posted
Empire is by far my least favorite Card book, but Andrew Breitbart's recent comments indicate that Card's vision may be closer to reality than I initially thought.
quote: “I must say, in my non-strategic… ‘cuz I’m under attack all the time, if you see it on Twitter. The (unclear) call me gay, it’s just, they’re vicious, there are death threats, and everything. And so, there are times where I’m not thinking as clearly as I should, and in those unclear moments, I always think to myself, ‘Fire the first shot.’
Bring it on. Because I know who’s on our side. They can only win a rhetorical and propaganda war. They cannot win. We outnumber them in this country, and we have the guns. (laughter) I’m not kidding. They talk a mean game, but they will not cross that line because they know what they’re dealing with.
And I have people who come up to me in the military, major named people in the military, who grab me and they go, ‘Thank you for what you’re doing, we’ve got your back.’
They understand that. These are the unspoken things we know, they know. They know who’s on their side, they’ve got Janeane Garofalo, we are freaked out by that. When push comes to shove, they know who’s on our side. They are the bullies on the playground, and they’re starting to realize, what if we were to fight back, what if we were to slap back?
posted
I wonder, how on Earth in that worldview-where you've got *the military* and a majority of the people behind you, how are *you* the victim? You're literally The Man, by your own words!
Heh, Breitbart is always fun for a laugh.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it is somewhat disconcerting to see a grown man calmly say those words, and atleast seem to believe them. But just as many were distraught and worried about redneck/white supremacists with guns after the Ruby Ridge fiasco back in 92, it was still just a small minority of extremists because extremists are always just that, a minority. This guy Breitbart and anyone who he may be able to rally into actually making war against anyone let alone the U.S. government are not the majority and never will be, Americans are many and diverse but united in the fact that we have come very far indeed from the illiterate dirt farmers and factory workers who were threatened with imprisonment and death lest we march and fight for another mans Civil War. We know peace and freedoms never expected, and I doubt that even the greatest snake-oil salesman could convince enough Americans to take up arms and leave their families and content lives behind over something so pithy and conservative vs. liberal.
I almost feel the real need to ask, but is he really defining Janeane Garofalo as a social piece of currency in the matter of an uprising? the woman who makes jokes about wearing spanx and watching the food channel?
If Garofalo herself spoke to me in person about taking the fight to teapartiers in the most literal sense, I would be prone to tell her that I liked her small role in Dogma and nothing else but good-day.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know there was a time when Washington was approached by his friends from the military and told, "We've got your back when you decide to become king."
Washington basically told them, "If you think that way, you're no friend of mine, and I'll have no part with you."
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
When we win the war against Breitbart and his high ranking military friends I can only hope that Janeane Garofalo is a kind and just king.
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: You know there was a time when Washington was approached by his friends from the military and told, "We've got your back when you decide to become king."
Washington basically told them, "If you think that way, you're no friend of mine, and I'll have no part with you."
posted
i hink the potential of this development during Washington's time became a story where it actually happened.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Washington did withdraw from many associations for reasons like that, while no recorded suggestion or request for re-establishing the monarchy exists. He treated his job like one which plenty of potential corrupting influences would like to get their hooks in, and started keeping most at arm's length.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: You know there was a time when Washington was approached by his friends from the military and told, "We've got your back when you decide to become king."
Washington basically told them, "If you think that way, you're no friend of mine, and I'll have no part with you."
But I'd love to be proven otherwise if you've seen a good source on it.
Interesting. I should think though that the topic would have had to have come up at least once. Not to mention during his terms as president people like Thomas Payne became increasingly vocal about Washington trying to be George the 4th.
If such a thing occurred, it appears you are right we don't have any proof positive. Washington made it virtually impossible to find it in his correspondence by having it all burned when he died. I'll have to stop perpetuating that myth. Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
