I agree with nearly everything you said, except this:


I would think NO revolution involves wars between governments. It would bethe people vs the government.

I'm not counting situations where the peopleget assistance from another government.
This is really just me knit picking, kind of tongue in cheek.

I am amazed at how many people don't realize the 2nd amendment is designed to allow the people to defend themselves from the government. Too many people get their information/knowledge from CNN.

What I meant to say is War WITH Government.

There are Peaceful Revolutions, they just get much less press... both in Current and in History.

What's worse is, it is amazing how many AMERICANS don't understand the 2nd, yet it's right there in plain English in undisputable words. Nothing that is being debated by the Scholars takes away from the intent, being able to arm ourselves against a Tyrannical US Government.

Yet you NEVER hear that discussed on the news. That point is never brought up.

Despite the fact that there are groups out there, both home and abroad, that already feel the US Government fits the description required to have the People rise against it. Which is why some on the more extreme side of things feel all this 2nd stuff is coming up... the part of the plan where they Disarm the Population so they can move forward unopposed.

Article 50 is the clause that needs to be invoked for a member state to leave the EU.

* deleted double post *

While I agree with you in principle, if all we are given is 2 bums to choose from I would rather not have EITHER of them in office.
That said, when this is the case I typically put in a write-in vote, however ridiculous it may sound. I have even gone so far as to write in "vote of no confidence".