Watch 44 seconds of Republican leaders grinning silently in response to questions about Roy Moore's alleged child molestation

Originally published at:


OMG OMG OMG - the photo you used?


this is another sand and horrible example of people abusing their power.



Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

It’s interesting that the USA, despite all the 2nd amendment drivel by gun nuts, has no right of revolution.


The look on Mitch’s face


Pretty much. This is what happens when you get in bed with Trump & Friends: you end up riding the tiger, except in this metaphor the tiger is child molestation and riding it is being forced to be on the side endorsing/defending it.


What relevance do you find in that quote to a right of revolution? Rephrased, it merely says that if you don’t want the people to revolt you should have laws protecting human rights. It does not name revolution as one of those rights, but as the method with which the people will ensure them if the government doesn’t.


Seeing Mitch McConnell smile is a reminder that unholy things often pose as normal and innocuous. His actions from the onset of Obama’s election with his obstructionist intent tells much about his vile nature. Honest history will be a vicious chapter when mitch’s story is told



What you are looking at in that video are men who believe that taxes on the wealthy are worse than statutory rape.


The guy in the blue tie looks like he’s dying on the inside. Like he knows this is wrong but won’t let go of the salt.

For the salt reference:


The thing that keeps making me gnash my teeth is people like Bannon saying “don’t you find it suspicious that this would come out when he’s running for office?”

Because, regardless of how much you like conspiracy theories, that argument doesn’t make any fucking sense even on the face of it. AFAICT he’s been a piece of shit since birth, and the ConspHillarcy didn’t want him to win his previous races any more than this one. There’s no reason why they wouldn’t reveal / fabricate it at the earliest opportunity, if they were going to.


“International Law, Dignity, Democracy, and the Arab Spring”:


In addition the right to revolution is present in several countries constitutions i.e. (Quote from wikipedia):

  • The 1949 Grundgesetz, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Germany, contains both entrenched, un-amendable clauses protecting human and natural rights, as well as a clause in its Article 20 (since 1968) recognizing the right of the people to resist unconstitutional tyranny, if all other measures have failed:
    All Germans shall have the right to resist any person seeking to abolish this constitutional order, if no other remedy is available.[40]
  • All Greek constitutions since the Greek Revolution have contained a right to resist in their concluding article. The current Greek Constitution states in Article 120:
    Observance of the constitution is entrusted to the patriotism of the Greeks who shall have the right and the duty to resist by all possible means against anyone who attempts the violent abolition of the Constitution.[41]

Right wing arguments don’t. They don’t need to.


Grand Old Pedophiles


What? It’s in our freakin’ Declaration of Independence, our very first founding document, for cthulu’s sake.

“whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government,”


“when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government”

And Thomas “let them take up arms” Jefferson wrote quite a bit more about this, as did Adams. The duty of revolution that is enshrined in our culture is in very large part responsible for the divisiveness of our polity. Many of your criticisms of the USA are apropos, but you are way off base on this one.


Has it force of law?

Since revolution is by definition overthrowing the law, that’s kind of an absurd query; like how green is up.

But if we are going by very loose definitions of words, then yes it does. The right of self-defense against aggression, including aggression by government, is enshrined in law here. Note many recent instances, like standoffs on federal lands for example, where revolutionaries were treated with kid gloves despite armed rebellion against the state.

Don’t try it if you are an American Indian, though.


It isn’t. I provided examples.

So it doesn’t have an explicit right of revolution codified*. That’s what I said.

*several states have though