Now I'm not taking any of this seriously, inasmuch as I think it would actually happen. Like most of what I read, it's all talk. For instance, there are about 80 people at "Camp Casey" outside of the Bush ranch in Crawford, Texas, meaning that either 199,920 people are just around the corner in a lot of buses, or the 200,000-strong demonstration is going to fizzle.
[By the way, the latest excuse: no hotel rooms. That's a good thing, says one, means lots of media on hand to cover demonstration. Um, no, actually there is a little league tournament this week, so lots of parents and coaches and little pitchers and utility hitters and what not are using up the rooms.]
Serious or not, this is what the fans of Cindy Sheehan are talking about, and for every 100 blowhards, there is someone who is going to think this is a good idea and is going to try and make it happen:
Send lawyers ,guns, and money cuz the sh*t's gonna hit the fan. Impeach the fraWd.
This is the opening salvo, and you'd hope the follow-ups would criticize the "guns" request. Peaceable demonstrations, spirit of Ghandi, and all that:
I don't have any money or guns.....but my brother just graduated from law school.good for your brother..hope he finds satisfaction and success and also perhaps can afford some worthy pro bono someday.
I played a lawyer in Ohio last selection. I worked on voter protection in Cincinn and everybody assumed I was a lawyer. Who am I to blow agianst [sic] the wind? I'm pretty good at it and would be happy to work the ugly front lines again. Let's see......... guns....... got nothing there except a little tube of pepper spray. Money. Kid starting college. Damn good thing I'm a vegetarian with a nice big garden. I will still FIND some, PayPal money or whatever to send to the cause. GO CINDY GO !!!!
So far, no guns, but no one saying guns would be a bad idea either, which is worrisome. One guy admitting to something that sounds like fraud during the 2004 election -- but I thought the Republicans were fraudulent?
To this point, the posts have sounded comical in an incompetent sort of way. Then things take a turn for the scary:
We have numerous guns but only for self defense. And hunting. Lots of neocons think Liberals don't know how to shoot...they're wrong. And that's all I have to say about that.
Sounds like a threat to me. Next one is the last post, and the closest to criticizing the idea, but only because he figures it wouldn't work, not because it's a fundamentally bad idea:
I was thinking about buy a gun today (money isn't there, but that's another issue). All of this recent talk about martial law and such...well, for the first time in my life I seriously considered whether we should get a gun. In the end, I decided No. If I'm going to get shot by troops or military, whether it's in my home or on the streets, a gun's not going to do a thing for me or my family. *machine guns ablazin'* The fact is, I'm not a hunter. A gun would provide no protection in the wake of martial law. I'd rather buy a boat and emigrate to freedom. Just not sure where that would be at the moment.
(Sending mental signals: Don't come to Canada! Don't come to Canada!)
So there you have it. A taste of the sort of advice and support Cindy Sheehan is getting. Every post from the thread is represented here -- the only edits have been for size, and not for content.
The advice she gets is extreme, and violent, and uncompromising.
Thankfully, the support appears to spotty, generally of the "Get in there and get Bush! We're right behind you!" sort, being posted on discussion boards by people unable or unwilling to take any concrete action whatsoever.
But then it only takes one...
