Posted on 01/19/2013 5:32:14 PM PST by Bratch
In 2008, the Anchorage Daily News ran this deck bellow the headline: “NO MORE GUNS: Alaska State Defense Force stripped of many powers.”
Irony knows no bounds when it comes to the Tea Party.
In 2008, Tea Party Queen and Shoot ‘Em Up and Hang ‘Em Governor Sarah Palin (R-AK) disarmed brigade members of the Alaska State Defense Force (think volunteer militia) at the recommendation of the state military officials, based on a report by an investigator with the Washington National Guard.
(I)n a major decision proving unpopular with at least some of the force’s roughly 280 members, the state is taking away the brigade’s guns.
Yes, Sarah Palin, as executive of the state, took away their guns. And no, conservatives, you can’t have it both ways. Clearly they gave Sarah Palin the report and she took executive action on it (also known as “tyranny” when a Democrat does it).
“The report does not say Westall was a bad commander,” Campbell said. “The report says the state defense force, it’s a voluntary organization, it’s part time, it’s dedicated volunteers serving their state, but they don’t have the intensity of training, the skill sets the National Guard has.”
As a result, Campbell recommended to Gov. Sarah Palin that brigade members should no longer be armed.
The state also read a report on said militia, and yet the state was not accused of hating Republicans. Do not try this on a national level.
A report ordered by George W. Bush’s Department of Homeland Security warned of right wing domestic terrorism, writing that “the economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.” This caused massive right wing hysteria by the usual suspects. Michelle Malkin quickly donned her Republican Poutrage, and the Drudge and Breitbart followed with their angry misunderstandings of reality.
The report was unveiled in April of 2009, during the beginning of the Obama administration, and so naturally Republicans screamed and hollered about how it hurt their feelings to have a federal agency report the facts until the agency decided not to distribute the report to law enforcement. (No such whining when the same agency released a report on left wing terrorism.) This was before the Obama administration figured out that catering to crazy only enables it.
Sarah Palin has a reputation as a great gun freedom fighter of the Right (in spite of her struggles with actually shooting a gun on her reality TV show). The fact that she directed her administration to disarm the militia in 2008 and yet we heard nothing of this during the 2008 election suggests that disarming the militia is equated with “liberty” and “loving the second amendment” when a Republican does it.
When a Republican is in charge, the cult salivates at the use of dictatorial power. It’s a form of security for them, resulting in what psychologists describe as an urge to be dominated and controlled, stemming from their deeply shameful suspicion that they can’t control themselves.1
We must remember Sarah Palin’s affectionate relationship with Sheriff Joe Arpaio, who is sending out his civilian armed posse to patrol for “illegal immigrants” and to “protect” the schools. It’s a wonder Palin didn’t explain to him that in her own state, they found that “administering a part-time civilian force brings a high liability risk to the state.” Yes, really.
Why is that? Because they are not trained as well as the professionals. Go figure. This conclusion comes dangerously close to suggesting that education matters, gravity exists, there is such a thing as expertise and that not everyone should be armed with a gun. But outside of their own actual records, Republican exceptionalism demands that we attribute equal weight to non-exerts and arm chair wannabes, lest we be called “elitists”.
All you need to do in order to represent second amendment “freedom” is pose with guns and put cross hairs on your opponents. You can disarm the militia in your state without DESTROYING THE CONSTITUTION so long as you have an “R” after your name. Also, posing while leaning on the flag in short shorts helps (warning: do not try this as a Democrat or you will be branded a hater of the troops and an enemy of freedom).
If you have a “D” after your name, don’t you dare even mention enforcing the existing gun safety laws, or else the Tea Party (read: Civil War Resentment Party) will denounce you as a “dictator” and threaten to throw you in jail for violating their imaginary Constitution. You know, the one they would have written if only they had won that awful war of “Northern Aggression”.
Remember patriots, image is everything. Substance zero.
Update: This is for the Palin fans. The question is, what would the right’s reaction have been if this same scenario had happened under President Obama. With a title reading “NO MORE GUNS” they would have gone insane. They’ve already jumped the “tyrant Hitler” shark over 23 executive actions that do little more than direct gun safety commissions and enforce existing laws. Only two address limiting the availability of a category of gun or a magazine capacity. If Obama ordered Arpaio’s posse to be disarmed because they were a “liability”, would the right be defending that as they are Palin’s actions?
1. Note: These are real psychological theories on authoritarianism that are worth a look if you want to understand the consistent hypocrisy of the right. The conservative base can be seen as suffering from a desire to submit to an authoritarian who represents “traditional values”. The underlying theory is that the authoritarian personality has a weak ego unable to manage their id impulses. Alfred Adler proposed an alternative theory that power-over seekers are compensating for a feeling of inferiority, which might explain why Republican leaders are able to manipulate their base by stoking resentment of “liberal elitists”. Professor Bob Altemeyer expands on this theory in his book “The Authoritarians”. John W. Dean’s book, “Conservatives Without a Conscience” discusses the psychology of obedience to authority. For more on how the Republican fear that they can’t control themselves causes them to seek policies that impose rigid moral control, read “Red State Blue State”.
The reason they would celebrate is that the GOP hierachy would doing their fighting for them.
The left wants to dismantle the military, so what’s the problem here?
Palin technically disbanded a state-armed militia! Why aren’t the liberal nuts dancing in the aisles for her?
I’m sorry did Palin say they could no longer own their own weapons in their own houses?
pres. Cruz will appoint her Sec’y of Energy and she will dissolve the dep’t
Good thing you said 'just about'.
"The loss of policing powers offends some brigade members, many former military who want to continue to serve. They are not paid for training or equipment, investments that can run to $4,000 a person, several members said. "
Palin is the heart of conservatism; a common sense thinker. She is the real deal.
The MSM are frightened we all will rally around her again!
They are in the early stages of picking who they want to run on the GOP ticket.
Funny, I don’t remember reading this before, say, in 2008. At that time the Partisan Media Shills branded Sarah a trigger-happy dunce who should be raped.
Thanks Bratch.
“The DNC goes to sleep at night fantasizing about Palin being the nominee. They’d have a drunken-week long celebration party if she got the nomination.”
Yeah, just like they celebrated when Ronald Reagan was nominated in 1980.
The fools.
Hope this clears things up. Low-information voters (and posters) might get confused....
http://www.adn.com/2008/10/28/570834/defense-commander-resigns-after.html
The ASDF was a relic pre-statehood. Once Alaska became a state, the Alaska National Guard became the primary force; the ASDF was voluntary, ex-military — sort of like volunteer firefighters after a city has its own paid firefighters. The elderly commander was running the force as though it was his own enterprise: firing without cause, not enough training, no real organization. After a complaint was filed with the Governor’s office in 2007, an investigation was conducted by the state’s military and veterans affairs commissioner and concluded the ASDF had become a liability to the state especially if the state continued to issue weapons to this outfit. The commander resigned, and members bellyached.
One thing I say for the left: they never let the facts get in the way of a pet narrative.....
But then the cult of personality plus the new and different aspect of having a black guy run gave Obama the edge, but a narrow one thanks to the right picking McCain and Romney, two people the left also fantasized heavily about running against. The left fears Palin because they see the potential for a following based on personality not unlike Obama's.
She didn't take away any one's guns. These GUNS were privately owned, and they STILL HAVE THOSE GUNS. The Alaskan Government removed the groups POLICING powers because of the legal problems due to lack of training, and a commander whose acts were becoming questionable.
That says nothing about weapons.....
Now remember Obozo said he did not think that citizens should own weapons. And the weapons that citizens already own are "private property" that he would love to confiscate. More leftist crap, stuff does not really belong to citizens, only the government. FUBO!
I’m still trying to figure out what the hell the author of this diatribe meant when he/she wrote : “Republican exceptionalism demands that we attribute equal weight to non-exerts.”
Are non-exerts really inerts?
Cruz isn’t eligible to be President.
You do need to like her (obviously you don’t) for the DNC to fear her...but for some I odd reason they do. More than any other candidate qualified or not. Who else gets this treatment ? We haven’t seen or heard from her in months, yet here she is living “rent free” in their heads.
Happy to oblige.
Actual article title: "Defense commander resigns after complaints" . . . The report . . . found that administering a part-time civilian force brings a high liability risk to the state, he said. . . . "The report says the state defense force, it's a voluntary organization, it's part time, it's dedicated volunteers serving their state, but they don't have the intensity of training, the skill sets the National Guard has." As a result, Campbell recommended to Gov. Sarah Palin that brigade members should no longer be armed.
In other words, Governor Sarah Palin made a financial decision that the litigation risk to the state did not justify the benefits of arming the militia. That is absolutely and completely unrelated to disarming civilians or in any way violating the Second Amendment. "Shall not be infringed" does not mean that the government is obligated to provide arms, just that it is forbidden to infringe on our right to keep and bear arms. The snark and vitriol are the typical Sarah bashing, with no substance behind it. This writer, like most liberals, is mistaking the individual freedoms in the Bill of Rights for a description of job responsibilities applicable to government employees.
“.....Only two address limiting the availability of a category of gun or a magazine capacity.......”
Which two were these?
It was so mealymouthed and vague I couldn’t distinguish anything......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.