Teabaggers start attacking people, breaking windows, to protest health care

[Elder Iptuous]

1) Isn't that what the National Guard is supposed to be for?

2) Any militia that they could possibly slap together will be more pathetic than the Minutemen who were supposedly protecting our border?

1)To resist the federal govt?
i'm pretty sure that's not in the charter for the national guard.

2)the minutemen aren't engaged in any resistance really.  has there been any stories about them going commando on anybody?  from what i recall they weren't even armed until fairly recently, and their goal is simply to report border crossings to the federal authorities to have them apprehended...

as far as the effectiveness of a slapped together militia fighting conventional forces that's not really something to be ignored if it's done in a guerrilla fashion, no?  especially if they are fighting on turf where they have significant support...
i think there is some underestimation of the danger that the country is in right now... 

also, keep in mind that they guy pictured in that article looks suspiciously like Locke from 'Lost'.  perhaps a formidable opponent... 

[Cain]

On the one hand, competent guerrillas can be fairly dangerous.  On the other hand, its not like any of these guys have anything on Al-Qaeda in Iraq or Hezbollah now, is it?

A savvy guerrilla commander is a terrifying person who can, with a small core of intelligent and dedicated people, cause mass destruction and disruption.  People who post videos of themselves marching around in the woods or desert with their guns on Youtube are idiots. 

[Elder Iptuous]

On the one hand, competent guerrillas can be fairly dangerous.  On the other hand, its not like any of these guys have anything on Al-Qaeda in Iraq or Hezbollah now, is it?

A savvy guerrilla commander is a terrifying person who can, with a small core of intelligent and dedicated people, cause mass destruction and disruption.  People who post videos of themselves marching around in the woods or desert with their guns on Youtube are idiots. 

yeah. i guess i should have specified.
the fat guy in camos that joins a group of other fat guys in camos get some media attention and lulz on the intarwebs.
but right now, there's a good amount of individuals that would act alone if a critical mass were reached.
there's old ex military guys out there that, while not in peak shape, know how to shoot a rifle, stfu, and not get caught.  acting alone, that could be dangerous.
you take one guy with a good scoped hunting rifle, and they can cause chaos in an area (e.g. beltline sniper)
you get a situation where a number of 'domestic terrorists' start adding up, and the grandpas of america start seeing them as 'freedom fighters', and things could get real messy...

i'm just saying that there are powder kegs in this country that i see getting laughed at on this board frequently, that's all...

[Cain]

I think the soldiers coming back from warzones and not being able to get jobs could be dangerous, yes, along with vets.  I think I have said that elsewhere here before.

However, there are an awful lot of wannabes whose best purpose would be for ATF trainee snipers to practice on, you have to admit.

[Elder Iptuous]

true.
but even they would be dangerous in the context of a roster of 'martyrs' that could be held up as an emblem that might rally those with a little more savy...

[LMNO]

I'd like to point out that it only took two guys with a Bushmaster .223 and a Chevy Caprice to throw the DC beltway into a panic.

[Cain]

It only takes Rahm Emanuel calling people nasty names to throw D.C. into a panic.

[LMNO]

 

[Juana]

1) Isn't that what the National Guard is supposed to be for?

1)To resist the federal govt?
i'm pretty sure that's not in the charter for the national guard.

I'm pretty sure that's treason, or very nearly it. Ironic, given how frantically patriotic they are.

[LMNO]

You know, when you look at the track record of state and local governments, I'm not sure why the Teabaggers think that letting them have more control over things would be a better idea.

[BADGE OF HONOR]

I'm just wondering how many of them actually want to secede and just haven't said anything about it yet, or if they just don't think about what getting a militia to resist the feds actually means.

[Cain]

Its funny how they simultaneously want an all powerful Emperor figure in Washington DC to smite the foreign heathen and protect them from Gay Islamist Mexicans, yet believe all power should be devolved to state level.

Of course, it has been suggested more than once that "state rights" is code for "bring back Jim Crow laws", so make of that what you will.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

You know, when you look at the track record of state and local governments, I'm not sure why the Teabaggers think that letting them have more control over things would be a better idea.

Because a state government is more easily manipulated/controlled/modified/stacked with friends than a large federal one. It's easier to get a majority in a single state to pass draconian anti-abortion laws, than it is to cover the whole country and then risk the Supreme Court's veto. Think about all the conservative "hot button" issues... prayer in school, ten commandments in court, zero tolerance for abortion, gays, etc. With a strong Federal government, all states are compelled to compromise... they can only pass what >50  senators agree on. And the senators from Kansas aren't likely to enjoy compromising with the senators from NY/CA.

Look at California. If we ask the Senators from California to vote on Gay Marriage... they will likely vote Yes. If however, we ask the citizens instead, they can be easily manipulated into saying 'No'.

Or in Colorado, where the Senators aren't likely to support legalization of marijuana, but local pushes got legalized marijuana in Denver.

Manipulating on the state level is far easier than manipulation at the national level (though FOX does a good job of trying to prove me wrong).

[LMNO]

Its funny how they simultaneously want an all powerful Emperor figure in Washington DC to smite the foreign heathen and protect them from Gay Islamist Mexicans, yet believe all power should be devolved to state level.

Of course, it has been suggested more than once that "state rights" is code for "bring back Jim Crow laws", so make of that what you will.

Perhaps updated, where "nigger" becomes "faggot" and "wetback", perhaps?




Perhaps.

[Thurnez Isa]

I'm just wondering how many of them actually want to secede and just haven't said anything about it yet, or if they just don't think about what getting a militia to resist the feds actually means.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/15/gov-rick-perry-texas-coul_n_187490.html

Texas Gov. Rick Perry fired up an anti-tax "tea party" Wednesday with his stance against the federal government and for states' rights as some in his U.S. flag-waving audience shouted, "Secede!"

Later, answering news reporters' questions, Perry suggested Texans might at some point get so fed up they would want to secede from the union, though he said he sees no reason why Texas should do that.

ON A SIDE NOTE:
sorry about linking the huffingtonpost... I don't like it either... makes me feel like a dirty hippie