MSNBC’s Dylan Ratigan, Ted Rall call for violent revolution?

posted at 9:30 am on November 9, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, I was traveling to Washington DC, where I’ll speak at the Heritage Foundation about the impact and future of the Tea Party movement this morning. While waiting for my flight, a woman conducted a rather loud cell-phone conversation with a friend (where’s Amy Alkon when you need her?) in which she discussed her frustrations with having to deal with “fascist morons” from the Tea Party. We hear a lot from the Left about supposedly violent and fascist grassroots activists for, er, limited government, and perhaps no more so than on MSNBC, which has made hyperventilation an art form.

That’s what makes this clip from Dylan Ratigan’s MSNBC show even more interesting. Ratigan gives six minutes of air time to Ted Rall, the cartoonist last seen shark-jumping by insulting the late Pat Tillman for dying in service to the country. Now Rall has a new idea for improving the country, and Ratigan seems very interested the the proposal (via Verum Serum and Directorblue):

Ironically, it was only about a month ago that Sharon Angle was excoriated by several MSNBC talking heads for making a reference to “2nd amendment remedies.” Is Chris Matthews going to call out Ted Rall and/or Dylan Ratigan for letting him promote this? Rachel Maddow wanted to know if Angle’s language was finally too extreme. Well is it still extreme when it’s coming from the far left over your own TV channel, Rachel? If so, maybe you should poke your head down the hall and say something.

Lest anyone thinks that Rall is prescribing a “spiritual” revolt of some kind, John at VS provides an excerpt of the book:

We are here because the U.S. is going to end soon. There’s going to be an intense, violent, probably haphazard struggle for control. It’s going to come down to us versus them. The question is: What are you going to do about it?…

Christian fundamentalists, the millennial end-of-theworlders obsessed with the Left Behind series about the End Times, neo-Nazi racists, rural black-helicopter Michigan Militia types cut from the same inbred cloth as Timothy McVeigh, allied with “mainstream” gun nuts and right-wing Republicans, have been planning, preparing, and praying for the destruction of the “Godless,” “secular” United States for decades. In the past, they formed groups like the John Birch Society and the Aryan Nations. Now the hard Right has a postmodern, decentralized non-organization organization called the Tea Party.

Right-wing organizational names change, but they amount to the same thing: the reactionary sociopolitical force—the sole force—poised to fill the vacuum when collapse occurs. The scenario outlined by Margaret Atwood’s prescient novel The Handmaid’s Tale—rednecks in the trenches, hard military men running things, minorities and liberals taken away and massacred, setting the stage for an even more extreme form of laissez-faire corporate capitalism than we’re suffering under today—is a fair guess of how a post-U.S. scenario will play out unless we prepare to turn it in another direction…

A war is coming. At stake: our lives, the planet, freedom, living. The government, the corporations, and the extreme right are prepared to coalesce into an Axis of Evil. Are you going to fight back? Will you do whatever it takes, including taking up arms?

I don’t find any of this at all remarkable from the execrable Rall, a cartoonist of limited talent who has compensated for it by turning into a crank. What I do find remarkable is this softball interview from Ratigan and MSNBC of a man proposing an armed revolution in the United States after months of hyperbole from MSNBC about the supposed inherent violence and fascism of the Tea Party movement. In fact, Ratigan seems rather intrigued by the potential of such a proposal, while carefully dancing just short of an endorsement. Apparently, that Election Night meltdown wasn’t an isolated case at MSNBC after all.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Pretty sure Rall will hide behind his presentation of this as a prediction of violent overthrow by the right, with him calling for the defense of the non-violent liberal loyalists by a militant left against the “Teabagging, Racist, Fascist, Christian Militia types”, or some such blather.

This is just more violent fantasy by cowardly, powerless left wing sissies, like the hate-f*** fantasies against pretty conservative women and the lesbians who hope for large, black street gang members to rape white conservative women.

Rall is not to be attacked as someone calling for a violent overthrow of the government. He is to be pitied for being so fearful of patriotic, law-abiding Americans with guns that he almost wets his pants on MSNBC. He is a NancyBoy.

Jaibones on November 9, 2010 at 10:21 AM

At what point is it safe to say that MSNBC is actively promoting Socialism for the United States?

BKeyser on November 9, 2010 at 10:22 AM

The DHS will now, of course, begin keeping an eye on atheist, left-wing cartoonists, no?

29Victor on November 9, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Wow. Glenn Beck will have a field day with this.

hawksruleva on November 9, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Rall obviously speaks with “nuance”…..unlike the rest of us bible-thumping, gun-worshiping hicks.

GarandFan on November 9, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Very interesting. The very left that is orchestrating the imminent collapse of the US and preparing the “alternative” power structure is accusing the Tea Party of this?

Watch the other hand. The masters of deceit are at work.

disa on November 9, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Wishful thinking by Rall. One thing you can bank on: the left won’t pick up arms to fight for anything.

james23 on November 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM

Wow. Glenn Beck will have a field day with this.

hawksruleva on November 9, 2010 at 10:25 AM

I assume you’ll be watching all this week. I’m fully prepared for nightmares. He’s going to reveal George Soros, puppet master.

disa on November 9, 2010 at 10:27 AM

To be perfectly honest here, I’ve heard this same crap coming from the same Liberal minded types since I was a child growing up in So. California. First time I can remember such threats of violence was from my 2nd grade teacher at Langden Ave. elementary… The years they do fly by, but some things never seem to change; Liberals have but one play book, and it is so old.

Keemo on November 9, 2010 at 10:27 AM

Take it easy on the poor oppressed guy, he’s just another victim of the evil bankers:

In the meantime, however, one visit with HR cost more than half my annual income. (My ex-employer, the Scripps media conglomerate, offered just four weeks severance pay—if I agreed not to work as a journalist for the rest of my life. Needless to say, I refused.) Just like that, I was broke.

The bills, of course, kept coming. Including my home mortgage. Unlike many people, I was conservative. When I bought, in 2004, I put down more than 50 percent of the purchase price. Refusing an adjustable-rate mortgage, I took out a vanilla 30-year fixed-rate mortgage from Chase Home Finance LLC.

My monthly nut, a combined payment of $2200 for the loan plus local property tax, didn’t seem so bad in ’04. But property taxes went up. Now I’m shelling out over $2700—on half the income. I’m still making my payments on time, but only by borrowing from a home equity line of credit.

My math is terrible so maybe someone could tell me how much does a house cost when you put down 50% and your monthly payment is still $2,200.00

SaintGeorgeGentile on November 9, 2010 at 10:28 AM

Let’s do it. I day dream all the time about frog marching these Stalinist clowns into prisons.

Hummer53 on November 9, 2010 at 10:29 AM

I have to disagree with most of the posters on this topic. What is reprinted from Rall’s writing is not the best case for Rall as advocating revolution. He is not saying much different from the previously mentioned projections against Angle and the “gun-nut” crowd. It’s not “ironic” to the reaction of what Angle said, it’s simply a more intense reaction in the same vein.

Rall still fears the righties will cause most of the problem with their guns, his difference is only “be ready for it” and (arguably) fight back. Interesting that the left is now growing reactionary in their own way–but it kind of drives my frequent point home about how mutable those labels have always been.

Because regardless of whether or not we can take Rall’s speech as “reactionary”, only by a frenzied, frantic, spinning dervish barrage of parries by the media can he avoid seeming a “fear monger”.

“The righty, inbred theocrats are COMING TO GET YOU!!“.

Really, Ted, we’ve been waiting and “praying” for a collapse of the US?!! Birchers, too! Please.

Imagine an “artist” with only one brush! Or a cartoonist who believes his own cartoons.

Axeman on November 9, 2010 at 10:29 AM

Regardless of who has the most guns (I think I know) we won’t have to worry about this guy being out there with a gun. His type are always the biggest pussies and he’ll be in hiding.

yubley on November 9, 2010 at 9:37 AM

Yes they are but remember that they are much braver when they have totalitarian rule.

shick on November 9, 2010 at 10:33 AM

This kind of threat to take on the “wingnuts” with violent action by ludicrous leftard cretins like these two puts me in mind of a scene from the 60s movie “Hombre”.
Paul Newman plays a mixed race Indian-white man who’s defending a group of wagon train ambush survivors ,stranded in a cabin on top of a hill ,from a band of bad guys.
Head bad guy Richard Boone swaggers up to deliver a threatening ultimatum to the group.
Newman finally responds to Boone : “I have a question…..How’re you gonna get back down that hill?”, whereupon Newman starts blasting at him with a rifle as the panicked Boone scrambles and falls back down the hill.
IOW, he’s so consumed by his stupidly contrived arrogant threats that he hasn’t thought through the fact that his enemy has the weapons, the high ground and the resolve to kick his ass.

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on November 9, 2010 at 10:33 AM

Took a second to peruse Rall’s website. Only political cartoon website I’ve ever been to where the artist(and I use the term very loosely) actually provides an explanation of each comic.

Hint: if you have to do that, your cartoons suck.

MadisonConservative on November 9, 2010 at 9:40 AM

The money comment for this post.

shick on November 9, 2010 at 10:35 AM

I’ve always thought a left vs right revolution would be a walk in the park. Lefties are all talk. When it comes time to stand up and take action, they will always run and hide. A liberal taking up arms? They’re afraid of guns.

loudmouth883 on November 9, 2010 at 10:35 AM

sad thing is these uber-intellectual morons WANT violent revolution. they’ve never been to war. they have no idea what civil war MEANS. idiots like Rall would probably wet himself if he heard a gunshot, and has no idea which end of a gun is the dangerous end. so him and his buddies will pass laws and edicts and make the police/military do it for them. eventually, the police/military will look across the lines and figure out “they are just like us” and the game will be up.

the three percenters know what war is. and say over and over…don’t do this..we don’t want this…don’t make us do this…

yet, they keep painting us further into a corner.

to quote MamaLiberty…

“Here’s an idea…If nobody wants a ‘civil disturbance,’ why in heck don’t they quit disturbing us?”

warhorse_03826 on November 9, 2010 at 10:35 AM

Indeed, MSNBC fails to make a key distinction: The Tea Party is for limited government, but not necessarily for limited authority.

Tea Partiers may see the federal government as some sort of alien leviathan – an institution apart from their lives as members of households, as employees or employers, as parishioners, etc. – but they are precisely the type of people to put complete trust in various law enforcement and military arms of both the federal government and their given states.

Just look at the ease with which supposed deficit hawks deflect any attempts at military cuts. Look at the knots supposed limited government types tie themselves in to justify federal and state policies that regulate what you put into your bodies, or how you organize your family unit. .

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 10:38 AM

Ted….honey…it’s our Christianity that stops us from lining up at your door and beating your ass in shifts.

I believe your plan needs a re-think. I wonder who will rally to you?

“And a cartoonist shall lead them”…?

jamie gumm on November 9, 2010 at 10:39 AM

My math is terrible so maybe someone could tell me how much does a house cost when you put down 50% and your monthly payment is still $2,200.00

SaintGeorgeGentile on November 9, 2010 at 10:28 AM

You don’t need math. The answer is too much.

loudmouth883 on November 9, 2010 at 10:40 AM

Conservative: You can take my gun when you take it out of my cold dead hand.

Liberal: I’m coming for it! It might take awhile. I might have to radically change the government before I can. But mark my words, I’m coming for it!

shick on November 9, 2010 at 10:40 AM

MikeA,

So, this weirdo wants to start a war by having his bunch of gay, hyper beta, vegetarian, anti-gun, pacifist, dope smokers attack the pro-gun, red-white& blue good ol’ boys who hunt, fish and grow their own food, and who just proved that they control about 95% of American soil. Hey, what could go wrong?

Yeah. Unless Rall and crew have found a way to weaponize their own asshattery, I’d say they’ll lose that war.

Mike Honcho on November 9, 2010 at 10:44 AM

Oh, a violent revolution, is it? Very nice.

They tell me those generally go a little more easily if you and your insane followers have, y’know, guns…

Not that I’m complaining. I look forward to Rall and the rest charging the barricades armed with a marks-a-lot…

mojo on November 9, 2010 at 10:45 AM

The only result from his type of revolution is that it gets lots and lots of THEM killed.

docflash on November 9, 2010 at 10:47 AM

When you quoted Rall

“…everyone else who doesn’t fit into their vision of what and who is right…”

Buy Danish on November 9, 2010 at 10:16 AM

Don’t you just love Relativist Fundamentalists?

shick on November 9, 2010 at 10:48 AM

Very interesting. The very left that is orchestrating the imminent collapse of the US and preparing the “alternative” power structure is accusing the Tea Party of this?

Watch the other hand. The masters of deceit are at work.

disa on November 9, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Sometimes I’m afraid that Glenn Beck right on this one.

Conservative Samizdat on November 9, 2010 at 10:49 AM

Ever see a liberal try and shoot a gun?

“Oooh! aaah! Its going to make a loud noiiiiiize!”

kurtzz3 on November 9, 2010 at 10:49 AM

If there is an armed struggle in this country, people like Dylan Ratigan and Ted Rall will be one of the first to meet their makers.

zoyclem on November 9, 2010 at 10:51 AM

Maybe this gives California the idea of splitting off into its own country.
kangjie on November 9, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Stop teasing, we are stuck with California, and they don’t get up until afternoon. I am pretty sure they start their mid day lighting up a doobie….so just what would a California revolt look like? The French really want to know.

Dr Evil on November 9, 2010 at 10:51 AM

Maybe this gives California the idea of splitting off into its own country.
kangjie on November 9, 2010 at 10:18 AM

Because losing the 8th largest economy in the world will help our position?

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 10:52 AM

but they are precisely the type of people to put complete trust in various law enforcement and military arms of both the federal government and their given states.
ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 10:38 AM

That doesn’t jive with the Oath Takers Movement.

Dr Evil on November 9, 2010 at 10:54 AM

I give them both credit for not acting like Obama is the answer who just needs more ‘cooperation’ from the rest of US. On the other hand, lil Teddy there better have a cave to hide in cause he looks like an easy take down in a real fight. I see him getting dragged outta the taxi and slapped to tears…
-
There’s your violent rev dude.
-

RalphyBoy on November 9, 2010 at 10:56 AM

Some time back, Rall said he wanted a communist dictatorship in the US:

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/liberal-cartoonist-releases-anti-american-manifesto?render=print

jdawg on November 9, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Bring it, beetches!

GISAP on November 9, 2010 at 10:58 AM

The anti-war left is so predictable. Always anti-war unless the war is inside of the United States borders and always after they have been booted from power.

Does anyone here really beleive that Big Sis will issue a terror warning against dissafected lefties?

booter on November 9, 2010 at 10:58 AM

Does anyone even understand what he said???

Ann on November 9, 2010 at 11:01 AM

We are here because the U.S. is going to end soon. There’s going to be an intense, violent, probably haphazard struggle for control. It’s going to come down to us versus them. The question is: What are you going to do about it?…

Sounds pretty much like Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn,and Ward Churchill.

I hope Rall gives the proper credit to how much “Prairie Fire” influenced him.

They know they can’t push their radical ideals through the democratic system…so they basically create a straw man argument of “crazy right wingers coming” to give them the excuse to execute violent overthrow.

The violence and suppression of free speech comes almost exclusively from the left.

But of course the “peace loving liberals” will never let a manufactured crisis go to waste.

Baxter Greene on November 9, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Eh, socialists, liberals and the “elite” don’t scare me when it comes to an open acts of hostility. We all know which side has the military background and knowledge to take care of conventional methods.

What concerns me is the left is very proficient in acts of terrorism.

ButterflyDragon on November 9, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Wishful thinking by Rall. One thing you can bank on: the left won’t pick up arms to fight for anything.

james23 on November 9, 2010 at 10:26 AM

You are correct. The left won’t for anything. But they’ll plant pipebombs to show they’re against something.

ButterflyDragon on November 9, 2010 at 11:06 AM

Will you do whatever it takes, including taking up arms?

Will you, tough guy? Forget the fact that you wouldn’t know a stripper clip from a nail clip. My guess is that when the shooting starts, your big mouth and soiled pants will be running for the hills.

It’s real easy to call for violence when you have no idea what that really means and have no intention of putting yourself in harm’s way.

RadClown on November 9, 2010 at 11:07 AM

“Bring it on. I prefer a standup fight to all this sneaking around.” – Han Solo.

catmman on November 9, 2010 at 11:08 AM

Isn’t there some sort of rule-of-thumb about a broadcaster calling for violent overthrow of the government? Just sayin’.

stonemeister on November 9, 2010 at 11:08 AM

That’s pretty funny. A slovenly cartoonist calling for a revolution. What’s he gonna fight with? A #2 pencil? The guy more than likely never held a gun in his life. Big talk for small potato.

RepubChica on November 9, 2010 at 11:09 AM

That doesn’t jive with the Oath Takers Movement.

Dr Evil on November 9, 2010 at 10:54 AM

Why not? Nothing in Oath Keepers literature leads me to believe that they would oppose searching and seizing property based on suspicion of drug possession, or organizing the tax and estate structure in such a way as to prevent same sex households from gaining “equal protection” under those laws. In fact, all they’ve done is reinterpreted their love of authority in a way that makes it more constitutional. The constitution doesn’t inherently prevent government from being an overbearing authority.

And even so, the Oath Keepers are a tiny subset of the Tea Party.

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Yes, when the country votes for a majority of conservatives to represent them in the House – the most “representative” half of the legislative branch – in response to a too-left agenda and one-party rule, that is the time for armed insurrection.

jamie gumm on November 9, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Some time back, Rall said he wanted a communist dictatorship in the US:

http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-spokane/liberal-cartoonist-releases-anti-american-manifesto?render=print

jdawg on November 9, 2010 at 10:57 AM

But of course he is not considered a “radical extremist” by the democratic party.

That is reserved for people who want lower taxes and accountability in government.

Obama’s buddy Bill Ayers, whose living room he started his campaign in, shares the same radical ideology.

He even goes so far as to call for the genocide of people who don’t agree with them politically:

Just a Little Genocide

http://confederateyankee.mu.nu/archives/276377.php

I asked, “well what is going to happen to those people we can’t reeducate, that are diehard capitalists?” and the reply was that they’d have to be eliminated.

And when I pursued this further, they estimated they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these reeducation centers.

And when I say “eliminate,” I mean “kill

But look ……over there….it’s Glenn Beck…..and he is talking about adhering to the principles of the Constitution…….AAAAAHHHHHHHH!!!!

…………….run awayyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!

Baxter Greene on November 9, 2010 at 11:12 AM

Actual pitched battles would be interesting, though. One has to assume that forces like the NYPD (which, in terms of manpower, would rank as one of the largest armies in the world) would remain under the control of people who aren’t the exurban gun collector types that some of you itching for a fight seem to be. Could the militia of upstate NY, lets say, rebuff a militarized NYPD in their attempts to maybe secure a rural water supply, or something of that nature?

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:12 AM

It’s real easy to call for violence when you have no idea what that really means and have no intention of putting yourself in harm’s way.

RadClown on November 9, 2010 at 11:07 AM

Indeed. Well said.

RepubChica on November 9, 2010 at 11:13 AM

Hasn’t anyone told Rall that he is at the very bottom of the food chain?

If our country had another revolution, Rall and people like him would be placed in Gitmo for the rest of their lives.

The notion of sexually ambiguous lefties like Rall attempting to perpetrate an armed revolution is comical.

molonlabe28 on November 9, 2010 at 11:13 AM

More projection from leftists. Violent revolution is the way of Mao and Che, the Black Panthers and the Weather Underground. It’s the way they ‘explain’ their intellectually superior socialist philosophy, justified by the assumed backwardness of their opponents. You never heard talk like this from the right when the liberals took over Washington. But logic never matters to these types, only power.

Socratease on November 9, 2010 at 11:14 AM

Wait… WHAT?

Its A-OK to start publicly agitating for armed revolt against a corrupt government that your preferred party no longer controls?

I never get the memo.

Sinner on November 9, 2010 at 11:15 AM

Maybe it went something like this.

Egfrow on November 9, 2010 at 11:16 AM

Does anyone even understand what he said???

Ann on November 9, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Translation: I’m a genius for hating haters that we need to fight to the death.

shick on November 9, 2010 at 11:18 AM

The hosts at MSNBC are pumpkin pie eyed crazy sons a 8itches.

csdeven on November 9, 2010 at 11:19 AM

It seems what actually frustrates these people is the lack of violence, hatred, and racism coming from the Tea Party and the conservative movement in general. It just doesn’t fit their narrative, and so manufactured is their outrage that they will invent right wing extremists so that they can point fingers at those horrible miscreants, all the while ignoring the ones in their midst. It’s kind of pathetic to see the sputtering leftists scapegoating the Tea Party for their own ineptitude. This particular conservative revolution is taking place exactly where it should, at the ballot box just as the Founders intended.

College Prof on November 9, 2010 at 11:20 AM

Could the militia of upstate NY, lets say, rebuff a militarized NYPD in their attempts to maybe secure a rural water supply, or something of that nature?

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:12 AM

Depends a whole lot just how ‘rural’ you mean. City cops have long experience on taking down armed hostiles in any situation all the way out to the suburbs…but go too much farther out beyond that and their playbook becomes increasingly sketchy. They might try to relearn how to form ‘posses’ from the sherrifs and state troopers – except that’s a long-lost art even to them.

My guess is there would be a massive increase in the use of UAV’s for scouting purposes past city limits. The r3v0lutionary forces would have a lot of trouble countering those.

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 11:21 AM

[ruthless Commies] taken away and massacred, setting the stage for an even more extreme form of laissez-faire corporate capitalism than we’re suffering under today

I hate the idea of violence. But when you put it that way …

HelenW on November 9, 2010 at 11:21 AM

Wishful thinking by Rall. One thing you can bank on: the left won’t pick up arms to fight for anything.

On that you are wrong. The left is infamous for not only picking up guns (and bombs), but using them to achieve it’s goals and remove it’s enemies.

The left is anti-gun only so as to control the masses knowing full well that should the need arise, it’s ‘militias’, it’s William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn’s will have access to all the weapons they need to enforce their will.

The left does not want any of the “masses” – even their own sycophants – to have guns because above all, they must have control. They know that even their fellow leftists, given a taste of freedom, will turn against them if they have the means to do so.

So to the left, guns are necessary for their elite and their trusted guards to enforce control – not for the rest of us whether we be on the right or the left.

DrDeano on November 9, 2010 at 11:22 AM

TESTING:

Revolution, Revolution, Revolution!

leilani on November 9, 2010 at 11:25 AM

Whaddya know, the post went through. Hot Air’s draconian word filtering elves must be taking the day off. YAY!

leilani on November 9, 2010 at 11:25 AM

Ted….honey…it’s our Christianity that stops us from lining up at your door and beating your ass in shifts.

jamie gumm on November 9, 2010 at 10:39 AM

Dang it.

Bruno Strozek on November 9, 2010 at 11:26 AM

Ed,

What you should do next time you encounter some brainless morons yapping LOUDLY on cell phones about ‘facist morons’ is -

to snap her/his picture with your own cell phone/other device.

It is not a violation of any law or intrusion to her privacy, and we could have a ‘leftist moron central’ for us to enjoy.

Sir Napsalot on November 9, 2010 at 11:30 AM

Dang! That kind of talk could get a guy banned from HotAir!

DrAllecon on November 9, 2010 at 11:33 AM

Who would have thought, that in a time when the libs are getting thier asses handed to them in the realm of public opinion, that they would call for violence?

Thune on November 9, 2010 at 11:34 AM

the execrable Rall

Major points for the one-word description that best fits Rall

tom on November 9, 2010 at 11:38 AM

If it’s a war between latte sipping pacifists in NY and San Francisco vs everyone else, I think I know who to place my bets on.

So bring that shit on Ted!

angryed on November 9, 2010 at 11:40 AM

.

.

.

.

Aw nevermind, Rall isn’t worth it.

reaganaut on November 9, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Incredible! Has this asshat ever taken the time to look at a Red/Blue, county by county, election map?

Hell, Rancid Crabtree in Nevada only took 3 counties out of 17 in the last election! And guess what? Guns in those counties are strictly regulated! Just how are they goin’ to start this revolution of which this moron speaks? By givin’ us Patriots paper cuts?

AllosaursRus on November 9, 2010 at 11:41 AM

The left have the union thugs to help them. They have who knows how many groups that want social, environmental, food, housing, etc., justice. They know people who know the leaders of gangs. Most have guns, including automatic weapons, and skills that only the best trained warriors have.

The left have unions in the form of all or almost all police departments across the country. If you doubt that, think back on the way the police protected the thugs who protested on Nina Easton’s neighbor’s front porch and lawn.

The left have what we call wussies but they are authoritarian wussies who live to order others around to fulfill their dreams of dominance and shattering the US Constitution.

This may just be another delusional idiot but don’t be fooled that his vision is not the vision of the leftist counter-culture. They have been planning and waiting like weasels for 45 years.

Greyledge Gal on November 9, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Actual pitched battles would be interesting, though. One has to assume that forces like the NYPD (which, in terms of manpower, would rank as one of the largest armies in the world) would remain under the control of people who aren’t the exurban gun collector types that some of you itching for a fight seem to be. Could the militia of upstate NY, lets say, rebuff a militarized NYPD in their attempts to maybe secure a rural water supply, or something of that nature?

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:12 AM

Probably, and without much trouble. Much as I respect the NYPD and what they do, that’s not the kind of battle they exist for. And frankly, I seriously doubt the members of the NYPD would be on board with abusing their power like this, anyway.

tom on November 9, 2010 at 11:42 AM

I strongly hope that most police officers would not follow union orders in such an insurrection; however, I do believe it is something that leaders will try to force upon them.

Greyledge Gal on November 9, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Probably, and without much trouble. Much as I respect the NYPD and what they do, that’s not the kind of battle they exist for. And frankly, I seriously doubt the members of the NYPD would be on board with abusing their power like this, anyway.

tom on November 9, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Hey, in the event of full scale armed revolution, all bets are off when it comes to “abusing their power like this”. And besides, do you know how many NYPD members suit up every day in full body armor, carrying fully automatic weapons? I’m sure they’re trained to use them properly. I mean, we’re wildly speculating here, but I find the ease with which so many people here insist that “conservatives” would win a civil war requiring at least a slight rebuttal.

That said, it’s all nonsense; no one’s revolting.

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:46 AM

I strongly hope that most police officers would not follow union orders in such an insurrection; however, I do believe it is something that leaders will try to force upon them.

Greyledge Gal on November 9, 2010 at 11:44 AM

In the union labor riots in Greece, the police mostly stand around and watch, like when a bank was burned to the ground by protesters, killing one of the employees. The police watched, because they are members of a union and their salaries and pensions are in jeopardy just as the rioters are.

This is what happens when you let police join labor unions.

slickwillie2001 on November 9, 2010 at 11:50 AM

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:12 AM

You assume the NYPD aren’t themselves the “exurban gun collector” type themselves.

Also, Waco showed what happens when LE types, who are extremely well trained and equipped go up against a well defended, well armed and motivated opponent – clusterfark – for the LE types. Yeah, the Branch Davidians lots a few people, but the ATF took it on the chin on that one.

Clarification: I’m NOT advocating for the BD in this case, simply using Waco as an example.

catmman on November 9, 2010 at 11:55 AM

And even so, the Oath Keepers are a tiny subset of the Tea Party.

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:10 AM

The oath keepers are (Trained) veterans and active duty members, who have taken an oath not to raise arms against the citizens of United States of America. Emphasis trained. How does an armed resurrection by untrained and disaffected leftist, unfamiliar with fire arms, stack up against Americans trained to use weapons and familiar with military tactics? It’s not about quantity it’s all about quality.

If the Left tried to set up camps to train folks to over throw the government, the FBI would move in and put a kibosh to their plans, the same as any other group.

Ratigan and this cartoonist are just beating their chests in frustration.

Dr Evil on November 9, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Hey, in the event of full scale armed revolution, all bets are off when it comes to “abusing their power like this”. And besides, do you know how many NYPD members suit up every day in full body armor, carrying fully automatic weapons? I’m sure they’re trained to use them properly. I mean, we’re wildly speculating here, but I find the ease with which so many people here insist that “conservatives” would win a civil war requiring at least a slight rebuttal.

That said, it’s all nonsense; no one’s revolting.

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:46 AM

To start with your last: yes, it’s pretty much nonsense. At the very least, it’s wildly hypothetical. To even draw up a scenario of the NYPD against some militia requires a huge amount of presupposition. Which is why I say it’s very hard to imagine a scenario where the NYPD would be in a position of pitched battle against some militia without many or most of them refusing to join in.

Regardless, there’s a huge difference between a military force and a police force, and the NYPD is very much a police force.

If it’s any comfort, the NYPD would do better in such a battle than any militia would do trying to police NYC.

tom on November 9, 2010 at 11:57 AM

That said, it’s all nonsense; no one’s revolting.

ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:46 AM

No, you and all your leftist idiots are revolting.

You make me sick.

Inanemergencydial on November 9, 2010 at 11:57 AM

forces like the NYPD (which, in terms of manpower, would rank as one of the largest armies in the world) would remain under the control of people who aren’t the exurban gun collector types that some of you itching for a fight seem to be. Could the militia of upstate NY, lets say, rebuff a militarized NYPD in their attempts to maybe secure a rural water supply, or something of that nature?

NYPD? Lol. Are we talking about these same cops who have a hard time breathing after running 1/4 mile? Also remember a lot (maybe a majority) of NYPD doesn’t live in NYC. They live in the suburbs. Don’t be so sure of where their loyalty would lie in an us vs. them struggle.

You know Saddam had the 4th largest army in the world. How did that work out for him?

angryed on November 9, 2010 at 11:59 AM

The left have the union thugs to help them. They have who knows how many groups that want social, environmental, food, housing, etc., justice. They know people who know the leaders of gangs. Most have guns, including automatic weapons, and skills that only the best trained warriors have.

The left have unions in the form of all or almost all police departments across the country. If you doubt that, think back on the way the police protected the thugs who protested on Nina Easton’s neighbor’s front porch and lawn.

The left have what we call wussies but they are authoritarian wussies who live to order others around to fulfill their dreams of dominance and shattering the US Constitution.

This may just be another delusional idiot but don’t be fooled that his vision is not the vision of the leftist counter-culture. They have been planning and waiting like weasels for 45 years.

Greyledge Gal on November 9, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Don’t know how it is in your county, but in mine, the Cops are goin’ to be backin’ us “Bitter Clingers” up here in Idaho!

You do know most blue collar union members lean more conservative than their reps, right? If they had their druthers, they sure as hell wouldn’t be usin’ their dues electing DemonRats! If you ask any member of the Teamsters or the AFLCIO, you would find a majority that would just as soon not want their dues used in any political process!

As far as gang members go, I find most scurry away into the shadows when the bullets start flyin’ in their direction. I’ve been a Bail Bondsman for a number of years and find just the threat of someone willing to confront them changes their perspective considerably!

AllosaursRus on November 9, 2010 at 11:59 AM

If we are about to enter a violent struggle for control, I want to be on the side of the gun nuts. Because…um, they’re the ones with the guns.

ramrants on November 9, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Interesting to play this video at the next GE stock holder’s meeting and see what happens.

I recall Charlton Heston got a record company to divest itself of a rap label by reading the lyrics of a “product” (Cop Killer, as I recall) to the investors.

They have a right to know and invest their money wisely.

kurtzz3 on November 9, 2010 at 12:03 PM

Yeah, the Branch Davidians only had a few people survive, who were taken prisoner, but the ATF took it on the chin on that one.

catmman on November 9, 2010 at 11:55 AM

FTFY. “Lost a few people” is a gross exaggeration. They were utterly slaughtered, women and children included. The only thing that kept them alive as long as they were was that the ATF had to go through all kinds of legal hoops to bring in something bigger than small arms. And would you like to bet some or all of those hoops will go bye-bye in an actual civil war.

I REALLY think you might want to find another example. Ernesto is exactly right, you people are in la-la land about the difficulties you’d face.

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:04 PM

Something tells me violence from Ted Rall wouldn’t be terribly painful.

Chuck Schick on November 9, 2010 at 12:05 PM

If we are about to enter a violent struggle for control, I want to be on the side of the gun nuts. Because…um, they’re the ones with the guns.

ramrants on November 9, 2010 at 12:02 PM

If that’s your line of thinking, I advise you to carefully examine which side has the gun nuts with the biggest guns and the most of them. Barring sheer incompetence (see the American Revolution among others), that’s usually the winning side.

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:07 PM

When someone with such a sibilant style of speech threatens to make war on you, you’re not under much threat.

esnap on November 9, 2010 at 12:08 PM

“Could the militia of upstate NY, lets say, rebuff a militarized NYPD in their attempts to maybe secure a rural water supply, or something of that nature?” ernesto on November 9, 2010 at 11:12 AM

it’s not just the militia of upstate new york.

remember, if only 3% of the gun owners of that area joined in…how many deer rifles is that? how many of those hunters have some sort of military experience?

the UAV’s would only be there to document the next “shot heard round the world”

redcoats marching to concord…NYPD moving to upstate new york..

the spirit is the same. taking stuff that ain’t yours.

warhorse_03826 on November 9, 2010 at 12:08 PM

hmmm……the alliance with LaRaza, New Black Panthers and the radical element of Islam might well come in handy yet, not to even mention the anarchists and Commie party USA

the party of peace..yup

sbark on November 9, 2010 at 12:10 PM

Are you kidding ? Go to Aryan nation headquarters and call them a bunch of left wing liberals and see if they agree with you.

LODGE4 on November 9, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Inconsistency is one of the hallmarks of such people.

Count to 10 on November 9, 2010 at 12:12 PM

the UAV’s would only be there to document the next “shot heard round the world”

warhorse_03826 on November 9, 2010 at 12:08 PM

…and to blow the people who fired it into chunky salsa. Or have you forgotten those things don’t just carry cameras?

I despair of any way of giving you lot a clue that doesn’t involve lead or explosives.

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:13 PM

Conservative: You can take my gun when you take it out of my cold dead hand.

Liberal: I’m coming for it! It might take awhile. I might have to radically change the government before I can. But mark my words, I’m coming for it!

shick on November 9, 2010 at 10:40 AM

Conservative: Be careful, the barrel will be hot by the time you get it.
At least,mine will be

Mini-14 on November 9, 2010 at 12:20 PM

I will say this much – if America fights a revolutionary war the way it fights the “war on drugs” or the “war on terror”, it is indeed likely to lose!

We simply don’t know how to actually fight a threat as a unified nation anymore. This is absolutely critical for any empire (which we are), yet the last time America presented a united, unyielding front against an enemy was in the 1940′s. Everything war-related has to be done by scraping up support from a mishmash of causes and classes to even wage a halfa$$ed conflict of occupation.

We’re already losing two wars that are so desperately necessary for our survival for pete’s sake…

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:21 PM

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:04 PM

I’m not talking about when they burned the compound down. I’m talking about the initial attempt to assault the compound. Had the ATF come out the victor on that one, then there would not have been the protracted siege resulting in the slaughter. The ATF underestimated the threat and paid for it.

I was a cop, in the military for 12 years before becoming a weapons instructor. Your garden variety civilian cop is not up to protracted military-type operations. Hell another commenter above said it. Only about half the force is physically fit enough to handle such ops, another shout out to the unions btw. The only portions of many civilian departments which could do such stuff are the SWAT officers. But except in many MAJOR urban areas – LA, NYC, Dallas, Houston, some other big cities (which have large, almost autonomous SWAT departments), SWAT makes up a significantly small portion of the departments

Civilian cops garner much of what they have to keep order by the authority given them by the government and the populaces adherence to that authority, not through any significant superiority in tactics, technology, equipment or training.

And not to toot my own horn, I have a lifetime of firearms and hunting experience, coupled with over two decades of military training and firearms training – including non-small arms. I think in a stand-up fight (heck, even a non-stand up fight), I could probably hold my own against a determined force of opposing libtard treehuggers tossing copies of the NYT at me.

This is of course all just speculation since I actually agree with ernesto. There is no armed revolution coming.

catmman on November 9, 2010 at 12:22 PM

Amazing the lefties here seem to forget the right is well on their way to reclaiming both houses and the presidency within the next coupla years. To say nothing of the 680 seat gain in state houses, and the 17 new right wing Gov’s!

They still want to believe the left will control police forces and the military!

Neeyat ah ah!!!! Laughing……..in my best, “Snidely Whiplash”!

AllosaursRus on November 9, 2010 at 12:24 PM

Honest question for the military types, ex- and current.

Since you know what kinds of lethal tools and in what numbers the armed forces uses in everyday combat (much better than us civvies do), does the thought of facing that firepower make you hesitate to be on the receiving end? If so, how much and why?

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:25 PM

“…and to blow the people who fired it into chunky salsa. Or have you forgotten those things don’t just carry cameras?
I despair of any way of giving you lot a clue that doesn’t involve lead or explosives.” Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:13 PM

and who, precisely, would they shoot at? how many hunters with .30-30′s can you take out with a $68,000 hellfire missile before you run out of money? and since most UAV’s only carry two, how many sorties would it take? how long before the UAV drivers stop showing up for work? killing your own people takes a toll, even if you’re just watching a video screen and pushing a button. I mean…that could have been grampa. or uncle jim. they both live up there and they both go hunting.

how many sociopath UAV drivers do we have? and can they stay in the “cockpit” 24/7?

like I said before..three percenters do this as a WARNING. do not cross this line if you do not want to die. we don’t want a war. we know what war is. most of us have seen it right up close. and we don’t like it. but given no other option….we understand what it takes to win it.

rall definitely doesn’t.

warhorse_03826 on November 9, 2010 at 12:25 PM

how many hunters with .30-30′s can you take out with a $68,000 hellfire missile before you run out of money?

Assuming you can even HIT one?

Dark-Star on November 9, 2010 at 12:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3