Don't Thread on me! Or there will be trouble ...
First, Dude, Glen Beck is *not* 'national news'. He's more like 'national psycho'.
Um, second, you appear confused about that word 'Democracy'. You're trying to point out that socialism is opposed to democracy, at the same time you claim it's a growing/failing system with in our democracy. Which is it, kitten?
Third, if we actually have anything resembling "our principles" in this democracy, then socialism has already met it's end at the will of the people. Wait, wut? It hasn't? It's a "seed"? Cuopcake, maybe "our principles" aren't what you think they are.
Now, anybody who could write such a stupid paragraph either doesn't understand the words he's using, or he's too insane to see his own contradictions. In this case, I'm gonna have to go with the former, simply out of polite deference.\
See, vodpod (a true activist's identity ... BEHOLD and FEAR ME; for I am VODPOD!), you can't even remain consistent within 3 short sentences. I read for certain that you wrote this was about making an issue for the Federal government. You haven't even shown that it's key within our own state, and now that makes it ... I can't tell ... a logical mess?
And, no. One thousand times plus one, no. It is not, nor has it ever been, nor hopefully will it ever be, the task of the judiciary to "listen to the thoughts" of the people. They are not fricking mind readers or psychics. They are legal professionals tasked with listening to the law. It's likely to remain that way until you either get Mistress Cleo elected or appointed to the bench, or you change that Constitutuion that so defies your will.
Montana is not now, nor has it ever been, a sovereign entity (leaving aside the claims of first nations folk.) We are as we were formed, as we have been since our inception, a state within a union of states. For us to declare sovereignty now might seem way wicked and killer kewl, but at heart, it's treason. Yes, we should have control of our gun rights, based on the Second amendment. But to base those on the Tenth is calling for anything but the "civilest" of wars. It's acall to arms against the government which has fostered and secured us. I don't expect a wingnut to understand that. All he will grasp is his erection at our enormous illusory power.
Buit it does give me something to laugh at.
When in an act of sovereignty, Gov. Brian killed The Real ID Act, where ya laughing?
Posted by: Big Swede | May 19, 2009 at 12:28 PM
1) That wasn't an act of 'sovereignty'. It was passive resistance. The Governor's argument was that a Montana issued ID already fulfills the requirement of the "real ID". He called the federal's bluff, and they blinked. At no point did Schweitzer argue for secession.
2) Perhaps you didn't know, or simply forgot, that when Brian did try to impress State Sovereignty, he lost ... big. Remember when he argued that Montana National Guard couldn't be sent to Iraq because of the impending fire season? Now that would have been an issue worthy of invoking both the Second and Tenth Amendments. But that time, Brian blinked.
3) "Where" I'm laughing is anywhere I get the urge.
4) You, again, spectacularly miss the point of the post.
Posted by: Wulfgar | May 19, 2009 at 03:24 PM
Since I've strayed off the res, could you tell me (if and when) they come for your firearms, are you going to let them "tread" on you?
Posted by: Big Swede | May 20, 2009 at 07:26 AM
When the aliens come for your women, are you going to let them thread on you?
Don't ask stupid ass questions, Swede.
Posted by: Wulfgar | May 20, 2009 at 07:37 AM