Talkin' bout a revolution
by digby
What an excellent idea:
On the morning of July 4, 2013, Independence Day, we will muster at the National Cemetery &; at noon we will step off to march across the Memorial Bridge, down Independence Avenue, around the Capitol, the Supreme Court, & the White House, then peacefully return to Virginia across the Memorial Bridge. This is an act of civil disobedience, not a permitted event. We will march with rifles loaded &; slung across our backs to put the government on notice that we will not be intimidated &; cower in submission to tyranny. We are marching to mark the high water mark of government &; to turn the tide. This will be a non-violent event, unless the government chooses to make it violent. Should we meet physical resistance, we will peacefully turn back, having shown that free people are not welcome in Washington, &; returning with the resolve that the politicians, bureaucrats, & enforcers of the federal government will not be welcome in the land of the free.
This supersmart event is the brainchild of Ron Paul supporter Adam Kokesh, a veteran who protested the Iraq war (and was kicked out of the army for doing so.)
And for all his assurances that they come in peace:
When the government comes to take your guns, you can shoot government agents, or submit to slavery.
— Adam Kokesh (@adamkokesh) May 3, 2013
He's not alone:
Nearly half of all Republicans surveyed said they believed that “an armed revolution in order to protect liberties might be necessary in the next few years,” a new poll from Fairleigh Dickinson University found.
While 44% of registered Republican voters indicated that they believed armed rebellion would soon be a reality in the U.S., just 18% of Democrats agreed. As for Independent voters, 27% indicated that guns would soon be used to settle the country’s political problems.
.