Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Right wing groups marching on Washington on date of Oklahoma City bombing.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
caseymoz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 01:58 PM
Original message
Right wing groups marching on Washington on date of Oklahoma City bombing.
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 02:12 PM by caseymoz
http://muster4-19.ning.com/xn/detail/4569649:Event:19?xg_source=activity

On April 19th, fifteen years ago, this country suffered the worst domestic terrorist attack since the Civil War . Ninety-nine federal workers, 50 other adults and 19 children, were murdered by Timothy McVeigh at at least one other right-wing militia member.

These right-wingers find that so inspiring they are planning to arm themselves and march as close to the Capital Mall as they can. In theory, that's one mile away. Just a "protest" march, you understand. You'd also understand that "muster" is in that url just for symbolic reasons. They're just simulating and armed rebellion for inspiration, or maybe for terror, but it's their right to free speech.

What would the Founders have done? Shays Rebellion in 1789 is illustrative. In that case, veterans of the Revolutionary War had an absolutely legitimate complaint against the Congress. They hadn't been paid. It was legitimate, but there wasn't anything the Congress could do; the country was broke. Shays men had armed themselves, but they made it emphatically clear that they weren't going to overthrow the government; they weren't rebelling, just protesting. They were just armed to show that they were "serious." Similar to the RW-nuts today, they were just armed to practice their rights to free-speech.

This is what the Founders thought of it: they called up the Army with none other than General George Washington heading it. He told the protesters to lay down their guns and disperse or they would be gunned down, and when they refused, they were. Apparently, arming to show you're serious sounded too much like a armed insurrection to Washington.

And how controversial was that among the Founders? Four years later they elected Washington president. Unanimously. Part of the reason: they thought Washington would be the most likely leader to give the new federal government credibility with the people.

Under Washington's watch, the Whiskey Rebellion occurred. People living in the Appalachians decided that they were taxed enough already (sound familiar?) after Congress taxed whiskey. Believe it or not (the argument is very similar to what we hear today), the tax protesters argued on 10th amendment grounds that the Constitution gave Congress no right to tax in any way other than a per-citizen tax on states and any taxes on import. Like today, the courts, and Congress did not agree. The protesters began to attack the homes of tax collectors.

Washington called up the army, and the tax protesters knew from Shays' Rebellion what would happen, and they wisely surrendered. Their leaders were prosecuted for their crimes. No doubt, Washington would have had them gunned down.

These Right Wing Nuts are heedless of history, and cannot accept the fact that they can lose an election. When they win, they'll talk about "rule of law," and democracy, but when they lose they take up arms and begin to organize violent rebellions to overturn the people's decision.

By taking up arms and marching on Washington on the anniversary of a national disaster, the worst act of domestic terrorism since the civil war, do they expect the government not to treat it as an act of rebellion, this time?

The only reasons to march armed toward Washington would be to rebel or to terrorize. Yes, marching with guns shows that you're serious. Your free speech rights. George Washington certainly interpreted it as serious.




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
FirstLight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. If only they read history, not propaganda
scary website, that's for sure...did you see the photo gallery of everyone showing off their guns? :scared:

but the saddest part is that they see history through their own skewed lenses, and rational arguments and reality are not going to work. If Obama did what Washington did, things would get even uglier... so we have to beat them with smarts. hehe our intelligence is the best weapon we have...that and our sense of humor!
and if we fight the far with laughter, that could be a very useful tactic...on the large scale.

However, I agree that the individual nutballs that show up waving guns near or at the Pres or members of Congress DO need to be locked up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Moostache Donating Member (905 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-03-10 03:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
9. Disagree 100%...
Obama MUST do what Washington did. If he does not, these anti-social miscreants will only take that as a sign of weakness and will continue beating their drums of hatred and intolerance until one of them DOES take a shot at the President.

If the "protesters" were met a fair distance away from the capitol, like say 3 miles, by Secret Service and told to disarm or cease advancing, then any further advance would be justifiably seen as an aggressive action to endanger the life of the President and any protester resisting arrest should be shot dead on sight.

I have had enough pussy-footing around with these fuckers. Yes, they can have their guns. Yes, they can have their free speech. Yes, they can believe all the bat-shit insane things that they want to believe. But can they march into the capitol armed and yelling insane things without being stopped and told to turn back? In the words of St. John the Boehner, "HELL NO YOU CAN'T!!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hvn_nbr_2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
2. "Their leaders were prosecuted for their crimes."
OMG! What a concept! 'Nuff said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justgamma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 04:16 PM
Response to Original message
3. This is not going to turn out well.
I can see it now. One loony gets an itchy finger. Police move in. Arrests are made. The Righties will be screaming. "See we told you there would be Marshall law." Chaos.

Half the Teabaggers will wait around to egg them on. This isn't going to go well.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caseymoz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 04:22 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Your right, provided enough of them show up.
Edited on Fri Apr-02-10 04:26 PM by caseymoz
I'm thinking that if they have a thousand or more, at least a few them of will show up drunk and paranoid, and locked and loaded. That will not go well.

At least there might be some friendly fire among the rebels, which means that one or two of them might learn that, hey, guns do kill people! Just like a hammer drives nails.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tcaudilllg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 04:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. Easy answer to the whole mess
Take away their votes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caseymoz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-03-10 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #5
10. Actually, since these idiots are apparently not filling out their census forms . . .

. . . they may be moot. They're depriving conservative sections of the country both of votes in Congress and in their own legislatures. Not to mention guaranteeing their areas will receive less federal dollars.

And, ironically, they would then have reason to complain about taxation without representation.

Idiots.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. There is a Blueprint
There's a blueprint for having Blackshirts rage with anger in the streets, then start a Third Party, be ridiculed as buffoons by the masses before they seized power, and be led by a charismatic messianic figure who was a failed media artist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hestia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-02-10 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. This time, though, there is no "messianic" leader to rally around, the 'pugs have no one
I liked how Rachel broke down the differences in campaigning this summer. The 'pugs can't even agree to an agenda.

You are right in how the Brownshirts came to power, hanging around the coffee shops, 50% unemployment, bitterness over the Versailles (sp?) Treaty (I think that is what is was called - reparations to be paid by Germany for WWI - isn't it?), the change of currency every other day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-03-10 01:55 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. You Are Incorrect.
Stalin was a backwoods "hillbilly" and failed poet who was ridiculed for his public speaking because it gave away his "hillbilly" Georgia accent.

Hitler was a failed painter who fancied himself a hero of the masses, was ridiculed as a buffoon by 1920s Weimar Republic intelligensia & artists, before his Third Party Brownshirts helped him seize power in a disputed, divided election in which no candidate received the minimum number of votes to take office.

In 1992, a Third Party (Ross Perot) split the Republican vote and allowed Clinton to win the Presidency. However, if Democrats had been extremely UNPOPULAR and Republicans had split a much larger vote, in thirds -- as happened in the U.S. Presidential Election of 1824 -- then the 1992 election would have been thrown into the House of Representatives (as required by the U.S. Constitution, and happened in 1824, electing President John Quincy Adams). Because the minimum threshhold of electoral votes would not have been reached by any candidate.

In 2012, if the economy collapses (as Elizabeth Warren is warning CAN happen, and others are warning WILL happen), then the Republicans will have a majority.

Palin is a backwoods "hillbilly" and failed sportscaster (& soon-to-be failed TV show host) who is ridiculed for her public speaking. She fancies herself a hero for the masses -- in fact, she fancies herself messianic (Google "Sarah Palin + Esther"). Her attempted usurping of the Tea Party is unobstructed. Her Brownshirts will rage in the streets for different reasons -- some for Biblical fundamentalist reasons, some for racist reasons, and soon -- when the U.S. dollar is intentionally destroyed -- for economic reasons.

In 2012, a Third Party will split the (majority) Republican vote. No candidate will reach the minimum number of electoral votes required to win the Electoral College (270). By law (the U.S. Constitution), this will throw the election into the House of Representatives. The 2012 Democratic candidate will be Hillary Clinton; Obama will be gone and Biden will defer to Clinton.

The November 2012 House of Representatives will be majority Democratic. By law (the U.S. Constitution), they are obligated to choose the President. They will choose Hillary Clinton. The media will immediately label "concerns of her illegitimacy" as "serious and genuine", the Tea Partiers will rage, and Chile 1973 will repeat. Clinton will hold office for less than two years. The Tea Party Brownshirts are merely a "red carpet" of support for the real threat -- the Pentagon Neocon Tea Party -- who will depose Clinton in a military coup, for which there will be vocal popular support: "Democrats cannot govern, and only the military discipline can save us now."

http://consortiumnews.com/2010/033110.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Election_of_1824

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=sarah+palin+esther&aq=f&aqi=g2&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hestia Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-04-10 01:27 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Well, that's one vision for the 2012 elections...I just don't see 'pugs winning
this November. They have no message, other than hate Obama, and that type of message doesn't last long. Yeah, it's all shiny and pretty now, but without standing *for* something, the shiny rusts and pretty becomes tawdry. One way to keep them down and out is to out message them, which our leaders really need to do. It's gonna get ugly out there this summer with the congressional races, and we need to be the one's with cool heads so people will have a place to go out of the fray.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoeyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-03-10 01:34 AM
Response to Original message
8. The top comment on that page right now
is particularly awesome.

Comment by Robert T Barclay on March 31, 2010 at 4:21pm
Sorry, I won't be able to attend this event due to pending knee replacement surgery.


And it's blatantly obvious he's on Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr.Phool Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-04-10 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Or the doofus shot himself in the knee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seattle_blue Donating Member (299 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-04-10 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
14. It's silly season
They love April 19-20. April 20 was Hitler's birthday. What's not to love for those people. That's just the way they roll.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paladin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-04-10 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. There's Nothing Silly About It. (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kirbster Donating Member (26 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-04-10 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
16. If the District of Columbia does not allow "open carrying" of firearms
would such a gathering even be permitted? Turn them back at the city limits. The march is illegal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-05-10 07:07 AM
Response to Original message
17. Waving guns
OTOH, they're within their rights, and when the next McVeigh wreaks destruction, you can be sure that the president will be blamed by Big Media.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat Dec 21st 2024, 07:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC