TexanOkie A militia is a paramilitary force capable of offensive and defensive maneuvers intended to seize, occupy, or otherwise obtain objectives through force and subterfuge. It exists for no other reason.
Any such organization has power and is
ALWAYS political. Even in the US armed forces, from the very beginning of our nation. The Russians have always understood this. The future Teabag Militia understands this.
Duke, nowhere in that article does it state that militia members will be in front of polling places trying to influence elections.
The gentleman from the article was also on Chris Mathews tonight. He clearly states that the possible formation of the TeaBag Militia was for political application of their views. He states the same thing in his article. Applying that force to the ballot box is the most effective method of influencing state law in order to propagate their political goals and motivation.
I would bet you a binge drinking session, it won't take more than 18 months for it to happen should the TBM form.
The TBM (TeaBag Militia) is for political uses. Since the Oklahoma National Guard takes care of disaster related issues, the various law enforcement takes care of policing issues, and the militias are not trained for major Natural disasters like hazmat related issues or forest fires. As such, they become "Political Commissars" dedicated to enforcing political views by use of force.
If they are not for the application of violence versus the federal government, what would their real purpose be? When "liberals" feel endangered by the TBM, what happens when they factionalize? I know. You know as well. It would be nieve to believe that armed factions "In a well regulated malitia" living in fear of each other will eventually fight with those arms. Think Ireland.
You my friend (I do seriously mean that), have way to much faith in human nature than I do, to believe this could end well.
The TBM is way right of the Attila the Hun. Spitting on lawmakers, shouting racial epithets, the religious overtones, and the insistence on rolling back any changes in the Constitution argue for an irrational return to some set of laws and social organization reminiscent of Taliban rule.
I believe that TeaBaggers are social reactionaries that would disenfranchise many in our society by operating under a strict constructionist interpretation of the US Constitution, repudiating the body of law established by the US Supreme Court, and militarizing as a faction to terrorize any other group that stands in opposition to their views. They have stated these objectives for a fact.
This means they would remove rights from their fellow citizens and remove protections we have decided as a nation to provide society wide. Conceptually, they are becoming a lot like the opposition in Afghanistan.
Let me clarify. The National Guard is a "Well regulated militia" created from the ranks of citizens from the good state of Oklahoma. Each guard unit is a "fill out" unit trained in combat maneuvers. In essence, each National Guard brigade is 1/3 of a maneuver division held in reserve. In no case has a state been striped of so many guard units it had no ability to manage disasters or provide for its common defense (a couple states were tight in the last 8 years but not unmanageably so).
This is Oklahoma's militia problem. The Guard is operationally integrated into the US armed forces. This means that TeaBaggers are not allowed to be TBM members and part of the Guard. That is law. Therefore, the Guard at best is an armed faction of Oklahoman's who can not be trusted to fight against federal interests precisely because their loyalties lay with the President of the United States. At worst, the Guard is a strong faction capable of being used against the TBM because their loyalties lay with the President of the United States.
The Oklahoma TBM can not trust the Guard because it is a separate faction aligned with its stated enemy. The Oklahoma TBM has not identified any other danger or threat other than the US federal government.
Short of violence, how can the TBM safeguard against political intrusion they deem unconstitutional? It's nonsense.
The TBM could sue all the way up to the Supreme Court. The State of Oklahoma already has this ability. Duplication of resources would cost citizens of Oklahoma extra money. NONSENSE.
Just for instance say, the court decision goes against them? How do they defend against it without violence if they disagree with the ruling? If they accept the decision, which they have no choice in doing so in any event, there is no reason to have the TBM. If not, violence will occur. This violence is an act of succession. It would and should be crushed and leaders would be tried and convicted of treason. So what is the point of the TBM? There is no action that makes sense as an isolated faction in opposition short of the ballet box. So what sense does a TBM make? NONSENSE.
I agree they have the right to form a state militia outside the boundaries of the existing US armed forces and National Guard. I do not have to agree it makes sense in the context of their political ideology. It only makes sense if they are intending to become coercive political commissars to influence policy in the state by some sort of force such as guns near polling places (for starters).
Their ideology is not coherent nor logical. They have romanticized the past and want to institute social policies that are no longer possible. The rejection of a large portions of judicial work shows they have no understanding of how a legal system operates and that it prevents armed violence between factions.
That is not the problem. I can entertain the thought of the OTBM and their ideology. Did that. Why can't you seem to see where it will lead?
You are seriously advocating for state militias?
You don't seem to see the formation of opposition (2 or more) militias within that state?
Will the state legally be forced to sanction both or more militias?
Will the state require "Open meetings laws" ?
Will federal agents be allowed to observe and report on these factions?
What happens if federal agents feel sedition is taking place?
Will these militias allowed to be openly armed?
When violence breaks out between sanctioned factions, how does the state adjudicate between them fairly? Can they?
Will the state continue their funding for the Guard?
Does the federal government have the right to impose sanctions and a blockade on travel, trade, and access to Oklahoma in a dispute.
Will state officials be criminally liable for decisions made during a "protection from federal over reach" event?
So now you get the idea I have thought about this. It ends badly and goes to a place we should not be heading to. TeaBaggers participated in societies largess in equal proportions to any other cross section of the population. Now they want to get out of the consequences and screw everyone else.
