Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Angle dodges question about armed revolution

For the first time, Sharron Angle has permitted herself to be directly questioned about her suggestions -- first reported on this blog -- of impending armed revolution. And she basically dodged.

From an interview with the Las Vegas Review Journal:

"In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years," Angle said in January in an interview with conservative talk show host Lars Larson. "I hope that's not where we're going. But, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."

Asked Thursday whether she was calling for an armed revolution or a political revolution at the ballot box, Angle paused and shook her head as if the question were ridiculous.

"I can't believe people are even asking that," Angle said in the brief interview. "I'm very much a proponent of the Second Amendment and the Constitution. But what we have to focus on here is a movement, a movement that's about retiring Harry Reid" by voting him out of office."

That's not an answer. Ms. Angle, what did you mean when you said that people are "looking towards those Second Amendment remedies"?

Again: This isn't about whether she was advocating the use of such "remedies" if the political process fails to reverse the country's direction. I'm happy to believe she wasn't. The question is this: Was she suggesting she believes this is a possibility in the current climate, however remote?

If her original quote had been offered in isolation, it would perhaps be understandable to ignore it. But there's a larger context here. She's repeatedly expressed similar sentiments. And she has a history of associating with groups that have similarly whacked out views. It's fair to press her on what she really believes.

By Greg Sargent  |  June 18, 2010; 10:50 AM ET
Categories:  2010 elections , Senate Republicans , Tea Party  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: Can bold new crop of Senators save carbon limits?

Comments

Oh Good Lord - someone drop me an email when Greg gets off this...

Posted by: sbj3 | June 18, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

Goooooooooaaaaaaaaaallllllllll!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: mikefromArlington | June 18, 2010 11:10 AM | Report abuse

sbj -- the woman is running for Senate. It matters whether she is capable of believing that armed revolution is a real possibility lurking around the corner.

Posted by: Greg Sargent | June 18, 2010 11:13 AM | Report abuse

I'm sure Greg will drop it once Angle owns up to what she is an every single voter out there realizes she is for privatizing peoples SS and has no interest in running Govn't effectively. Why run for Govn't if you despise it?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | June 18, 2010 11:14 AM | Report abuse

Oh and that she digs treason too.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | June 18, 2010 11:15 AM | Report abuse

from the last thread:

"More Incompetence... Crude-Sucking Barges Ordered By Gov. Jindal Shut Down By Feds"

Posted by: sbj3


Yeah, shut down for lack of fire extinguishers. Jeebus! What could go wrong? Methane, flammable crude, and motors...The incompetence is not having safety gear. Ask BP whether or not safety is important.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | June 18, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

@Greg

Did you see the video I posted in the Morning Report? I think TPM has it up as well.

That was some rough coverage from the local news. If she keeps avoiding them like that, it's only going to get rougher.

...and speaking of totally crazy Republican Senate candidates, has there been any news on Rand Paul since he went to ground?

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | June 18, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

BBQ posted this video in the last link. It is advertising gold....for Harry Reid!

http://www.8newsnow.com/Global/category.asp?C=28259&autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=4878954&flvUri=&partnerclipid=

Posted by: suekzoo1 | June 18, 2010 11:25 AM | Report abuse

All this Nevada talk and the link from The Morning Plum have tweaked my Chicken for Checkups withdrawal. Greg, you have my official permission to post that picture of my great grandfather, the patent medicine salesman, with his barnyard of chickens. I can resend if you'd like.

Posted by: AllButCertain | June 18, 2010 11:32 AM | Report abuse

@greg: "It matters whether she is capable of believing that armed revolution is a real possibility lurking around the corner."

Half of your readers believe that.

Posted by: sbj3 | June 18, 2010 11:35 AM | Report abuse

sbj -- no, they don't.

and yeah, ABC, mind resending?

and others, yup, the vid of her running away is mindboggling

Posted by: Greg Sargent | June 18, 2010 11:36 AM | Report abuse

She'd better get used to it.

Posted by: CalD | June 18, 2010 11:37 AM | Report abuse

The Las Vegas Sun is covering Angle's "second amendment remedies" rhetoric, too.

"Armed revolt part of Sharron Angle’s rhetoric"

Money quote from from a Vegas independent voter:

"Still, the comments may be extreme for the typical general election voter, even in Nevada, which has an overwhelming political culture of support for Second Amendment rights.

Lokken pointed to himself. He said he is registering as a nonpartisan voter.

“This is not the Republican Party I signed up for,” he said.

And this comment on the article is just the best:

"If Angle doesn't like our government, why does she want to be a part of it? I don't like the band U2, and that means I don't want to be their drummer."

Posted by: suekzoo1 | June 18, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

SBJ You must be jesting. Of course Angle is a lead story in the news right now as is a growing awareness that some of the ignorance on the right is getting exposed.

Angle is important in the individual sense that Greg points out...everybody certainly enjoyed taking their shots at her opponent Harry Reid when he was actually helping to craft HCR not just pontificate like Angle.

To me however this represents a larger meme that goes under the thread "you can fool some of the people....time" People are catching on. That Angle/Paul/Palin and their ilk have hidden this long dodging genuine interviews is the amazing part...not that their views are finally getting exposure and the result hasn't been pretty. Right's response...Since the Paul/Angle/Palin messages are on target it must be the fault of the messenger not the message! Ohhh that horrible "lamestream" media.
Hence we have SBJ blaming Greg.

Posted by: rukidding7 | June 18, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

@greg: "It matters whether she is capable of believing that armed revolution is a real possibility lurking around the corner."

sbj: "Half of your readers believe that [armed revolution is a real possibility].

greg: "No, they don't."

I can't let Greg get away with that - when he was raising a stink about the angry Tea Partiers carrying guns his comments were full of statements about fear of armed revolution. C'mon Greg - you can't rewrite the history of your own comments section.

Posted by: sbj3 | June 18, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

@suekzoo1 But how could ANYBODY not want to lay down a back beat for Bono and the boys?

Posted by: rukidding7 | June 18, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Greg: "... the vid of her running away is mindboggling."

Thanks for the prod. I saw the short post about it on the TPM front page but skipped viewing it. Definitely worth watching.

Random thought: It's been ages since we've heard anything from Michael Steele. The current crop of GOOPer droppings kinda makes me wistful for his tone-deaf but otherwise innocuous gaffes. Maybe he thinks he just can't compete with Bohner and crew?

Posted by: jzap | June 18, 2010 11:59 AM | Report abuse

SBJ I take your point about our fear of an armed insurrection but really you are getting close to the proverbial "straw man" here with this line of reasoning.

Yes Greg and many other posters have talked about fear of armed insurrection but I don't think we meant a "true" revolution. Everybody including Greg can speak for themselves SBJ but my fears are more along the line like the wacko's arrested in Michigan! Groups like the "Oath Keepers" also cause me concern...but in NO WAY am I concerned about a GENUINE insurrection nor do I believe the nation is riven by anything as divisive as slavery. IMHO these "so called revolutionists" are actually closer to fascist thugs who would insert THEIR will upon all of us under the name of THEIR interpretation of the Constitution.

That's our take...here is Angle's..

"In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years," "I hope that's not where we're going. But, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."

SBJ Shake yourself man! What these Tea Party "EXTREMISTS" are suggesting is TREASON!!! IT'S A FREAKING CRIME...NOT A "SECOND AMENDMENT REMEDY" as Angle refers to it!!!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | June 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

SBJ I take your point about our fear of an armed insurrection but really you are getting close to the proverbial "straw man" here with this line of reasoning.

Yes Greg and many other posters have talked about fear of armed insurrection but I don't think we meant a "true" revolution. Everybody including Greg can speak for themselves SBJ but my fears are more along the line like the wacko's arrested in Michigan! Groups like the "Oath Keepers" also cause me concern...but in NO WAY am I concerned about a GENUINE insurrection nor do I believe the nation is riven by anything as divisive as slavery. IMHO these "so called revolutionists" are actually closer to fascist thugs who would insert THEIR will upon all of us under the name of THEIR interpretation of the Constitution.

That's our take...here is Angle's..

"In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it's good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years," "I hope that's not where we're going. But, you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies."

SBJ Shake yourself man! What these Tea Party "EXTREMISTS" are suggesting is TREASON!!! IT'S A FREAKING CRIME...NOT A "SECOND AMENDMENT REMEDY" as Angle refers to it!!!!!

Posted by: rukidding7 | June 18, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

All, here's who's key to saving carbon limits in energy bill:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/06/can_new_crop_of_senators_save.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | June 18, 2010 12:13 PM | Report abuse

@jzap

Don't worry, in time you'll learn to trust my comments, since I'm normally right. And humble. Don't forget to mention humble when spreading the word of my greatness.

I'm kidding. I found it at DK who were the first to have the video up...likely because Jed is in NV.

@Greg

The more I think about it, the worse this question gets:

"What did you mean by second amendment remedies?"

Really, even moreso than the wide view "armed revolution" title...when you start thinking about what that means on person-to-person level, that's some serious stuff.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | June 18, 2010 12:16 PM | Report abuse

Kagan comparing NRA to KKK and apparently noodling about how not to inadvertently suggest that it is a legitimate group that should have legal recognition.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NGFkY2E5Zjg1OTFmYjMwODY1ODhlNDVkNTQ0OTdhOTI=


We'll see how that plays compared to this nonsense flap about Angle.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

@rukidding7

"SBJ Shake yourself man!"

Don't bother, that has nothing to do with it. Sbj isn't stupid, just disingenuous.

Posted by: TheBBQChickenMadness | June 18, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

If Obama allows the Black Panthers and SEIU to beat us when we try to vote, are we allowed to take up arms?

Would that be treason or our unalienable right?

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

If the entire GOP allows Klansmen posing as tea partiers to take up arms and spread their brand of racism disguised as tax concerns - are we allowed to take up arms as well?

Would that be treason or our unalienable right?

Posted by: latenightwhatnot | June 18, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Q.B.

"If Obama allows the Black Panthers and SEIU to beat us when we try to vote, are we allowed to take up arms?"

Q.B. For that rhetorical question to make ANY sense in regards to this debate it indicates that YOU believe there is a POSSIBILITY that Obama would use the Black Panthers (I think they're long defunct but for the sake of discussion any new incarnation)or the SEIU to BEAT people in an attempt to deprive them of their vote.

Q.B. DO YOU REALLY BELIEVE THAT OBAMA WOULD USE PANTHER OR UNION GOONS TO DEPRIVE YOU OF YOUR VOTE OR ATTEMPT TO INTIMIDATE YOU AT THE BALLOT BOX?

Q.B. you and the other wingnuts resort to hyperbole so frequently and easily you truly lose sight of the actual debate. Seriously this is amazing. Your post implies that you believe Obama would PERHAPS actually use Panther or Union goons to influence elections. In other words Q.B. You have jumped the shark. You believe Obama is a tyrannical despot who is gathering his dictatorial powers as we speak.

Earth to QB....Earth to Q.B. could you adjust your foil a bit your message is garbled!

Posted by: rukidding7 | June 18, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

On the contrary, ruk, what I just illustrated is that you have jumped the shark and inhabit a far-off fringe of the fever swamp.

Perhaps you don't know that the Obama/Holder DOJ dismissed a clear-cut case against Black Panthers who barred the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia with clubs -- dismissed over the objections of staff lawyers and after default judgment had been entered. Do some googling; enlighten yourself.

And apparently you don't know that SEIU thugs have indeed beat anti-Obama demonstrators. He said they should "punch back twice as hard," and they did. Again, google is your friend.

So you tell me which is more far-fetched and which has some thin attachment to reality.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

"If the entire GOP allows Klansmen posing as tea partiers to take up arms and spread their brand of racism disguised as tax concerns - are we allowed to take up arms as well?"

No. The postulated conditions are not parallel.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

if sbj doesn't like this blog's coverage, why does he want to be a part of it...?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | June 18, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

qb: "Perhaps you don't know that the Obama/Holder DOJ dismissed a clear-cut case against Black Panthers who barred the entrance to a polling place in Philadelphia with clubs"

-----------------------------------------------

care to provide any evidence supporting your claim that they barred entrance to anyone?

what about the rand paul supporters who were removed from voting places?

http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20100518/NEWS0106/5180337/Rand-Paul-supporters-removed-from-polling-places-during-Kentucky-primary-election

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | June 18, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

I'm just glad one postulated condition can recognize another one.

Posted by: latenightwhatnot | June 18, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

also, the case with seiu is not clear and there was violence and intimidation on all sides.

what about the teabaggers calling democratic congressmen anti gay and racist slurs before the health care vote? what about the teabaggers showing up to obama speeches with assault rifles?

it seems you have a very selective filter when perceiving 'intimidation' and your hyperbole is not credible or persuasive.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | June 18, 2010 1:32 PM | Report abuse

"also, the case with seiu is not clear and there was violence and intimidation on all sides."

Nope

"what about the teabaggers calling democratic congressmen anti gay and racist slurs before the health care vote?"

No racist slurs; that was a flat-out lie. I've heard someone used a naughty word with Frank but haven't bothered to investigate, because, really, I don't care a lot about it.

"it seems you have a very selective filter when perceiving 'intimidation' and your hyperbole is not credible or persuasive."

No, and I wasn't making a case about intimidation to begin with. I was asking a hypothetical question designed to illustrate the fanciful nature of the paranoia Greg and his flock are showing. Which it ably did.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:42 PM | Report abuse

Teabaggers and wingnuts are such cowards. Oh sure, when they are on Fox 'News' or in front of a group of bitter angry old white people they let their unhinged bizarre rhetoric fly but when they actually have to answer to a 'non-friendly' they clam up and run away.

I thought teabagging wingnuts were proud of their ignorance and violent language. Why don't they own up to it?

Typical right wing cowardice. They try and have it both ways.

Posted by: BirchMan | June 18, 2010 1:43 PM | Report abuse

. . . and to confront ruk with the issue of whether he believes there is ever a right of resistance or believes in an absolute state.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

"care to provide any evidence supporting your claim that they barred entrance to anyone?"

There are photos of them standing at the door with clubs. I assume you've viewed them. Res ipsa loquitur.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

"what about the rand paul supporters who were removed from voting places?"

What about them? If you have a point to make about the GOP primary, go ahead and make it. But it isn't relevant.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Quarterbrain, the election is over, mmkay sweetie? You do know this right?

You're side lost, badly at that, and now it's over. But please, keep flailing like some experimental caged animal trapped in your own feces.

It's very amusing to witness.

Posted by: BirchMan | June 18, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

I've seen the plan the Black Panthers, the Weather Underground, SDS, the Yippies, and ACORN have floated to steal the next election for Obama. It is chilling.

Posted by: oldabandonedbeachhouse | June 18, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Oh and I forgot this one:

"what about the teabaggers showing up to obama speeches with assault rifles?"


Well, if that were true, then I suppose Greg's knickers wouldn't be in a twist about what Angle said.

But you make a broad and serious claim with a sinister implication, but of course your proof is lacking.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse


Oh Good Lord - someone drop me an email when Greg gets off this...

Posted by: sbj3 | June 18, 2010 11:08 AM

..............

Will do. Please post your email, and then stay away from Plumline, until you get an email from me, telling you that Greg is no longer reporting on your beloved Obtuse Angle, the Church Of Scientology, TeaBagger, Lady.

Posted by: Liam-still | June 18, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

qb just says 'nope' to providing evidence. i believe the testimony of the congressmen over the denials of the teabaggers, especially given their demonstrated offensive and belligerent conduct amply documented on video.

the so called new black panthers were not refusing anyone entry to the polling place, and that picture hardly speaks for itself in supporting that claim.

he ignore the assault rifle wielding yahoos and ejected rand paul supporters.

this is one of the big problems with web mediated discourse, people like qb can just keep tossing out wild assertions with no factual basis, refuse to provide supporting evidence and dismiss out of hand countervailing evidence.

this is not new to online forums, but is certainly greatly facilitated by web mediation.

still, as the cliche goes, you are entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts.

finally, as another commenter wrote, pointing out that their are yahoos on the right who have gun fetishes and like to trade in, mostly overblown, violent rhetoric is not the same thing as angle repeatedly making threatening statements a looming armed insurrection if people on the right don't prevail at the ballot box.

the meaning of her 'second amendment remedies' is clear and it is obvious why the national repubs have coached her to run away from them. sadly for her and them, she will not be able to.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | June 18, 2010 2:10 PM | Report abuse

Yoohoo, Quarterbrain, here is the story of the teabagger with a AR-15 slung over his back, complete with a picture. You know what a picture is, right?


http://prescottdailycourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&subsectionID=1&articleID=71465

Posted by: BirchMan | June 18, 2010 2:28 PM | Report abuse

Why are the Tea Party candidates running from the press? I thought they were all for transparency and the like. Why do they get upset when they are questioned about their own words?!

(actually I know the answer, I just wonder what cr@p their supporters will spew i defense).

Posted by: AMviennaVA | June 18, 2010 2:29 PM | Report abuse

The falsity of the "racial slur" and spitting allegations has been exhaustively documented at Powerline among other places. Go look it up for yourself. Dozens of video and audio recordings of the events exist, and not one contains any evidence for the allegations. Breitbart offered $100,000 to anyone who could provide evidence -- no takers.

Go read the laughable responses of McLatchy to requests for support for their absurd "report." They were able to produce NONE. They admitted that they just reported as fact what the LYING representatives alleged.

If you bothered to inform yourself before making silly assertions, you might know better. This isn't a matter of "he said she said." It's all on video and audio, and the reps lied. In fact, why do you think they suddenly went silent when follow up questions were asked and the videos started to show up proving they lied?

Black Panthers in quasi-miliatary gear guarded the door with clubs. Yes, it does speak for itself. They were intimidating people and blocking entrance. Say you were a little old white woman. Think you'd be intimidated? The DOJ career lawyers prosecuted these criminals. Holder, without explanation, terminated the prosecution. Think there is any chance Obama would not have prosecuted any white who did the same thing? Preposterous, and you know it.

"he ignore the assault rifle wielding yahoos and ejected rand paul supporters."

Hardly. Let's look at two aspects of your error here. First, as I said, you don't even understand what this argument was about. If you are claiming that Tea Partiers are regularly attending Obama speeches with assault weapons in tow, then you are proving Greg's own argument wrong. Second, you made a claim -- which you just repeated -- not of the single BLACK man who was photographed outside an event (lawfully) carrying an AR15 but of common bearing of assault weapons by Tea Partiers. That's what you were trying to suggest, wasn't it? And of course that is an absurd claim. Like most liberals here, you and the truth are strangers. Anything goes for you. Any wild claim will do if it suits your purpose.

Think of how preposterous your claim is. You assert that Tea Partiers are coming to Obama speeches with assault weapons. Have you ever heard of the Secret Service? Do you actually think they allow this? If not, where are all the reports and photos of all these violent protesters with assault weapons?

"not the same thing as angle repeatedly making threatening statements a looming armed insurrection if people on the right don't prevail at the ballot box."

Just like that -- there you go again with wild assertions lacking any factual basis. How ironic for you to talk about people making wild assertions without providing support.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

From the article blahg linked:

"Phoenix police said the gun-toters at Monday's event, including the man carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle slung over his shoulder, didn't need permits. No crimes were committed, and no one was arrested."

That's his "evidence" of "the assault rifle wielding yahoos" he claims are attening Obama speeches.

What a surprise. Blahg is another peddler of liberal misinformation and "wild assertions" that have no basis.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Greg, why can't you understand what she means? She has said it numerous times in plain English. It's pretty clear. If you can't figure it out after the first three times she says it and a statement from her spox then it doesn't matter if she says it five more times. You aren't going to get the picture. And it's funny how you claim to be the first to report it. You were about the last person to hear about it. I think you are just frustrated because it doesn't raise an eyebrow outside of the insulated liberal blogging universe. You want it to be a big story and it just isn't.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | June 18, 2010 3:36 PM | Report abuse

read the comments qb -- i didn't link to that article. and your logic is as sloppy as your quoting.

so, because it wasn't captured on video, it didn't happen? stellar logic, that.

i do understand the argument and being a lout doesn't help your cause. i suppose you're trying to bait me into retaliating with similar personal attacks.

read the last paragraph of my comment you're responding to again.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | June 18, 2010 4:01 PM | Report abuse

teller,

then why is she running away from the statements. and, just for the record, why don't you state what you believe she means by her comments?

you're not reluctant to, are you?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | June 18, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

My response to blahg went to moderation (for length i assume), so I'll just give the cliffs notes version:

1. Your logic is fallacious. Video and audio are indeed proof that X did not happen if X could not have happened without being on the video, and here that is undoubtedly the case. If you are falsely charged with shoplifting, I'm sure you will feel that way about the store video.

2. Don't make personal attacks and then pretend to be a victim of the response. I'd say calling someone a lout probably qualifies as acting like one.

3. Oh, yes, I forgot, you provided no evidence at all of assault rifle wielding Tea Partiers flocking to Obama speeches. My mistake.

Posted by: quarterback1 | June 18, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

QB you'ssuch an endless bag-of foul wind. Google reveals that the nonsense you raise about the Panthers in Philly is yet another overblown distortion by the paranoia exhorting right wing dingies. Google does not vet anything for its truthfulness or validity. Cease and desist your rascist horse manure. Y'all bark an wail about 2nd amendment this and ammunition that - it is disgusting. You have the emotional maturity of a 12 year old. The provincial boobs that beat their breast about how the government takes their money is disingenuous bs at best. Self serving idiocy is more like it. The simple fact is this - pay attention now - we all live and work in a society, in an interlinked economy. Neither you or I exist outside of that. If you really want to exist outside of this great country, leave! However, if you want to stay here, we have rules, taxes and accepted protocols. If you're 12 year old mind cannot get with the program, fine. You will be spanked and sent to a room.

best

Posted by: right_as_rain | June 19, 2010 8:37 AM | Report abuse

Food for her. I can't wait until Dingy Harry is gone. He has been nothing buy bad for the country.

Posted by: robpg | June 19, 2010 12:01 PM | Report abuse


This Just In!

The Unemployment rate in Las Vegas came in at 14.1 percent in May. The highest in the nation.

Posted by: geo82170 | June 19, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

hey QB. So I took your advice and did some 'googling.' Turns out you really don't need to infer anything at all about what she meant. Its all there.

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/2010_Elections/2010-elections-primaries-test-republican-strength-california-nevada/story?id=10853479

"What is a little bit disconcerting and concerning is the inability for sporting goods stores to keep ammunition in stock," she told the newspaper. "That tells me the nation is arming. What are they arming for if it isn't that they are so distrustful of their government? They're afraid they'll have to fight for their liberty in more Second Amendment kinds of ways?

"That's why I look at this as almost an imperative. If we don't win at the ballot box, what will be the next step?" -- SHARON ANGLE

Sounds pretty clear to me. She said right there that the reason why there is a a shortage of ammo in stores is because people are stocking up to 'fight for their liberty in more Second Amendment kinds of ways.'

P.S. Last time I checked, an armed revolt against our government is still called treason.

If that still wasn't clear enough, heres some more 'googling.'

http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/06/what-are-sharron-angles-2nd-amendment-remedies-to-reids-oppression.html

Angle: I feel that the Second Amendment is the right to keep and bear arms for our citizenry. This not for someone who's in the military. This not for law enforcement. This is for us. And in fact when you read that Constitution and the founding fathers, they intended this to stop tyranny. This is for us when our government becomes tyrannical...

Manders: If we needed it at any time in history, it might be right now.

Angle: Well it's to defend ourselves. And you know, I'm hoping that we're not getting to Second Amendment remedies. I hope the vote will be the cure for the Harry Reid problems.

Yes, she said it, yes she means that voting out Harry Reid will hopefully be the cure so that Americans wont have to use their 'second amendment (treasonous) remedies.'

No need for more of your spin, no need for more explanation, conjecture, or translation. Its all there in black and white. Exactly what she believes and why.

And frankly, if that doesn't scare you, perhaps you're one of the people contributing to the shortage of ammo as you stock up to someday soon fight for your liberty 'in more Second Amendment kinds of ways.'

Posted by: xcelltech | June 21, 2010 4:38 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company