And do tell, what does Fred imagine would qualify the left’s “damaging the constitution” taking? Maybe restoring habeas corpus and other things that Bush took away? A Supreme court decision he dislikes?
I’m not Fred, so I’m not going to bother speaking for him. I think it is pretty clear that there are people, myself included, who are reacting to the specific ideas coming under the rubric of “the Ayers Revolution”, as the title of the thread suggests. Attempts to turn the country into a version of Venezuela (a country Ayers is known to admire), for example, would legitimately be resisted by any means up to and including violence.
Stephen Daedelus didn’t call history “a nightmare from which I am trying to awake” because of people like George Bush suspending habeas corpus under specific circumstances in a limited number of cases. He called it that people of people like William Ayers and their free-floating anti-humanitarism and the things it leads to, like the elimination of people whose only crime is wanting to freely exchange goods and services without the state as an intermediary.
If you don’t understand that distinction, you better get yourself some history books and learn the difference because that tiger you’ve got by the tail isn’t going to stay under your control for long.
