Not a member yet?REGISTER!
There was 1776, the big one.
Then there was this small brouhaha, something about a civil war.
That's about it when it comes to guns and roses.
Who's fomenting the next one? A bunch of wingnuts who believe the apocalypse is going to happen today and who also believe that having a gun will help them to storm the gates of heaven (sorry, you athiests out there, but there's a small place in heaven for you too - apparently.) (heh).
All you need to claim it is a gun.
The tea parties that some are presently subscribing to are definitely going to turn ugly when all those gun owners suddenly realize that they need to praise the lord and pass the ammunition. Unfortunately, the crooked twist of history they feebly attemt to re-enact has them believing that they're contributing to some momentous current event, when in actuality the Boston tea party they sadly attempt to stage was a protest against a foreign government, not an American government.
Although, I do suppose that it could be proposed that the foreign-ness (sorry, Nessie) of a black man in a white house goes against the grain of every wingnut in the known universe, from Montana to Alabama and all places in between, thus ensuring that the Tea Party must become America's third party to attempt its turn to govern at the next election.
The question then becomes, will President Obama even call an election given the Tea Party's dominance of current events?
Twisted logic? Obviously. But then, I'm hoping to have my place in heaven too, and by subscribing to the wingnut theory of governance, my place is assured, no doubt.
Except it really wasn't a foriegn government. The colonists were all still pretty much British in mind and culture. With major differences to be sure, but they didn't consider themselves Americans.
There's rollercoasters in Heaven and ya know they have a hell of a drop!
Let's call it the Tea Bag Party cause you know when those CPAC dudes get behind closed doors they'll be tea bagging each other.
But rewriting history is a favorite of mine, and others.
Jesus said offer your agressor the other cheek, and be good to your enemies.
Gandi said that if you provoke a greater aggresor with violence, they will simply do you in, but if you don´t fight back, there existing morals will come into play. They will not want to kill those that refuse to fight back, and if they do, it will invoke the sympathy of those watching.
MLK adopted that principal and took it a step further by boycotting certain services. You can hit your aggressor in the pocket book too.
I understand the need for guns, but there are other effective ways as well.
will often get you more than just a kind word."
Passive resistance is something we tend to approve of when we identify more with the oppressor than with the oppressed, as in Britain vs. India or the South vs. blacks. No doubt if Palestinians did it against Israel, that would appeal to us to.
I'd rather view Gandhi less as a saint and more as a kook. Only then will you appreciate his greatness.
© 2001 - 2016. ShadowCulture's Mr. Cranky is in no way affiliated with The Cranky Critic, nor is ShadowCulture's Mr. Cranky in any way affiliated with any goods or services bearing The Cranky Critic mark.