Posted on 08/21/2009 5:05:16 AM PDT by reaganaut1
It is hard to know what is more shocking: the sight of a dozen Americans showing up to flaunt guns outside the venue for President Obamas speech in Phoenix on Monday, or the fact that the swaggering display was completely legal. We are all familiar with the right to bear arms and the noisome extremes indulged by its zealots. But is there no sense of simple respect due the nations elected leader when he ventures forth among the citizenry?
One man strutted through the crowd with an AR-15 semi-automatic assault rifle slung over his shoulder. (That weapon was banned in recent American history until a bipartisan retreat before gun-lobby propaganda.) The man also packed a holstered handgun and completed this war-games ensemble with an ammunition clip in his back pocket. Such lethal parading, he announced, was legal under Arizona law and the public should get kind of conditioned to it.
The local police and the Secret Service were aware of the armed protestors and noted that they were kept out of the guarded convention hall where Mr. Obama spoke. That is hardly reassuring, especially this summer when so many protestors seem to consider primal rage a reasoned political statement.
New Hampshire is another open carry state. When Mr. Obama held a town hall meeting in Portsmouth on Aug. 11, gun-packing protestors were also there.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
It probably doesnt mean any more than he just got the rifle out of the trunk and slung it on that shoulder so he could have more room to use his camera or hold a bottle of water in the sun.
Don't you have to extend respect to get it? BO trashes conservative people and conservative principles 24/7 but we're supposed to quiver in awe because he organized ACORN well enough and was fortunate to have a RINO opposing him to have won the election? I thought dissent was patriotic. The old gray disease-infested whore never seemed to object to that line.
You’re probably right. It just seems to also point to this being a PR stunt, I would think that one would want to have both important items on the side you favor as a matter of course.
Even if if were, it's bad logic. Just because off-the-reservation politicians caved to the Sinkmaster to infringe on my rights, and some others had the good sense 10 years later to let it die (no credit to Bush here unless he was working against renewal behind the scenes), that means I'm supposed to bow DEEPER before them? It argues the other way!
Our rights are like our muscles, they need to be exercised from time to time.
Where did you see that? Got a link?
Looking for rock-solid identification of the AR carrier as a libertarian rather than a MoveOn/ACORN guerrilla-theater troll.
He strutted? He STRUTTED?! OMG, he strutted!!!
The old grey whore wheedles and wheezes .... lolol. Won't be long now, girlie-pie. The reaper will be at your door soon enough, and then we can all go have a drink and celebrate.
That was written in the mid to late 1700’s when the nobility still excercised power in Britain and was written about Rome where the nobility was the main impediment to the Emperor’s powers. I think his reference to a martial nobility was a reference to that. That would equate today to a leadership among our elites willing to stand between the “prince” and absolute power.
You know that if it was Moveon.org or ACORN then they'd be flooding the demonstrations with armed people acting as irrational as possible. They aren't subtle.
Yeah, I got all that. I'm saying, where they at? They don't exist.
It’s not time yet.
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.