tothe people who say "this cannot be sedition because

[DonCoquixote]

No force has been used..."

Ask Gabbie Giffords
Ask Dr. Tiller
ask Tray Martin
ask whoever called for "second amendment" remedies,
ask the folks that put crosshairs on people
ask the folks who sold Targets with Obama's face
Ask Ann Coulter when she said "we may need to kill Liberals!"
ask the truckers ready to do citizen's arrest on the highway
ask Matthew Shepard

[Abq_Sarah]

1. You might want to take a break for a while

Turn off the TV, put on some music, grab a good book....

[NoOneMan]

2. +1

Don't forget some pot too

[blkmusclmachine]

3. Wait for this:

Pentagon Leaders Met with Collaborator of Preacher who Proposed 'Military Takeover' of the Government

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-rodda/pentagon-leaders-met-with_b_4037505.html

[JDPriestly]

4. There is no equivalent violence from the left in America.

What is left of an American left is non-violent in general.

Some of the Occupiers broke a few windows. I think that is as violent as it got, and we do not know what their political direction was. Occupiers were not all liberals, not all on the left. There were anarchists and libertarians in the mix, as well as apolitical people who were angry.

So far I am unaware of any terrorist acts from the left that involved violence to people.

Am I wrong or just overlooking something in my statements?

I think I'm right, but then maybe I am forgetting some shocking instance.

[Recursion]

6. Late 70s and early 80s were the last of that from the left in the US AFAIK

Jonestown and MOVE (and both of them were idiosyncratic) were the last of the militant left in the US that I can think of. You'd probably have to go back to SLA to get unambiguously leftist violence.

[eShirl]

17. Jonestown was not in the United States.

[Recursion]

20. Well, "from the US"

Fair point

[blm]

43. You forgot to take back the 'left' part.

.

[Recursion]

50. Because they were an anti white supremacy socialist cult

Even good causes can spawn cults.

[blm]

28. Jonestown wasn't leftist - it was a religious CULT ala GOP Moonie cults.

http://www.truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/4143-reverend-moon--source-of--rightwing-funding-and-the-washington-times--comes-to-life-in-bad-moon-rising

It's sort of astonishing how many lobbyists and religious right operatives who claim to be these heroes of Christianity have worked so closely and become so entwined over the years with Reverend Moon, whose central message is that Jesus Christ was a failure, and that Moon had to be sent by God to make up for Jesus' bungling God's mission.
-- John Gorenfeld, author, Bad moon rising: how reverend moon created the washington times, seduced the religious right, and built an american empire

[Recursion]

48. Yes, it was left. post-racial socialist utopia stuff (nt)

[JDPriestly]

31. Jonestown was not left at all. To the contrary. And MOVE, I don't know about because I

wasn't in the US at the time.

[Recursion]

49. Read up on Jonestown. You'll be surprised (nt)

[Common Sense Party]

52. It was the "People's Church."

Jones said: "I decided, how can I demonstrate my Marxism? The thought was, infiltrate the church."

He called his ideology "apostolic Socialism."

[JDPriestly]

53. That is not where Jim Jones came from.

He was a pastor in Indianapolis at one time. He was mostly about himself, pushing himself not any Christian concept of God, from that early period.

Jim Jones was simply in it for his own glory. He may have talked about Marxism at some point, but he talked about God earlier in his career, and it was always really only about Jim Jones. He was on a life-long power trip. A personal power trip. He pretended to have political commitment. There probably aren't very many people who remember his Indianapolis period. He was selling monkeys back then to support his activities. He was always only about his own aggrandizement. Trust me on this. I know it for a fact, and I don't say that very often. I did not know him after Indianapolis.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. How about that guy that shot up the FRC? Or the guy that took hostages at the Discovery network over

climate change?

[DonCoquixote]

24. er, all those I mentioned

were from the RIGHT,
where did you get anything where I talked about the left?

[LittleBlue]

5. Stop humiliating DU, drop the sedition talk

I was hoping this sedition thing was just a one-day fad.

People actually want the executive branch to charge members of the legislative branch with sedition? Wowie. That is advocacy for a dictatorship.

One of the admins should end talk of jailing political opponents, it's ridiculous and a little scary.

[JDPriestly]

7. Not members of the legislature, at least that is not my view.

But this is a trend we need to watch. The members of the legislature are immune from prosecution when they are performing their duties. We might question whether they are performing their duties, but technically they are performing.

The problem is that the legislators may be inciting or encouraging other right-wing extremists who see violence as a means to solve problems.

The OP points out situations in which there has been violence perpetrated by right-wing people, in some cases, specifically to achieve their political agenda. In others, with a seemingly apolitical goal, but clearly under the influence of a right-wing, might-makes-right, vigilante viewpoint.

I don't think the OP is suggesting that the executive branch charge members of the legislature with sedition. Perhaps I am wrong. But that can't be done in any event, so don't worry.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

10. Loughner was a whackadoodle. The Martin killing was not political. The OP is plain ol' wrong.

[JDPriestly]

32. Loughner was a whackadoodle who tried to kill a Democrat and killed many of those

meeting with the Democrat.

That's the problem. Right-wingers call their violent types whackadoodle and don't take responsibility for the fact that the influential spokespeople on the right never caution their admirers to be nonviolent. In fact, all the hullabaloo about gun control and carry laws send the opposite message.

If we didn't have extremists out their who never caution nonviolence, who never preach love for those with whom we disagree, we would not need such tight gun laws.

Name one prominent spokesperson on the left -- prominent, someone who gets lots of news coverage or has a radio show -- who advocates for guns and violence. I don't think there are any. But there is a long list of right-wingers who talk about violent topics or who speak in the anger of violence. A long list. Someone mentioned specific words that Ann Coulter has used. I don't listen to that kind of garbage, but many of us who abhor violence, who know what it means in people's lives, are forced to listen to the garbage because we live or work with right-wingers.

I believe strongly in the First Amendment and no censorship, but I do not like people who use violent language or indirectly or directly admire or preach violence.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

34. Loughner was obsessed with 9/11 truthiness and a film called Zeitgeist.

So how do you feel about the guy that shot-up the FRC? Who set him off?

Who set-off the guy that took hostages at the Discovery TV network over climate change?

[blueridge3210]

37. Well, there you go again.

Ruining a perfectly good rant w/ facts. Carry on.

[DonCoquixote]

56. Thanks for bringing Ann C. up

http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/ann-coulter-second-conservative-today-to-advocate-violence-against-liberals/news/2012/08/30/47847
http://www.alternet.org/speakeasy/2011/06/07/intellectual-scatology-ann-coulters-new-book-calls-liberals-demonic-and-possessed-of-a-mob-mentality-that-will-destroy-america/

Folks, about the only leftist I can think of who calls for nearly half the violence is ted rall, and he himself attacks liberals as much as he does the right.

[JDPriestly]

39. There simply is no Democratic equivalent of Rush Limbaugh spewing hate all day.

There is no Democratic equivalent of a number of these hate-spewers.

Listen to Pacifica Radio's news programs. That is the far left. There is a calmness, a dispassion in most of the programming there that I listen to. They convey information. Listen to Thom Hartmann. Very calm and also conducting genuinely thoughtful dialogues with people who disagree with him. Then watch Fox News, Bill O'Reilly. Watch the contempt that Fox News shows for people who disagree with Fox. Watch the hate coming out of the pores of some of the Fox News types.

It's that hate that makes right-wingers so extreme. It is very, very sad for our country.

The hate is there because the right-wing philosophy cannot stand up to reason. In 2008, we saw what happens when the markets are allowed to run "free" without regulation. People cheat. That's what happens. And that's how a lot of America's 19th century moguls, often the great-grandparents of Americans who are out pillaging, ravaging the earth today, made their money. By squeezing out all competition, by cheating. They called it competition, but it wasn't. It was monopolizing the market, say getting a legislature to pass favorable laws so that your products could get to market but your competitors' couldn't. It was that over and over.

Meanwhile, it was the generous land grants to railroads that really built the West and made us a nation -- -government largesse to specific individuals. The truth about American history is not generally know, and when it is learned, you can see the lies the extreme right-wing and libertarian branches of the Republican Party.

We need to work together. Should we have free enterprise. Yes. But we need rules that give new businesses, truly small businesses, mom-and-pop businesses a fair chance. Rules that insure that if you buy a stock, the company that issued it can't in a back-handed way cheat you out of your money. Rules that insure that if you work for a company and are supposed to get a pension from that company, the company can't merge with another company or sell to another company and allow the new company to take your promised pension. Rules that put pressure on companies not to drive competitors out of specific markets by selling products way under cost. Rules that insure that American working people can compete in international markets in spite of our very valuable currency.

Many Republicans have no idea why we have environmental regulations. They simply don't study that field. They don't really understand chemistry. They don't know what it means if someone dumps arsenic into the water supply of a town. They have never heard of the sheepherders in Scotland who used arsenic when they sheared and washed their sheep. They don't know what they are talking about. They just think that if you simply spew your poison on the earth, God will somehow take care of it. Doesn't work that way. They don't know how much care is put into monitoring the safety of the water that comes out of their tap or their well. They don't understand the role of the EPA and government in making sure they can breathe safely and drink water safely.

Too many Republicans spew hate rather than information. It's a doggone shame because it is really hurting our country. The numbers of right-wing militia groups in the country speaks for itself. Go to the Southern Poverty Law website and find out for yourself.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

40. Loughner didn't listen to RW radio.

[DonCoquixote]

25. Ok, you get it

No, I am not sayign we need to send Ann Coulter to Leavenworth, but when people call for and enocurage violence, we need to hold them accountable. When "second amendment remedies" are discussed, we cannot strum our harps and assume they are talkign about having BBQs.

[JDPriestly]

30. Yes. We don't have to send people to jail. We just have to point out that they are using violent

language and that some crazy person might be encouraged to commit a violent act because of it. We don't have to censor speech either.

[Yo_Mama]

13. And somewhat frightening given political history in multiple states

From there it is a steep, greased slide into disaster.

[blm]

44. No - but the senate should hold hearings based on the appearance of corruption.

What was promised in exchange for a shut down of the government? A default?

[Decaffeinated]

8. Here's what you need to do in several easy steps...

1) Take a deep breath

2) Count to 100

3) Take your router, phone and tv outside

4) Put a big free sign on them

5) Take a break from talking about anything related to politics, especially anything related to law or criminal conduct

6) Check back in a year to see if you feel better.

I'll bet you do...

[LaydeeBug]

29. Perhaps you could practice what you preach? Oh, and then grab a dictionary

and look up the definition of "force".

Then...

deep breath...

blah3

[Decaffeinated]

45. I'm good thanks...

I've still retained my ability to make logical statements AND to define words.

[LaydeeBug]

46. Whatever gets you through the day

Since the definition of force eluded you.

[Bearheim]

11. Although it won't be used I agree with the sedition argument because..

Many are right to say that 'force' has not been applied in this situation. However, 'force' is not explicitly defined in the sedition act.

We have many laws on the books in which 'force' does not necessarily mean physical force.

For instance, work place harassment. An employee's boss does not have to tie up someone and beat them to harass them. Constantly sexually harassing through joking or innuendo have been held up as sexual harassment. The 'force' applied is the simple fact that the employee is subordinate to the boss.

Also, although the constitution gives the power of the purse strings to congress (House originates supposedly), the constitution does not say anything like 'by any means' in regards to budget issues etc.

In a democracy, and this is spelled out explicitly in the constitution for our democracy, there is an order of execution, if you will, or how things are to get done. No where does the constitution say that blackmail can be used in that orderly process.

Back to force and sedition. The 'force' being used by the republicans in congress currently can easily be seen as blackmail. Do what we say or the citizens are cut off (shutting down the government). The greater 'force' being applied and coming up in a few weeks is do what we say or we tank the world's economy.

Like I said, I don't think it will be applied, but I think a cogent argument could be made that the actions of this current House absolutely falls under the heading of sedition.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

19. So if father refuses to buy his daughter concert tickets he kidnapped her

because he used force to keep her from freely moving about.

In a democracy, and this is spelled out explicitly in the constitution for our democracy, there is an order of execution, if you will, or how things are to get done. No where does the constitution say that blackmail can be used in that orderly process.

There is no blackmail. That's just partisan hyperbole.

[DrDan]

12. this is your justification for charges of sedition? really?

"Tray Martin" is your justification for charges?

this is embarrassing . . .

[Maraya1969]

14. I agree with you and I find the people who get on their high horse and put you down, (and me and

others down for having this opinion) very rude and insensitive. They don't know more. They just act like they do.

[Decaffeinated]

15. All of these arguments remind me of Christian "scientists"...

... trying to prove a 6000 year old world with dinosaur bones in it.

As much as you want the words "sedition" and "treason" to mean what you want... they don't...

[DonCoquixote]

26. If people threaten to use Violence

to enforce a poltical goal, how is that not treason?

"second amendment remedies" is not about a fundraiser, neither are sites where Dr Tiller's name was crossed out after he was shot.

[NuclearDem]

41. And last I remember, Mrs Second Amendment remedies lost badly

And Scott Roeder isn't a member of Congress.

[TexasProgresive]

16. Chose your battles

While it may be true what you say, it is a moot point since nothing will come of it except a flame war. That is a waste of energy. Now if you want to visit and/or write your congress critter and voice your thoughts to him/her that might do something. But I doubt it. It is better to voice your words in ways that make the point yet are not confrontational.

Rants feel good for a moment but tend to be a waste of time and energy.

[Warren Stupidity]

18. You seem to be equivocating around what "this" refers to.

The House Republicans are not committing sedition by making legislative demands. What they are doing is hurting people and is wrong on many levels, but it is not sedition. Your list doesn't even include the shutdown.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

21. To those who say, "This is the dumbest post I've ever seen"

I think I'd have to agree with you.

Taking the actions of several stray and wholly unrelated nutcases (I don't think Jared Loughner was in a conspiracy with anyone but the voices in his head) along with some people exercising their constitutionally-protected right to express their opinion, and throwing in a case of "some asswipe said something on the internet that will never actually happen" and you're got something far less than a seditious conspiracy.

Seriously. You're making the rest of us look foolish.

[Dr. Strange]

51. Yeah, it's stupid.

But I still think the moon bombing thread tops it.

[Nye Bevan]

22. Excellent points. Are you a constitutional law professor? (nt)

[LWolf]

23. Is somebody on DU saying that?

I certainly haven't read everything being said, and I've listened to less.

[former9thward]

38. There are at least a dozen threads everyday making that claim.

Here's just one: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023805602

[LWolf]

47. I can't say that I've missed much.

I guess the long hours at work have a silver lining; they keep me from seeing everything on the 'puter.

[aikoaiko]

27. weak. nt

[dairydog91]

33. OK, who wants to argue this before a judge?

"Your honor, I know that it would appear that the Constitution prohibits punishing legislators for their decisions about what to vote for, but you have to remember that a gay man was beaten to death in 1998. Ironclad proof, your honor! John Boehner must go to jail."

Personally, I'd feel more dignified wearing a Joker suit into court and throwing poo at the ceiling while singing Hava Nagila in Pig Latin.

[RZM]

35. Beyond stupid n/t

[cthulu2016]

36. Preposterous n/t

[NuclearDem]

42. None of which has even the slightest to due with the rules of the House

Or seditious conspiracy.

I really find it horrific that liberals are trotting out the sedition talk in light of who sedition laws have actually been used against. If you think throwing Tea Partiers in jail on this flimsy bullshit reasoning of sedition can work, then wait until Occupiers, environmentalists, anti-war advocates, Democrats and feminists start getting locked up by someone who thinks they're guilty of it by equally shoddy evidence.

[DonCoquixote]

55. the problem is

"If you think throwing Tea Partiers in jail on this flimsy bullshit reasoning of sedition can work, then wait until Occupiers, environmentalists, anti-war advocates, Democrats and feminists start getting locked up by someone who thinks they're guilty of it by equally shoddy evidence."

Well, they already are, and far worse, even though they ave not committed half the violence the folks I mentioned did. OWS was outright blitzed by Police.

I am not advocating lots of jailings, but when Conservatives outright talk of killing us, using domestic terrorism to do it, are we supposed to overlook the bloody elephant in the room? It is one thing to have free speech, it is another to grave dance and all for more, which they do.

[Throd]

54. You forgot Michael Hastings

and Piltdown Man

Being an obstructionist a-hole isn't, by and of itself, sedition

[cali]

57. wow. impressively clueless. utterly, shockingly clueless.

what do all of those things have in common?

None of them have anything whatsofuckingever to do with sedition.

Unbelievable.