Here’s the counterpoint: you had Federalists and you had anti-Federalists. So you already have to accept that the language was going to be a compromise.

I don’t believe the Framers, very well educated and well spoken, would insert a vaguely worded method for violent resistance. No government writes into it’s founding document the method for violently overthrowing that same government. The very troops you describe as “our armed forces” are our countrymen not outsiders…

Yeah, it was clearly a sort of afterthought, something George Mason proposed near the end of the Convention, in an effort to “quiet the people.” Even then, a lot of states were against the idea, because those states felt like they already had those rights covered. Still others, principally the Federalists, were…

A shit sandwich can call itself prime rib. It’s still a shit sandwich. Tyrants call themselves liberators. I’m not buying it. The right wing has no claim on patriotism. America survives despite them.