems. Trust for our leaders is incredibly low, and trust for the military is very high. We are economically unstable, owing more than we can possibly pay and spending more each year.

    Some of our energy sources are unstable, and much of the stuff we buy isn’t made here.

    It probably won’t be a problem, but I think one thing hard leftists will always have to calculate into their weird war plans is that Americans are strong people. This is why you should encourage all men in your family to pull at least a stint in the military, and the same for women who are inclined (I am a bit sexist on this, I guess).

    Also make sure everyone in your family has a long gun.

    Not because I expect we’re going to actually have a war, but because I think that kind of thing forces stability.

    One thing that is worth noting is that our military is becoming more robotic.

    Michael, how many tracked vehicles in the military have remote function units for their firing systems and electronically controlled drive by wire carrier systems? This is 1970s technology.

    Dustin (b2fb78)

  17. Yes, Drew. I think such a scenario would greatly favor Americans.

    Americans have vehicles, tools, and weapons on a scale insurgents in the middle east couldn’t dream of.

    However, when you think of isolated incidents, I think the calculations change a bit.

    Dustin (b2fb78)

  18. “I find it unlikely that we’re going to have a war between the US Military and the citizens…”

    The war will be between citizens and Obama’s “civilian army” that he talked about in the ’08 campaign, which will be based on the goon-squads at SEIU/ACORN, and other union thugs.
    The U.S.Military will mostly sit this out, as they are not pledged to protect and defend the President, but the Constitution; and the Constitution has no provision for attacking the populace, particularly when any “uprising” will obviously be a retaliation against political dissent by a paramilitary unauthorized under that Constitution, as there is no way any such authorization or funding would survive the House.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (199304)

  19. 13, “Where would these people get either tanks or tankers?”

    If by these people you mean the motley crew of dupes and useful idiots performing like drunken monkeys for MSM’s cameras in our city squares and financial districts, then the answer is nowhere. They don’t have heavy equipment and they never will, it’s not their function.

    My point is that the real danger comes from people who command the levers of state power. However, it looks like others here have already taken up the issue.

    ropelight (8700a0)

  20. The war will be between citizens and Obama’s “civilian army” that he talked about in the ’08 campaign, which will be based on the goon-squads at SEIU/ACORN, and other union thugs.

    Amazingly, I completely forgot all about that. What a damn creepy idea that was, and how incredible it’s been overshadowed.

    Dustin (b2fb78)

  21. Fight! Fight! Between a left and a right… Tonight’s first bout– George H.W. Bush vs. Barack Obama.

    Bush wins, third round knockout.

    Next on the undercard– Karl Rove vs. David Axelrod…

    Birdbath (19803d)

  22. Can’t wait for the bout between Plouffe and a strawman – that knocks him out.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (199304)

  23. I think that modern capitalist India has lifted more people out of poverty than any other organization ever.

    Amphipolis (b120ce)

  24. India still has slums.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  25. Doh, the poor will always be with us.

    If we gave every person in the U.S., tomorrow, a Million-Dollars; in a few years a certain segment of the population would have nothing, and a smaller cohert would have much more than a Million.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (199304)

  26. AD – if the War on Poverty had simply given each of the poor a million bucks at the beginning, it would have been a whole helluva lot cheaper.

    JD (f93629)

  27. That might be true, but it still would not have “ended Poverty in America”.

    Interestingly, the total amount spent on Great Society/War on Poverty programs since the LBJ Administration is close to, or more than, 50% of our current National Debt.

    So, like the spending of ObamaPorkulus (and the New Deal before it), it solved nothing but increased the debt on coming generations of Americans.

    Another Drew - Restore the Republic/Obama Sucks! (199304)

  28. That might be true, but it still would not have “ended Poverty in America”.

    This is because of what poverty is.

    For those without knowledge of basic economics, poverty is not defined in terms of absolutes. It has nothing to do with absolute measures of subsistence, or health, or quality of clothing or standards of living. It is simply based on income percentiles; if you rank financially in the bottom third of the population, then you are below the poverty line (the exact placement of the poverty line may vary from country to country).

    To put this concept in stark relief, consider this: if everybody in North America experiences a tenfold increase in wealth over the next 30 days, the number of people living below the poverty line won’t change one iota. The “poor” grocery store clerks might have 6000 square foot homes and Porsches, but the “rich” people would have 30,000 square foot homes and McLarens (insert whatever ostentatious displays of wealth you prefer, if you’re not into cars).

    In other words, a general increase in the standard of living cannot possibly eliminate poverty, no matter how high that increase is. It’s all relative, so even the most comfortable country in the world must have poverty … unless the government forces everyone’s standard of living to be the same. Do you know of any economic systems which attempt to do that? I can think of only one: communism.

    Of course, she can’t stop there, so she goes on to claim that “hopelessness, despair, cruelty and war” have also been eliminated. This is spin-doctoring of the worst sort. Tasha Yar’s homeworld used to be a Federation planet, but it suffered all of these things. Instead of admitting that their society isn’t immune to those problems, the government simply cut that “bad” colony loose and continued to boast that nothing bad ever happens on a Federation world.

    Michael Ejercito (64388b)

  29. Michael, that link of yours has proven very entertaining.

    I take it this dude doesn’t like Star Trek.

    Dustin (b2fb78)

  30. We be racist for criticizing Obama.

    Well I blame Bushs reckless spending for this and Obama is making it worse.


    DohBiden (d54602)

  31. I am beginning to think that only warriors understand Gandhi. Gandhi is about using your own death to make the world a better place for others, not about killing others to fill your rice bowl.

    htom (412a17)

  32. Obama was elected because the people wanted the rich to die.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  33. his supporters.

    Obama is no scapegoat.

    DohBiden (d54602)

  34. I haven’t seen this militia-boners in one thread since the Kathryn Johnston shooting. Aaron, you dog-whistler, you…

    Leviticus (7acba2)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3801 secs.