If last Saturday's mass demonstrations are any indication of days to come, I see the Founding Father's visions of 'peaceful transfer of power' coming to an end, and sooner rather than later.
The smashing of windows, burning of cars and trash barrels in the streets is not what I would call peaceful. Yes, the power was transferred from a Democrat in the White House to a Republican, but so far it has been anything but peaceful.
Also witness the unhinged lunacy on the part of the folks that lost the election. That pinch-faced liberal hag on the Alaskan Airlines flight who completely lost her composure, got kicked off the plane after she berated her fellow passenger simply because he suggested that he did not adhere to her extreme liberal views of how things should be run in our country. Peaceful transfer of power? Hardly.
A woman was being interviewed at the Washington D.C. women's rally on Saturday and said (I paraphrase here) "if women continue to march in the streets, it will lead to action." I would be curious to know just what kind of 'action' this cretin is talking about. Does she think that Donald Trump, when seeing protests against him will simply abdicate his office, and swear Hillary Clinton to the presidency? I believe she just might think this will happen. And of course most people with half a brain understand that this will never happen.
Or maybe she really doesn't know what kind of 'action' she wants, she just knows that things didn't go her way, and she truly believes in her teensy brain that she should get what she wants when she wants it. And that stomping her feet, setting things on fire and smashing windows will achieve these goals. Much like a 4-year old in K-Mart, who throws a wild tantrum when mommie doesn't buy him that box of Fruit Loops.
What she is talking about, all of this 'action' rhetoric, is something that everybody else except unthinking dolts like her and her movement understands: she is talking about violent revolution.
This is how people have transferred power in every other society on earth since man crawled out of the ooze: not until our Founding Fathers wrote up how things could peacefully change with the results of peaceful elections, social change was handled by the most people with the biggest guns and the angriest voices leading the largest mobs, leading to lots of blood in the streets. This was how it was done back in the good ol' days.
By the looks of this past week, this is going to be how the Left wants things to return to; gunfire and bloodshed. Unfortunately, the Left has never really been keen on gun ownership, and they have not thought this revolution thing all the way through: the only way revolutions work is with an armed movement, and the only side in this upcoming skirmish that is openly and proudly armed is the other side (that would be me and my ilk). Sure, they are familiar with Molotov cocktails, crow bars, sticks and stones, but guns? Uh uh.
I don't see this working out for the liberal commie pinkos in the end. This revolution business requires fire power, something they are still a bit squeamish about. And until that changes, they will be resigned to setting garbage cans on fire, and getting arrested.
Some revolution. But they will eventually get it figured out, and once that happens, the notion of 'peaceful transfer of power' would be a quaint memory.
#NotOK - Why did Kathy post this? And then delete. Was it somehow #NotOK? Hail /pol/, LSP
1 hour ago