Green County VA GOP Group's Newsletter Calls For 'Armed Revolution' If Obama Is Reelected

5,723
309
Joined
Jul 16, 2001
 Oh politics...
roll.gif
roll.gif


How is this not theatre???

[h1]Greene County, Virginia GOP Group's Newsletter Calls For 'Armed Revolution' If Obama Is Reelected[/h1]




monthly newsletter published by the Greene County Republican Committee in Virginia is raising eyebrows for including a column in its March edition that calls for an "armed revolution" if President Barack Obama is elected to a second term in November.

Among articles denouncing a University of Virginia initiative to implement a living wage for employees of the institution, questioning if Obama is "America’s Most Biblically-Hostile U. S. President?" and an op-ed slamming the GOP establishment with generous use of capital letters, RightWingWatch picks out a column from the newsletter's editor, Ponch McPhee.

In it, McPhee urges readers to encourage other conservatives to vote in November. He goes on to warn that the consequences of not defeating Obama, a so-called "ideologue unlike anything world history has ever witnessed or recognized," would be dire.

"[W]e shall not have any coarse [sic] but armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November," McPhee writes. "This Republic cannot survive for 4 more years underneath this political socialist ideologue."

A disclaimer at the bottom of the publication apparently attempts to account for this type of rhetoric, noting that the contributors do "not reflect the opinion of the Republican Party whole or in part" and are only representative of the "individual" -- in this case, the editor himself.

According to the newsletter, McPhee also hosts a public radio show that airs every Saturday morning at 5:30 a.m on Charlottesville's WTJU.

Read the entire newsletter below:

GreenCountyGOP

http://www.huffingtonpost...501510.html?ref=politics
 
The only part of VA worth staying in or mentioning is Northern VA, just about any and every other part is on some backwoods type stuff.
 
Whites going off the deep end, be prepared for race wars in the near future.
 
Hey Buggz why don't you take this and all your other recent post garbage back to daily KOS, instead of posting all this democrat propaganda
 
Originally Posted by CJ863

Whites going off the deep end, be prepared for race wars in the near future.

Why can't you see the distinction made between preventing socialism and racism? 5 billion added to the deficit and you still think anybody who doesn't want obummy, only thinks that way because they are racist. Wake up!
 
Originally Posted by Sleaze Jar Omens

this does make me think "when will the next civil war/American revolution be?" though.


Never, we as a collective unit are too lazy and comfortable with the way things are. It's this very behavior that allows us to continue to slide deeper in a state of mediocrity.
 
Originally Posted by IronChef

Hey Buggz why don't you take this and all your other recent post garbage back to daily KOS, instead of posting all this democrat propaganda

You're not really troll enough, but I'll answer you anyways.
eyes.gif


Republicans do this to themselves. I'm merely re-posting what most of the world already thinks about them.

(1) I don't identify with either parties, nor am I a centrist so you won't find me at KOS. (2) You don't like hot women talking about vaginas... =
indifferent.gif
indifferent.gif
 
Originally Posted by IronChef

Originally Posted by CJ863

Whites going off the deep end, be prepared for race wars in the near future.

Why can't you see the distinction made between preventing socialism and racism? 5 billion added to the deficit and you still think anybody who doesn't want obummy, only thinks that way because they are racist. Wake up!


^

Looks like we a have a resident of Green County amongst us.

  
 
I just can't reconcile these arguments - he's "biblically hostile" implies that they are followers of the bible - but they think the right thing is to have an armed revolt?

Crazy. Have they read anything that Jesus said - in a time where his people (Jews) actually lived under hostile occupation.
 
Originally Posted by IronChef

^^^^^ baaaaaaaaaaaa says the sheep


This coming from somebody that said they want to "prevent socialism" in reference to Obama, talk about being a sheep.  We see where you get your talking points from champ. 
 
Originally Posted by MenteCriminal

Originally Posted by Essential1

Boy wait until they read this
AsenPFqCQAIPQ8b.png:large
I wonder why now and not sooner

Beats the hell out of me... I believe somewhere in the interview he said he believed civil unions would be sufficient enough.. and that didn't really happen..

But it sure as hell takes some backbone politically to officially support gay marriage at the national stage in an election year..
 
Originally Posted by IronChef

Originally Posted by CJ863

Whites going off the deep end, be prepared for race wars in the near future.

Why can't you see the distinction made between preventing socialism and racism? 5 billion added to the deficit and you still think anybody who doesn't want obummy, only thinks that way because they are racist. Wake up!

laugh.gif
laugh.gif
 i laugh anytime an uneducated clown throws the term socialism around. do you really know what socialism is? because it is a LONG way away from what we have now in this country. calling the president a socialist is such a recycled talk radio garbage cliche that it invalidates any point you make. especially considering that whole fact that tax rates are at some of the lowest levels they have been in the last 100 years, and government spending (idiotic wars excluded) has been drastically reduced. but you know, dont let something simple like fact get in the way of your fear mongering anti socialist rhetoric. wake up!
 
Originally Posted by kdawg

I just can't reconcile these arguments - he's "biblically hostile" implies that they are followers of the bible - but they think the right thing is to have an armed revolt?

Crazy. Have they read anything that Jesus said - in a time where his people (Jews) actually lived under hostile occupation.

Jesus was most definitely in favor of capitalism over socialism.
 
Originally Posted by buggz05

Originally Posted by kdawg

I just can't reconcile these arguments - he's "biblically hostile" implies that they are followers of the bible - but they think the right thing is to have an armed revolt?

Crazy. Have they read anything that Jesus said - in a time where his people (Jews) actually lived under hostile occupation.

Jesus was most definitely in favor of capitalism over socialism.
jesus constantly admonished the extremely rich. he was much more socialist and communist. 
 
Every living being in this country is a socialist, some not knowingly, but it is a fact of life.

Just look around and everything in your house, and everything outside, every action you do, and how much of your safety/entertainment is provided by the government from the taxpayers collectively.

And Jesus was no capitalist
Mark 10:17-25
20 And he said to Him, "Teacher, I have kept all these things from my youth up."
 21 Looking at him, Jesus felt a love for him and said to him, "One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me."

 22 But at these words he was saddened, and he went away grieving, for he was one who owned much property.

 23 And Jesus, looking around, said to His disciples, “How hard it will be for those who are wealthy to enter the kingdom of God!"

 24 The disciples were amazed at His words. But Jesus answered again and said to them, "Children, how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!

 25"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
 
Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by MenteCriminal

Originally Posted by Essential1

Boy wait until they read this I wonder why now and not sooner

Beats the hell out of me... I believe somewhere in the interview he said he believed civil unions would be sufficient enough.. and that didn't really happen..

But it sure as hell takes some backbone politically to officially support gay marriage at the national stage in an election year..
Or he's just pandering for votes. You're lost my man. 
 
Originally Posted by MenteCriminal

Originally Posted by Essential1

Originally Posted by MenteCriminal

Beats the hell out of me... I believe somewhere in the interview he said he believed civil unions would be sufficient enough.. and that didn't really happen..

But it sure as hell takes some backbone politically to officially support gay marriage at the national stage in an election year..
Or he's just pandering for votes. You're lost my man. 

Every position has the pandering of votes... Supporting a stop sign is a pandering of votes.. That's what politics is..

My point is : The barrage of attacks he will receive from this are counter-productive.. And even if it is gay marriage, negative attacks on anything are bad for favorable poll numbers. He's taking a HUGE risk on this when he could have kept his mouth shut about it, and kept it moving with Repeal of DADT. Pandering of course. His support of the most minute idea is a pandering to someone.

The votes he'd get for this position, were votes he already had. He wouldn't have lost any votes if he never said he supported it.

When you put your neck out as far as he just did, it is a lot more than just pandering in the position.
 
Just for the record, I was being sarcastic about Jesus being for capitalism. Our system is a capitalist/socialist hybrid anyways.
 
Originally Posted by buggz05

Just for the record, I was being sarcastic about Jesus being for capitalism. Our system is a capitalist/socialist hybrid anyways.


Glad we can agree.
 
Back
Top Bottom