See, this is why I love real conversation! Now I’m learning something! Thanks for dropping by and sharing!
Fr, I’d never heard this mentioned. It’s an all new take on the purpose of (state? local?) militias, for me anyway, I’ve got some reading to do now…
Yeah, sorry, sometimes my ADHD just randomly throws in a clown. I mean, an entire non-sequitur sentence.
SO MUCH great information here! Bookmarked for later, so I can pick through it later and absorb all of your knowledge. Because I’m like a sponge. Or maybe more like a leech…
Someone did. They missed by inches. I would imagine they beefed up security a bit since then…
And, in most cases, it’s a good thing that our head of state is well-protected. Otherwise, we’d have a new president every week and the executive branch would be a mess…oh…hmmm…
Totally agree with you, a handgun is no match for a tank. If the military wants to make war on citizens, they will lose.
However, there is more going on that meets the eye. Many members of the military would not want to shoot their own citizens. And armed citizens can still do more damage than unarmed citizens. In other words, the 2A forces an authoritarian administration to use violence in order to repress the citizens. It ups the stakes. And citizens can strike in ways that the military can’t. Guerilla warfare tactics. They don’t need to “win”, they just need to disrupt, to spread fear.
But, yeah, with the current surveillance state, along with the culpability of the media, it seems a dubious proposition that armed citizens can save themselves from the fascists. Regardless, I have suddenly become a HUGE proponent of guns. Especially when I see the Black Panthers providing security for demonstrators. Respect.
This is interesting.
This memo is only relevant if Trump plans on staying in office past 2028, or installing another MAGA sycophant.
I mean, Trump knows that if a Democrat takes office, the DOJ will first clean house and then go after him for this shit. Yet he telegraphs his intention to break the law. Why?
The Constitution allows for the possibility of a gangster Administration. Checks and balances. The hope was that the Supreme Court and Congress would keep the executive branch in check.
The Constitution also recognizes that no system is perfect, so it adds the right to bear arms. Not for sport. Not for defense. The Second Amendment exists specifically to fight tyranny. Just in case the elections get rigged and an extremist party takes control.
Such an unlikely scenario, amiright?
This is false.
The Pentagon hosts a Ramadan dinner (at the end of the holiday, to celebrate the conclusion of the fasting ritual).
The Pentagon has hosted Hanukkah menorah lighting ceremonies. (I’m not sure if they still do.)
The issue here isn’t the sponsoring of a religious activity. The function of the military is to send soldiers to their deaths. Those soldiers who need spiritual support should absolutely have access to it.
The issue is that the president and the defense secretary have incorporated evangelical Christianity into their cronyism. Religion is being used as a litmus test for loyalty.
Signed,
A pragmatic (ex-militant) atheist
Your average American is not intelligent enough to decipher the clever wordsmithing of the average journalist.
In an age where sensationalistic headlines are the norm, an understated headline can seem to lend credibility to the absurd.
This is not a problem, though. I enjoy eating popcorn and watching the world burn.
First, who the fuck is an expert on teleporting to Waffle House?
Second, why the fuck are the experts “dubious” instead of incredulous or openly condescending? JFC, c’mon experts, do better!
Right! I must have been high when I wrote that! 🤣