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

[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.