Skip to main content

That the Governors, CiC of, of the States can call on in times of need and if so security of the State!

Salem Takes Honor as National Guard’s Birthplace
The history of the National Guard began on December 13, 1636, when the General Court of the Massachusetts Bay Colony ordered the organization of the Colony's militia companies into the North, South and East Regiments. The colonists adopted the English militia system which obligated all males between the ages of 16 and 60 to possess arms and participate in the defense of the community. Though the exact date is not known, the first muster of the East Regiment took place in Salem, Mass. Graphic courtesy of the National Guard Bureau

ARLINGTON, Va., Jan. 18, 2013 – On Jan. 10, President Barack Obama signed into law a bill that designates Salem, Mass., as the birthplace of the National Guard.

Local officials, politicians and members of the Massachusetts National Guard gathered at the Salem City Hall yesterday to celebrate the signing of the bill.

“What a lineage we have -- what an honor to be here,” Massachusetts Guard Adjutant General Air Force Maj. Gen. L. Scott Rice said at the ceremony.

“What a great meeting of all the history in the place,” Rice added.  read more>>>

While individual gun owners have the right to 'bear arms' they are not a trained and regulated militia of any state, to be called upon in emergencies nor even security of said state by the Commanders of the Governors or if needed the President as National CiC of the regular military. That gives the states and the federal government, the people, the right to regulate the arms that can be carried by the private citizens if they pose danger to the occupants of each state, whether by owner or others, and have no purpose other then that possible danger to others because of the advancements of the weapons produced. Those modern weapons are held in armories of the trained and regulated militia's, the State National Guard, and are used for purpose intended!

Groups that form, especially with high velocity weaponry, and well stocked ammunition supplies for, and train themselves while saying they regulate themselves, in these modern times, are labeled by Nations and Nation States as 'criminal terrorists organizations' with training camps and bent on ideologies to individual wants and not a civil society existence!

If you don't buy that last then stop readily labeling others as 'terrorist' or 'terrorist organizations', they too want the best developed and able to procure offensive weapons, by any means, to carry out their ideologies, they're no different then you or what you're arguing and fighting for! It's that simple!

Originally posted to DKos Military Veterans on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 05:22 AM PST.

Also republished by Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA) and Shut Down the NRA.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (18+ / 0-)

    Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

    by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 05:22:15 AM PST

  •  I'm going to post a counter-diary later today (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jimstaro, Chi, Glen The Plumber, NYFM, RUNDOWN

    In the past week I've done some heavy research. It appears the Second Amendment wasn't rooted in the early militias at all, but was an effort to preserve the rights of Southern States to maintain their slave patrols. I have a good deal of legal analysis to sift through.

    But remember, this was an AMENDMENT. It occurred after the revolution and the Con Con, and was a trade off deal for some other provisions the South didn't like.

    "Well regulated" referred to State's Rights. and was the dog whistle of the time.

    •  there was just a diary up about that (9+ / 0-)

      forget the legal the words of the founding fathers and the notes from the constitutional debates.

      even if it were a sop to the South, the slave patrols are NOT the only reason for the second.  not by a country mile.

      Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

      by Cedwyn on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 05:50:11 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This is true - as is true that the 2nd's intent (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        varied, greatly, depending on who voted to ratify the amendment.

        We have strayed so far from what was variously envisaged as justification, context and application, that a country mile leaves you a light year or more away from the point of origin.

    •  That's Understood (5+ / 0-)

      And not only by the South but the Northern slave owners as well.

      But it brought about the National Guard which was formed, as it should have been in those early days, and evolved over time by what the States and Federal Government saw the need for that was missing in not only protect of individual states, rather then having citizens of running around willy nilly, if you will, but the emergencies within that a well trained and regulated militia would do to help the citizens within and can be called upon, under structured leadership, to give aid and comfort to the citizens of.

      Like I say above, these arguments about, and the NRA especially, are no different then what we today call others as 'criminal terrorist', some within that culture have taken up their arms to do what these international terrorist orgs also have done or tried to on the domestic front but everyone fears calling them 'terrorists'. Even back then they were considered 'criminals' like the ones that roamed as marauders or small groups fighting for their ideologies under no control of state or federal regulations for safety of the rest of society.

      Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

      by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 05:56:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It is also true that another difference between he (0+ / 0-)

        who is acting as part of the well regulated militia and under orders is in a different legal position that he who simply assumes he is one and can act autonomously, the difference lying in sovreign immunity in the event that those two each shoot and kill someone. The one running around lose does not have it and can be prosecuted and the one who has it, can't.

    •  Frankly (4+ / 0-)

      It makes no difference, or little, as to the why of the second amendment, different times different life styles different wants different weapons different reasons for having weapons with some the same.

      As the society grew it also evolved with the growth and times, for most, and the second amendment was changed by congress for political purposes but still with the same meaning, citizen gun owners are Not a well trained nor regulated militia and the weapons over time they want are more offensive purpose and can't be used for anything else except the crazy within some owners of. You may have them and thousands of rounds of ammunition for so called defensive purposes but if ever that need comes about you're only going to be able to get off a couple of rounds as will the perp you're defending against!

      There's a reason to regulate, and yes there are some that go over the top, with no regulations then there's not a society especially in the case of guns certainly not a civil society!

      Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

      by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 06:21:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It does make a difference because... (0+ / 0-)

        the far right invokes the Founding Fathers as if they really knew them. (No, they were not very traditionally religious. No, George Washington wasn't "bullet proof.")

        The Second Amendment was after the Whiskey Rebellion, at a time when "THe US" was actually "These"--a plural word rather than a singular one (until the Civil War.)

        The teen-age angst of the US was over states' rights, not the right of an individual to defend his home (which was understood).

    •  I posted a comment to that older diary (9+ / 0-)

      and what you'll find is that the Framers were obsessed with the avoidance of a standing army, given the experience of the English during their civil wars.  In particular, the Framers wanted to avoid a situation such as they saw in classical antiquity and with Cromwell's New Model Army that essentially could determine who was sitting in Parliament and influence policy-making.

      Obviously, this went to the wayside relatively early on, but it was where the Framers were at in the 18th century.  You can find precedents for the 2nd Amendment in the English Bill of Rights (1689).

      Note the article above and its reference to the English militia system--this was put in place in the later Middle Ages as a means of calling up men to serve in the king's armies.  At this stage, between the pike and the longbow, heavy cavalry was no longer the main element on the battlefield.  Heavy cavalry--made up of the nobility and the basis for the feudal economic/social structure--was being replaced by other formations (archers, pikemen) which were based in the middle class or better off peasants.  To ensure that this group was prepared in time of war, they were required to show up at the local courthouse to demonstrate that they had their weapons and knew how to use them.  Their names would be recorded in a muster roll.

      See here from the UK National Archives:

      The musters were done away with during the English Civil War period, but were returned under the Militia Act of 1757 due to the Seven Years' War (we call it the French and Indian War).  It was enacted for every county in Britain, as well as English colonies overseas, including Canada.  

      Here's the act for Virginia:

      WHEREAS it is necessary, in this time of danger, that the militia of this colony should be well regulated and disciplined. Be it therefore enacted, by the Lieutenant-Governor, Council, and Burgesses, of this present General assembly, and it is hereby enacted by the authority of the same, That from and after the passing of this act every county-lieutenant, colonel, lieutenant-colonel, and other inferior officer, bearing any commission in the militia of this colony, shall be an inhabitant of, and resident in the county of which he is or shall be commissioned to be an officer of the militia.
      What annoys the crap out of me is that the gun nuts take the 2nd A (thanks to asshole Scalia's ridiculous reading of 18th century grammar in DC v. Heller), which is obviously intended for collective protection in lieu of a standing army, and warp it to mean an  individual right.  And many of these same people reject the idea of a living constitution in other areas

      At any rate, this is not about slavery.

      Buck up--Never say die. We'll get along! Charlie Chaplin, Modern Times (1936).

      by dizzydean on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 06:30:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  individual versus collective rights (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

        The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

        what of the 8th and other amendments that mention neither "rights" nor "people."  
        Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
        who's rights does that discuss?  here's the 9th, the kick-assest of them all:
        The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
        rights retained by the people.

        why is the right assumed to be for individuals in all amendments but the second? what is a militia but a collection of armed individuals?

        Please don't dominate the rap, Jack, if you got nothin' new to say - Grateful Dead

        by Cedwyn on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:01:36 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Hi Cedwyn, Well, I think if you look at (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Christy1947, Cedwyn

          the text of the 1757 Militia Act, you see a collective responsibility--it was something being imposed on the people, whether they liked it or not, with penalties attached if they did not show up (which had been the case since the formation of the musters back in the later Middle Ages).  From the link I had in my first post to the VA version:

          And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, That every person so as aforesaid inlisted (except free mulattoes, negroes, and Indians) shall be armed in the manner following, that is to say: Every soldier shall be furnished with a firelock well fixed, a bayonet fitted to the same, a double cartouch-box, and three charges of powder, and constantly appear with the same at the time and place appointed for muster and exercise, and shall also keep at his place of abode one pound of powder and four pounds of ball, and bring the same with him into the field when he shall be required: And if it shall be certified to the court of any county, by order of the court-martial, that any soldier inlisted in such company is so poor as not to be able to purchase the arms aforesaid, then such court shall, and they are hereby required, immediately to depute some person to send for the same to Great Britain by the first opportunity, and to levy the charge thereof in the next county levy; which arms so to be sent for shall be marked with the name of the county; and if any person shall presume to buy or sell any such arms, so provided as aforesaid, then, and in such case, every person so buying or selling shall forfeit and pay the sum of six pounds, to be recovered, with costs, by information, before the court of the county to which the arms shall belong, or in the court of the county wherein the offender or offenders shall reside, one moiety whereof shall be to and for the use of the county to which the arms shall belong for the purchasing other arms, and the other moiety to the informer: And all arms purchased by any county and delivered to any poor soldier, as aforesaid, shall, on his death or removal out of the county, be delivered to the chief officer of the militia in the county, or to the captain of the company to which such poor soldier did belong, to be by such officer delivered to any other poor soldier that the commanding officer of the said county shall adjudge unable to provide himself with arms, as aforesaid.
          Note that it is the responsibility of the individual to purchase a specific type of weapon, with specific accoutrements.  If one is too poor, then there is a mechanism to provide a weapon to that person, but the weapon still belonged to the state.  

          And if you did not show up to muster?

          And be it farther enacted, by the authority aforesaid, That it shall and may be lawful for the field officers and captains of every county, or the major part of them, whereof the county-lieutenant, colonel, lieutenant-colonel, or major, shall be one, and they are hereby required to meet at the court house of their counties respectively, the day next following the general muster in September or October every year, if fair, if not, the next fair day, then and there to hold a court martial, which court shall have power to adjourn from day to day, and to enquire of the age and abilities of all persons inlisted, and to exempt such as they shall adjudge incapable of service, and of all delinquents returned by the captains for absence from musters or appearing without arms, powder, or ball; and where any person is returned a delinquent to a court-martial and shall not be able, by reason of sickness or other real disability, to attend such court to give in his reasonable excuse for such his delinquency, it shall and may be lawful for the succeeding court-martial to be held for such county, city or borough, wherein such person shall be returned a delinquent, upon such reasonable excuse then offered, to remit such fine or fines levied by the proceeding court-martial on such person; and such court shall and may, and they are hereby impowered to administer an oath or oaths to any person or persons for their better information in the premisses, and to order the fines inflicted by this act, not otherwise directed, to be levied upon all delinquents who shall not make out some just excuse, for not performing their duty, and to order and dispose of all such fines for buying drums and trophies for the use of the militia of the county, and for supplying the militia of the said county with arms:
          And what was being done at these musters?
          And for the better training and exercising the militia, and rendering them more serviceable, Be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid, That every captain shall, once in three months, and oftner if thereto required by the lieutenant or chief commanding officer in the county, muster, train, and exercise his company, and the lieutenant or other chief commanding officer in the county shall cause a general muster and exercise of all the companies within his county, to be made in the months of March or April, and September or October, yearly; and if any soldier shall, at any general or private muster, refuse to perform the command of his officer, or behave himself refractorily or mutinously, or misbehave himself at the courts martial to be held in pursuance of this act, as is herein after directed, it shall and may be lawful to and for the chief commanding officer, then present, to cause such offender to be tied neck and heels, for any time not exceeding five minutes, or inflict such corporal punishment as he shall think fit, not exceeding twenty lashes.
          Notice the idea of DUTY here.  The point is to MAKE individuals have specific weapons, show up for training and act accordingly.  If one did not perform this duty, one was subject to penalties.  

          That's what makes this collective.  None of the other amendments in the Bill of Rights imposes a duty on individuals--they are all intended to preserve the rights of the individual from the abuse of power by the government (focusing again on many problems that occurred in 17th century England).  

          That's the importance of this whole discussion of what a militia was and why that clause should be the driver behind the 2nd Amendment.

          Buck up--Never say die. We'll get along! Charlie Chaplin, Modern Times (1936).

          by dizzydean on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:22:31 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  And to follow up on this (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Christy1947, Cedwyn

            the "right" in the Second Amendment was to have an appropriate weapon be a part of a militia.

            Going back to the English Bill of Rights (1689), one of the rights that William and Mary had to accede to had to do with having arms for the citizenry so that there would be no standing army:

            And thereupon the said Lords Spiritual and Temporal and Commons, pursuant to their respective letters and elections, being now assembled in a full and free representative of this nation, taking into their most serious consideration the best means for attaining the ends aforesaid, do in the first place (as their ancestors in like case have usually done) for the vindicating and asserting their ancient rights and liberties declare...

            That the raising or keeping a standing army within the kingdom in time of peace, unless it be with consent of Parliament, is against law;

            That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law;  

            Notice "as allowed by law".

            So, the right is firmly rooted in the collective responsibility of being a part of a militia so that there are no standing armies.

            But what about weapons that are not specifically for the use within a militia?  That's where US v. Miller comes in:

            In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense.
            What about that phrase, "the people" you put so much emphasis on?  Justice Stevens' dissent in DC v. Heller clears that up (Scalia's opinion is such a hash, it's not worth looking at):
            Similarly, the words “the people” in the Second Amendment refer back to the object announced in the Amendment’s preamble. They remind us that it is the collective action of individuals having a duty to serve in the militia that the text directly protects and, perhaps more importantly, that the ultimate purpose of the Amendment was to protect the States’ share of the divided sovereignty created by the Constitution.

            As used in the Fourth Amendment, “the people” describes the class of persons protected from unreasonable searches and seizures by Government officials.    It is true that the Fourth Amendment describes a right that need not be exercised in any collective sense. But that observation does not settle the meaning of the phrase “the people” when used in the Second Amendment. For, as we have seen, the phrase means something quite different in the Petition and Assembly Clauses of the First Amendment. Although the abstract definition of the phrase “the people” could carry the same meaning in the Second Amendment as in the Fourth Amendment, the preamble of the Second Amendment suggests that the uses of the phrase in the First and Second Amendments are the same in referring to a collective activity.

            By way of contrast, the Fourth Amendment describes a right against governmental interference rather than an affirmative right to engage in protected conduct, and so refers to a right to protect a purely individual interest. As used in the Second Amendment, the words “the people” do not enlarge the right to keep and bear arms to encompass use or ownership of weapons outside the context of service in a well-regulated militia.

            There's your difference.  And when the day hopefully comes that one of the group of conservative judicial activists leaves SCOTUS and gets replaced with someone more like Kagan or Sotomayor, I guarantee you that DC v. Heller gets thrown out.

            Buck up--Never say die. We'll get along! Charlie Chaplin, Modern Times (1936).

            by dizzydean on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:43:40 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, it's about militias (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Not the right of an individual to start his own "non-regulated" militia to patrol a gated community in Florida or to set up a training camp for insurrection in Northern Michigan, which is what is going on right now.

      •  May have time to write tomorrow but... (0+ / 0-)
    •  Doesn't matter (0+ / 0-)

      People are still being killed by psychotic, untrained whackos who have access to weaponry far more lethal than the muskets of colonial times. Yes, you've truly missed the point here, my friend. 'Nuff said.

      •  And (0+ / 0-)

        You apparently think? that those that quickly rush out and buy up today's latest model gun and clips for and thousands of more rounds of ammunition, quickly shoting supplies for law enforcement, to add to what they already have and can't use and don't use, which by the way Do Not Have A Long Shelf Life, are Not Psychotic, Untrained Whacko's, my friend!!!!!!!!!!

        I hope you don't own and carry, you're a loose cannon, literally!!!!!!

        Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

        by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:48:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Literacy (0+ / 0-)

          is not your strong suit, is it? Nothing in your attempted response even remotely resembles coherence. Take some English classes and then get back to me. I'll wait. By the way, "whackos" is a plural, not a peossessive. And that's just the tip of your iceberg of errors above.

    •  States Don't Have Rights, Only Powers nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:02:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Only Powers (0+ / 0-)

        To leap to the Wrong Conclusions in a single bound

        I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

        by JML9999 on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:07:13 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The People (0+ / 0-)

        Are not only the State but the Federal Government who hire their representatives, in a Democracy, that too is a simple yet powerful definition, unless you don't want big 'D' but little 'd' or no 'd' at all!!

        And they all have 'rights' that one group can't trump, those demanding these weapons as 'their rights' have and still are fighting to diminish other rights of those they exist with on numerous fronts by dictating theirs are supreme and All others are to be destroyed!!!!!

        Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

        by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:53:44 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  And they still say... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ZedMont, jimstaro

    It appears to me that the right wing and the NRA have never read the Second Amendment, yet they cling to it as if it were life itself. The first four words of the Second Amendment are "A well regulated Militia." The closest thing we have to that today is the National Guard. The members of the National Guard are armed and well-regulated. Therefore, the untrained citizenry of this country does NOT need to be. How many more Columbines, Newtowns, and Auroras do we need before  everyone gets this very simple concept? It's absolutely appalling to me that members of our armed services and police departments have to go through rigorous training with their weapons, yet we permit any nutjob to go to the corner gun store and buy an automatic or semi-automatic weapon to wipe out innocent school children. No, I challenge any of the pro-gun morons out there on this point. Sorry, you guys lose!!

    •  They don't need to be (0+ / 0-)

      But if they really believe in the 'second amendment' they certainly as civilians can join, of which most are war lovin, so don't mind sending their states Guard into invasions and occupations and especially don't feel the need to pay for same and especially the results of, but not fightin so called patriots!!!

      Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

      by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:57:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  One man's "Freedom Fighter" is another Man's (0+ / 0-)


    If there is indeed  a "Legal Mechanism" that allows the President of the United States to declare a US Citizen an "Enemy Combatant" and then arrange for said "Enemy Combatant"  to be blasted into goo, their abode into splinters in say for example Pakistan.

     Since no one has been able to identify where in the some 15 "Phone books" worth of revisions to Federal Law composing the PATRIOT act(10 and 5 fixes) not counting the AUMF against Terrorism is the verbiage that permits blasting into said goo , I would imagine that no one can identify where it prevents said process from occurring in  Piscataway, Poughkeepsie or Punxsutawney.

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 07:00:45 AM PST

    •  And Whom (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Walked away from Any and All Accountability of your write and oh so much more so quickly while many even started laying the blame, completely, on those it was left to clean up the destructive mess while trying to not create even more future problems, an impossibility as those who walked away freely had already created what the future holds, think of the last couple of days and what's happened in Africa, far from the main missions abandoned by the country as they cheered on invading another country!!!!!!!

      Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

      by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:01:39 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  By The Way (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        The same 'whom's' had also quickly walked away from paying for the destructive wars of choice and the results of, DeJa-Vu all over again, as those who should have been held accountable count the booty they made from and will leave to their offspring!!

        Along with all the other accountability, though some of those still are on the payroll in congress!!

        Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

        by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:12:48 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  The Weapons (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Gary Norton, annieli

    Developed today and many for a long time, with military purpose in mind, are done so as 'offensive' weapons, along with the extended clips and advanced ammunition technology, not for so called defensive purposes to be stockpiled in private residences where someone who's fuse blew can quickly grab and eliminate that which blew it's fuse, already well lit in the paranoia that's only growing!!

    Vets On FLOTUS and SLOTUS, "Best - Ever": "We haven't had this kind of visibility from the White House—ever." Joyce Raezer - Dec. 30, 2011

    by jimstaro on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 08:08:36 AM PST

  •  you can have my comma when you pry it from my (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    cold dead lexicon

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    Warning - some snark above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ “If someone has a tool and is trying to negate your existence it would be reasonable to reciprocate in kind with your own tool.” - Dalai Lama XIV (sic)

    by annieli on Sat Jan 19, 2013 at 01:34:11 PM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site