[Toshi]

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/22/gop-violent-overthrow/

You can't make this stuff up.

Stephen Broden, a “constitutionalist pastor” from Texas who won the Republican nomination for Texas’ 30th Congressional District, made a vaguely threatening statement at a Tea Party event last year. He described the federal government as “tyrannical” and said that “we have a constitutional remedy. And the Framers say if that don’t work, revolution.”

Yesterday, a political reporter for WFAA in Dallas-Fort Worth asked Broden to explain whether he was actually calling for violence against the federal government. After a “prolonged back-and-forth,” Broden said a violent overthrow is “on the table”:

“If the government is not producing the results or has become destructive to the ends of our liberties, we have a right to get rid of that government and to get rid of it by any means necessary,” Broden said, adding the nation was founded on a violent revolt against Britain’s King George III.

Watson asked if violence would be in option in 2010, under the current government.

“The option is on the table. I don’t think that we should remove anything from the table as it relates to our liberties and our freedoms,” Broden said, without elaborating. “However, it is not the first option.”

Video (that I have not watched secondary to firewalls at work) at link.

 

[jonKranked]

so he only like deomcracy as long as he gets his way?

 

[FlyinPolack]

so he only like deomcracy as long as he gets his way?

sounds about right..

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

isnt sedition punishable with jailtime in the states?

 

[Pesqueeb]

isnt sedition punishable with jailtime in the states?

Freedom of speech, its a bitch sometimes. Although Pastor douchebag here is certianly pushing it.

 

[Toshi]

isnt sedition punishable with jailtime in the states?

Freedom of speech, its a bitch sometimes. Although Pastor douchebag here is certianly pushing it.

Rarely invoked, still on the books (Smith Act), however:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition#Civilian

 

[ALEXIS_DH]

Freedom of speech, its a bitch sometimes. Although Pastor douchebag here is certianly pushing it.

but when at what point does it become sedition for us laws??

say, if he talks and stuff, no prob (free speech)... but then if he gets a lot of armed angry rednecks together???? (i guess that´d be covered by freedom of assembly), but where does the legal umbrella ends??

 

[Pesqueeb]

but when at what point does it become sedition for us laws??

say, if he talks and stuff, no prob (free speech)... but then if he gets a lot of armed angry rednecks together???? (i guess that´d be covered by freedom of assembly), but where does the legal umbrella ends??

Hell if I know. This is one of those slippery slope/fine line questions.

Armed angry rednecks already get together on a regular basis, its called the Tea Party.

*Edit:

Rarely invoked, still on the books (Smith Act), however:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sedition#Civilian

In 1940, the Alien Registration Act, or "Smith Act", was passed, which made it a federal crime to advocate or to teach the desirability of overthrowing the United States Government,

Sounds like hes guilty to me.

 

[sanjuro]

Be funny if the revolution started by shooting this guy first.

 

[Inclag]

but when at what point does it become sedition for us laws?

When Muslims are involved...

 

[JohnE]

so he only like deomcracy as long as he gets his way?

And his freedom is more important then anyone elses. I always want to ask idiots like this- "Just what freedoms in particular have you been deprived of?"

And then give them a test on the Constitution...

 

[stevew]

and this wasn't being said if by chance father time had won over obama in 08.....

 

[ohio]

As much as I hate to encourage lunatic chicken-little ****ers like this, technically, he is correct. It has always been an option on the table, all the way back to the declaration of independence. It's just that the subtext when this guy offers it up is "Government's gotten to big now that we're taking orders from an uppity Uncle Tom."

 

[Silver]

As much as I hate to encourage hateful ignorant ****ers like this, technically, he is correct. It has always been an option on the table, all the way back to the declaration of independence. It's just that the subtext when this guy offers it up is "I ain't taking orders from no uppity nagger."

You might want to watch the video...

 

[ohio]

You might want to watch the video...

Ha, touche.

Edited to address my incorrect presuppositions.

 

[Silver]

Read his issues page:

http://www.brodenforcongress.com/Broden_on_the_Issues_s/3.htm

Same stupid **** the Joker thinks will work, for the same magical reasons. Less Randy-More Jesusy.

Christ must be spinning in his ****ing grave, I tell you...

 

[X3pilot]

It's just that the subtext when this guy offers it up is "Government's gotten to big now that we're taking orders from an uppity Uncle Tom."

Well, if he's quoting the Framers, then it's only 3/5ths too big...