Tea Party Zealot calls for overthrow of the government.

**~BigTymer~** · 06-30-12, 10:05 PM

BTW, you could never uprise against the government. You would have no way to get the word out for people to join you, as soon as you put it on the net bam FBI and others at your door. Then their is always....the government has f-16's vs my shotgun o.0

**Xavsnipe** · 06-30-12, 10:09 PM

You have to have the military´s support for a successful coup d etat.

**Red_Lizard2** · 06-30-12, 11:09 PM

Originally Posted by SoySoldier

I semi-agree: Money and corruption is a huge problem. We need to regulate the process; take the power away from the corporations to donate. Make it so anything campaign related is fixed, and all candidates have equal time and resources. And punish the fuck out of those who fail. Problem is, people keep crying about regulating these giant money-machines... They need to be regulated because they are regulating us; as you pointed out.

While I agree there needs to be massive campaign finance reform (one that makes it possible for anyone to run, not those either with money, or those that sell-out to corporations to fund their campaigns), I still think things would only slightly improve. What we need is a good 4th pillar (as I've heard it called), or basically a good media. The news can be great for digesting what happens, and spitting it out in a way that people can easily understand or not forcing them to read 100s of pages of legal crap. Does anyone feel the media really does a great job explaining things to the public, or even doing investigative work?

It seems you basically have 24/7 cable news, that panders to the fact that Americans ignore stuff that isn't "drama" and yelling and stupid shit. The mainstream media doesn't seem to do much more then report something is happening, and never goes very deep into it (personally, I think that is due to them being paranoid about being considered "bias"). Either you find a small blog that might actually go somewhat deep into stuff, but then a lot of them you have to be skeptical because they tend to heavily lean one way or the other. The other option is to look it up yourself, but if you've tried to read a bill, it can be a major MAJOR pain in the ass.

*shrugs* not really on-topic but oh well. Though if you do want to relate it, I'd argue the media should be, at least, doing some of the revealing of what is really happening in Washington. We know Washington isn't going to talk about back door deals, and all that shit. They know the media won't do anything, and they know with enough money voters won't give a shit, what do you expect to happen? I think Soy will like this, but couldn't this be an example of lack of regulations? =p

Edit: Oh and to be THAT asshole, if it was a democracy we wouldn't have these problems, but we'd also probably never get shit done. We are a republic though

**deathgodusmc** · 06-30-12, 11:29 PM

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

I, too, support an overthrow of the government when necessary. It happens every few years when we have time to vote. Out with the old, in with the old.

You left out that the new always end up being the same as the old. You wont pass bills that take money out of the pockets of the people that have the money to actually compete in a campaign. This is one case where i think the process is actually to quick. In order to get people in office that actually give a damn about the little guy the funding from corps. has to be cut.

They can still contribute but it should be to a bulk fund. That fund should be where every donated dollar goes. Then it should be divided to those that wish to run. Spending more then what your given should be an automatic disqualification. That is the only fair way i can see the system functioning completely unbias of corp. influenece. After that though with all the federal employees we have a few should be paid to watch politicians accounts and assets.

IMO public service at this level should require a few prying eyes as a trade off to keep the system clean. If they are uncomfortable with that feel free to not run, bow out, or be prosecuted for not abiding to the standards we expect as their boss.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-30-12, 11:36 PM

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

I'm not saying that I wan't to over throw the government, we have a democracy already. Overthrowing the Government becomes necessary when you have a dictatorship and the people don't have a say. We in America do have a say, if were too fucken stupid to use our rights and keep electing corrupt politicians that's our fault. How are we as a people to overthrow a government if we can't even get the masses to make an educated decision at the voting booth. The country is on a real path to bankruptcy and we can't even get half our voters to show up.

Exactly what kind of democracy do we have? Only those with the money can run for office with any chance of winning. Those same people pass laws that the majority did not want. Those same people deny laws that the majority not only want but see as needed. How many times have lobbyist laws been shot down? How many times has the normal person been shit on for their benefit?

With that in mind do you still think this is really a democracy? I sure dont. I see a small group of people running the show in total disregard for the people.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-30-12, 11:47 PM

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

I understand why they want to overthrow the Government, they have more than enough good reason to be angry, it just doesn't make sense to do so. If we were some how able to overthrow our Government, which has the biggest military in the world by far, what would we do after? Would make a great political cartoon for the paper regarding the Tea Party calling for an overthrow.

Not the biggest. We have the strongest military on the planet. Minor difference but your forgetting a few key points.

The military can not take action on the people of its own country. It would violate the UN agreements in place. Of which would draw the UN peace keepers into the fight and they aren't known for protecting the standing government. If given the order to do so it would be an unlawful order. As such every person receiving that order is subject to punishment for following it. Its their job to disobey any such order.

On top of that it would be one of great conflict for each and every member. So odds are you would no longer have one standing military but two equally powerful groups going at each other. Plus there are way more military trained people in the civilian sector then they will every be active duty and reserve status. Even if those groups split in the middle odds are once word is out the government gave an attack order on US citizens the tables would unbalance quickly.

Its not a matter of if we could overthrow the government. Its a matter of how many lives would be lost before those that should have resigned are removed by force.

Of course there is always the option of giving them a choice to either get the job done right or get the fuck out.

**Red_Lizard2** · 07-01-12, 12:33 AM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

I sure dont. I see a small group of people running the show in total disregard for the people.

Well there is 50% of a republic =p, the other half is supposed to be listening to the people (though I think there are times to pass something that is somewhat unpopular because of the benefits to the nation and/or people. And don't say people always favor laws that are good for them). Of course, the reelection rate of incumbents is something absurd, likely due to the fact that people recognize names like "Cantor, Rangel, Pelosi, Reid, McCain, Flake, etc. etc." and vote for them based on knowing them (stupid, but how often does the voting public seem smart?). So why should they give a shit what their constituents want? They know they'd have to do something really really bad, or there is a movement that gains traction (see: 2006, 2010), they don't have to care what the constituents think.

Also money helps trick voters and *insert the whole media, campaign finance, etc. stuff here*

**Alundil** · 07-01-12, 02:11 PM

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

While I agree there needs to be massive campaign finance reform (one that makes it possible for anyone to run, not those either with money, or those that sell-out to corporations to fund their campaigns), I still think things would only slightly improve. What we need is a good 4th pillar (as I've heard it called), or basically a good media. The news can be great for digesting what happens, and spitting it out in a way that people can easily understand or not forcing them to read 100s of pages of legal crap. Does anyone feel the media really does a great job explaining things to the public, or even doing investigative work?

It seems you basically have 24/7 cable news, that panders to the fact that Americans ignore stuff that isn't "drama" and yelling and stupid shit. The mainstream media doesn't seem to do much more then report something is happening, and never goes very deep into it (personally, I think that is due to them being paranoid about being considered "bias"). Either you find a small blog that might actually go somewhat deep into stuff, but then a lot of them you have to be skeptical because they tend to heavily lean one way or the other. The other option is to look it up yourself, but if you've tried to read a bill, it can be a major MAJOR pain in the ass.

*shrugs* not really on-topic but oh well. Though if you do want to relate it, I'd argue the media should be, at least, doing some of the revealing of what is really happening in Washington. We know Washington isn't going to talk about back door deals, and all that shit. They know the media won't do anything, and they know with enough money voters won't give a shit, what do you expect to happen? I think Soy will like this, but couldn't this be an example of lack of regulations? =p

Edit: Oh and to be THAT asshole, if it was a democracy we wouldn't have these problems, but we'd also probably never get shit done. We are a republic though

Excellent post Red.

Sent via highly charged bolt of electricity.