Amash denounces armed protests in Michigan

[susano]

I think he's saying "Why give the media ammo to smear you?" In a lot of ways, protestors walk right into the trap that the media wants, where the protests can be characterized however the media decides and broadcast far and wide based on a few select pictures. Going into the state house with nazi signs and guns isn't going to change much unless they're intended to be used. Clearly, the mere ownership of guns in the country hasn't stopped the slow grind into tyranny. Maybe slowed it down some but obviously hasn't stopped or reversed it.

Having said that, I'm somewhat a purist but so far I'm willing to cut Amash some breaks on his rhetoric since his track record is otherwise fabulous. He's so far campaigning like he's actually trying to win a national election instead of harping on wonky policy points that most voters don't care about nor even really understand. We KNOW how dumbed down the average voter is and it's folly to think they'll suddenly decide to become scholars. I'm ok at this point with a libertarian with a solid track record running a populist campaign since only populist campaigns actually win. Slogging through another election season just to win the usual 1-2%? No thanks.




Or maybe he's trying to win by running a populist campaign that offers appeal to all sections of voters? No one is going to win a national election by advocating storming state houses with rifles and Hitler pictures. They're just not.




It is highly unlikely, sure, but I hope you don't seriously think that the independent/unaffiliated voters that decide elections (assuming free and fair elections, big assumption I know) are in favor of running into state houses with rifles and Hitler pictures, do you? There's personal preferences and then there's electoral realities. I'm reminded of Clinton's statement about having "private positions and public positions"...
Plus, he's already getting more media coverage than pretty much every LP candidate ever and it's not because he's saying everyone should go all 3%er on their state houses.

The only signs referencing Nazis were calling the governor of Michigan one. And, here's the deal on the FAKE news about a Nazi flag:

After last week's protest around the Michigan Capitol, a picture of someone holding a large swastika flag that said "TRUMP PENCE" began circulating on social media as a sign of the supposed Nazi leanings of Trump supporters and the people protesting. But after some viral outrage about the kind of people the conservative organizers of these protests were in cahoots with, it turns out that the picture in question actually came from a March 2 Bernie Sanders rally in Boise, Idaho.

https://reason.com/2020/04/20/dont-g...down-protests/

Please, use some discretion and don't parrot MSM. None of those people in the capital were promoting Nazi anything. That's the usual MSM bull$#@!.

[susano]

Quite possible.. although R & D might not be very telling in some cases; also based on track record, it could be argued that Trump is more of a Democrat/Liberal than Hillary Clinton on various issues.

But to follow up on the fake hate aspect, do you think Trump officials are also responding to 'fake hate' or their global campaign against hate is genuine?

Coronavirus Crisis Unleashed 'Tsunami' of anti-Semitism, Trump Official Says
Special envoy Elan Carr says his office is closely monitoring online expressions of anti-Semitism around the world, clearly seeing an uptick in hate speech caused amid the spread of COVID-19
Washington May 05, 2020

I think the charge is false and Trump is a ass kisser of Jews who probably believes their confabulated ADL BS.

[pcosmar]

I don't see guys in tactical gear with long guns in that picture or am I missing something?

https://hazardousliberty.com/events
More photos
https://www.smugmug.com/gallery/n-Mt6Gz8/

Look through the gallery... Photographers were not focused on the Guns as much as the People... but you will see a well armed crowd..

I showed up in a few videos,,, haven't seen my mug in these pics.

[Theocrat]

You know what? I kind of agree with Amash. I do support these guys right to bear arms. I would never support any law that takes away that right. But honestly did you really need to show up with an AR15 strapped to your back? It just freaks out the liberals and dilutes your message. If you really feel a threat to your safety carry a pistol concealed. If the day comes when it gets bad enough we need to open carry long guns for our safety, I will be there alongside you fighting.

[Bold emphasis mine]

Yes. Our government officials need to be reminded of whom and what they're supposed to be serving, and it's not themselves. If they can hide behind guns (in fact, they have armies and arsenals at their disposals) to intimidate law-abiding citizens with unalienable rights into obeying their edicts, then those citizens have every right to check that power by intimidating them with their own guns.

[Theocrat]

I think he's saying "Why give the media ammo to smear you?" In a lot of ways, protestors walk right into the trap that the media wants, where the protests can be characterized however the media decides and broadcast far and wide based on a few select pictures. Going into the state house with nazi signs and guns isn't going to change much unless they're intended to be used. Clearly, the mere ownership of guns in the country hasn't stopped the slow grind into tyranny. Maybe slowed it down some but obviously hasn't stopped or reversed it.

Having said that, I'm somewhat a purist but so far I'm willing to cut Amash some breaks on his rhetoric since his track record is otherwise fabulous. He's so far campaigning like he's actually trying to win a national election instead of harping on wonky policy points that most voters don't care about nor even really understand. We KNOW how dumbed down the average voter is and it's folly to think they'll suddenly decide to become scholars. I'm ok at this point with a libertarian with a solid track record running a populist campaign since only populist campaigns actually win. Slogging through another election season just to win the usual 1-2%? No thanks.




Or maybe he's trying to win by running a populist campaign that offers appeal to all sections of voters? No one is going to win a national election by advocating storming state houses with rifles and Hitler pictures. They're just not.




It is highly unlikely, sure, but I hope you don't seriously think that the independent/unaffiliated voters that decide elections (assuming free and fair elections, big assumption I know) are in favor of running into state houses with rifles and Hitler pictures, do you? There's personal preferences and then there's electoral realities. I'm reminded of Clinton's statement about having "private positions and public positions"...
Plus, he's already getting more media coverage than pretty much every LP candidate ever and it's not because he's saying everyone should go all 3%er on their state houses.

That's the problem. You're making Populism the standard, when it shouldn't be. Populism is the reason why we continue to move further away from any real progress towards small government, sound money, etc. Populism is just sociopolitical relativism, and it always moves with the waves of arbitrary, public opinion.

We need candidates who are principled and unafraid to stand on principle, in order for their platforms to remain consistent and objective. When that happens, then it will expose the problems rooted in our society, from the corrupt media organizations to the ignorant populace who continually vote for the very candidates that have destroyed our nation because of the subjectivity of arbitrary laws.

[69360]

[Bold emphasis mine]

Yes. Our government officials need to be reminded of whom and what they're supposed to be serving, and it's not themselves. If they can hide behind guns (in fact, they have armies and arsenals at their disposals) to intimidate law-abiding citizens with unalienable rights into obeying their edicts, then those citizens have every right to check that power by intimidating them with their own guns.

Are you intimidated by them? I am not. So I do not feel the need to parade around with a long gun. I also know if things go sideways I am fully capable of doing what is necessary.

[Krugminator2]

Glue sniffers?

Neither you nor Amash has any problem with armed goons of the state being present in the building so who's the "glue sniffer"?

Police are an part of a free society. In fact, protecting rights with law enforcement and the military is the whole reason for government existing.

So no, I don't have a problem with there being security at the Capitol. There are people hipped up on crystal meth and low IQ who might do lawmakers harm like the guy who shot Steve Scalise.

[Theocrat]

Are you intimidated by them? I am not. So I do not feel the need to parade around with a long gun. I also know if things go sideways I am fully capable of doing what is necessary.

I'm not intimidated by them, until the time comes when I have to be stopped at a "health checkpoint" in order to show them an "immunity card" that I refuse to carry along. They'll be the ones brandishing guns to enforce an unethical edict of the State. And that's the point. Guns are deterrents, and we all have every right to carry them in whatever way we deem appropriate.

[Krugminator2]

Our government officials need to be reminded of whom and what they're supposed to be serving, and it's not themselves

There is something that already exists to handle that. It is called the ballot box.

Using physical threats to intimidate is fine for monkeys, not for humans.

[Bold emphasis mine]

If they can hide behind guns (in fact, they have armies and arsenals at their disposals) to intimidate law-abiding citizens with unalienable rights into obeying their edicts, then those citizens have every right to check that power by intimidating them with their own guns.

Individual citizens don't get to decide which laws are legitimate. We have a court system that settles the legality of laws. The average person is a low IQ dunce. Laws aren't subject to the arbitrary whims.

[devil21]

He's my congressman and I smelled a rat with him a long time ago with his pandering to progressives at town halls. That he would say we should "work with" the governor is unbelievable. She's a raging commie who, while shutting down all health care in our state said that abortions had to continue because they're "life sustaining". She rules by executive order. The woman needs to be in prison and he wants to work with her.

Some of y'all should just admit that you're not libertarians, just run-of-the-mill Republicans. Libertarians are -not- a subset of the GOP, even though many held their noses and worked through the GOP as part of Dr. Paul's campaigns. We experienced how the GOP "welcomed" us by beating up elderly members, stealing vote ballots, shutting down state conventions when we were winning, driving around buses full of delegates for hours so they couldn't participate in the RNC, etc. Being so obsessed with bashing progressives, instead of trying to find common ground and offering positions that may appeal to them, just means you watch too much Fox News, read too much Breitbart and should just admit to being generic Republicans instead of libertarians.

The only signs referencing Nazis were calling the governor of Michigan one. And, here's the deal on the FAKE news about a Nazi flag:

Your point? No one said anything about who the nazi symbols were directed toward or used for, just that they were present and unnecessary.

That's the problem. You're making Populism the standard, when it shouldn't be. Populism is the reason why we continue to move further away from any real progress towards small government, sound money, etc. Populism is just sociopolitical relativism, and it always moves with the waves of arbitrary, public opinion.

We need candidates who are principled and unafraid to stand on principle, in order for their platforms to remain consistent and objective. When that happens, then it will expose the problems rooted in our society, from the corrupt media organizations to the ignorant populace who continually vote for the very candidates that have destroyed our nation because of the subjectivity of arbitrary laws.

Hence why I said I'm somewhat a purist but I'm not naive enough to think that anything will suddenly change in how national campaigns are ran and which campaigns can actually win. After 12 years of watching good, principled candidates lose while the populist liars win, at what point do we accept that maybe winning requires our own version of 5D chess? Amash does have the luxury of being able to run a moderate national campaign even before officially winning the LP nomination, which the D/R's can't do. They have to be hard right or left for primaries then head to moderate middle during the general since it's the moderate middle that actually decides elections.

[Sammy]

He's my congressman and I smelled a rat with him a long time ago with his pandering to progressives at town halls. That he would say we should "work with" the governor is unbelievable. She's a raging commie who, while shutting down all health care in our state said that abortions had to continue because they're "life sustaining". She rules by executive order. The woman needs to be in prison and he wants to work with her.

Justin Amash doesn't get it. The Progressive left is our enemy & they are destroying our country since the 60s.
He drives me crazy when is trying to pander to them.

[Ender]

Justin Amash doesn't get it. The Progressive left is our enemy & they are destroying our country since the 60s.
He drives me crazy when is trying to pander to them.

There is no right/left here- just a bunch of neo-whatevers telling you what you want to hear. It's all a ruse to keep us fighting each other instead of looking at the man behind the curtain.

[Matt Collins]

Justin Amash doesn't get it. The Progressive left is our enemy & they are destroying our country since the 60s.
He drives me crazy when is trying to pander to them.

Bingo

[PAF]

There is no right/left here- just a bunch of neo-whatevers telling you what you want to hear. It's all a ruse to keep us fighting each other instead of looking at the man behind the curtain.

Truth is treason.

+ Rep

[Sammy]

There is no right/left here- just a bunch of neo-whatevers telling you what you want to hear. It's all a ruse to keep us fighting each other instead of looking at the man behind the curtain.

Libertarianism is a right wing ideology. The Problem is that the left (Neoconservatives) control the republican Party we just need to take over the Republican Party & expel them.

[devil21]

Libertarianism is a right wing ideology. The Problem is that the left (Neoconservatives) control the republican Party we just need to take over the Repblican Party & expel them.

No, it isn't a right wing ideology in the sense of what constitutes today's "right wing". Classic conservatism, or going even further back to Jefferson's time, classic liberalism perhaps, but not what passes for "right wing" ideology today = Israel and wars and bible, but I repeat myself.

[69360]

I'm not intimidated by them, until the time comes when I have to be stopped at a "health checkpoint" in order to show them an "immunity card" that I refuse to carry along. They'll be the ones brandishing guns to enforce an unethical edict of the State. And that's the point. Guns are deterrents, and we all have every right to carry them in whatever way we deem appropriate.

I have no intention of carrying any papers or getting any immunization.

Of course you have the right to carry any gun any way you choose. But is that always the smart choice?

[CCTelander]

I have no intention of carrying any papers or getting any immunization.

Of course you have the right to carry any gun any way you choose. But is that always the smart choice?

Always? No.

Now? Absolutely. In fact, if we hope to avoid the totalitarian nightmare TPTB have planned for us, I'd say it's absolutely necessary.

[Anti Federalist]

Some of y'all should just admit that you're not libertarians, just run-of-the-mill Republicans. Libertarians are -not- a subset of the GOP, even though many held their noses and worked through the GOP as part of Dr. Paul's campaigns. We experienced how the GOP "welcomed" us by beating up elderly members, stealing vote ballots, shutting down state conventions when we were winning, driving around buses full of delegates for hours so they couldn't participate in the RNC, etc. Being so obsessed with bashing progressives, instead of trying to find common ground and offering positions that may appeal to them, just means you watch too much Fox News, read too much Breitbart and should just admit to being generic Republicans instead of libertarians.

Never said I was a Libertarian.

And we already tried that and got stabbed in the back.

Progressives are a plague, the politics of the new Bolsheviks and Jacobins are death.

The only response to them is utter rejection and opposition...$#@! them...I have no common ground with these people.

[Anti Federalist]

I have no intention of carrying any papers or getting any immunization.

Of course you have the right to carry any gun any way you choose. But is that always the smart choice?

And how do you intend to avoid that?

Wouldn't it be more desirable to make it clear you will resist now, loud and clear, in a public display of armed defiance, surrounded by fellow patriots, than shooting it out with a SWAT team alone in your underdrawers at oh-dark-thirty in your living room?

[PAF]

Never said I was a Libertarian.

And we already tried that and got stabbed in the back.

Progressives are a plague, the politics of the new Bolsheviks and Jacobins are death.

The only response to them is utter rejection and opposition...$#@! them...I have no common ground with these people.

Mistake number 1. Unless you support the statist quo.

Learn it, live it, and pass it on.

[PAF]

And how do you intend to avoid that?

Wouldn't it be more desirable to make it clear you will resist now, loud and clear, in a public display of armed defiance, surrounded by fellow patriots, than shooting it out with a SWAT team alone in your underdrawers at oh-dark-thirty in your living room?

By the link in Post #11

[69360]

Always? No.

Now? Absolutely. In fact, if we hope to avoid the totalitarian nightmare TPTB have planned for us, I'd say it's absolutely necessary.

No quite yet, I still have hope this whole virus nonsense will blow over soon as more people are pushing back against it.

And how do you intend to avoid that?

Wouldn't it be more desirable to make it clear you will resist now, loud and clear, in a public display of armed defiance, surrounded by fellow patriots, than shooting it out with a SWAT team alone in your underdrawers at oh-dark-thirty in your living room?

Oh I'm too smart to get swatted. I'm always one step ahead and never let the government know what I am up to.

Don't worry if it gets bad enough, I am firmly one of the 3%. I just don't make a show of it.

[dannno]

There is no right/left here- just a bunch of neo-whatevers telling you what you want to hear. It's all a ruse to keep us fighting each other instead of looking at the man behind the curtain.

That made a lot more sense 12 years ago when most Republicans were pro-war and pro-drug war.

Now Republicans are more anti-war, the left mostly doesn't care about war, the left supports the war on drugs and Republicans are largely for legalization of herb.

So the political climate has shifted drastically, and now the left is the clear, true enemy of liberty.

[pcosmar]

Police are an part of a free society. In fact, protecting rights with law enforcement and the military is the whole reason for government existing.

Nope..
Police (Control Enforcers) are an Authoritarian Construct..

ARE COPS CONSTITUTIONAL?
https://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm

The Framers contemplated law enforcement as the duty of mostly private citizens, along with a few constables and sheriffs who could be called upon when necessary. This article marshals extensive historical and legal evidence to show that modern policing is in many ways inconsistent with the original intent of America's founding documents. The author argues that the growth of modern policing has substantially empowered the state in a way the Framers would regard as abhorrent to their foremost principles.

[CCTelander]

Nope..
Police (Control Enforcers) are an Authoritarian Construct..

ARE COPS CONSTITUTIONAL?
https://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm

"You must spread some Reputation around..."

[Krugminator2]

Nope..
Police (Control Enforcers) are an Authoritarian Construct..

ARE COPS CONSTITUTIONAL?
https://www.constitution.org/lrev/roots/cops.htm

I am not a constitutionalist. And some random guy on the internet bloviating means nothing to me. I Googled Roger Roots and his credentials are graduating from a law school that is barely accredited. https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate...iversity-03180

An opinion which does carry weight is Ayn Rand's. Here is what she said about the police.

A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense

The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals;

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/government.html

[devil21]

Never said I was a Libertarian.

And we already tried that and got stabbed in the back.

Progressives are a plague, the politics of the new Bolsheviks and Jacobins are death.

The only response to them is utter rejection and opposition...$#@! them...I have no common ground with these people.

I always point out how Trump and the GOP are LOADED with Bolsheviks and Jacobins (more appropriately labeled Jesuit cryptos posing as whatever gets the agenda done) but you always glide right past that proven fact. BOTH PARTIES are loaded with them and are playing a false duality game of 2 wings of the same bird, particularly at the talking-head level.

A candidate that appears to not be beholden to that game emerges, who may be playing a real 5D chess game, yet we're right back to "those Dem Bolsheviks" statements. You do realize that talking heads on the tv aren't necessarily representative of all people, right? I swear, the collectivism that oozes from some of the comments on RPF these days makes me question who the real collectivists are. It's almost like you've never actually tried to find common ground but are instead content to take media accounts of your "opposition" at face value and never try.

[pcosmar]

I am not a constitutionalist.

Apparently,, just another petty Authoritarian..

[fcreature]

Wait, people here still care about this clown?

We learned Amash's true loyalties when he threw his support in the shredding of the Constitution, and more importantly our god given natural rights, in an effort to destroy a politician he simply didn't like.