"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."

This is the oath that American soldiers take. The oath for officers is similar. Read it and then imagine asking people so sworn to consider a coup. That should shock and disappoint even Limbaugh larvae.

While I suppose I should take some partisan delight in Newsmax publishing this seditious nonsense (which they took down like good little cowards as soon as someone noticed), I find that I have only sadness that we have arrived at this dangerous place.

The fevered swamp that is the political right - for better or worse, my countrymen - are willing to publicly discuss shredding our Constitution in order to achieve what they were unable to achieve at the polls.

I'm waiting for the mainstream media to ask the republicans to publicly repudiate this like they asked Democratic leaders to repudiate MoveOn.org over the "General Betrayus" campaign. MoveOn's zeal was just stupid, misguided and counterproductive. This is all that PLUS dangerous and probably criminal. I won't hold my breath while that "liberally-biased" media gets to work.

Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate

Oathers. Check it out.

This whole ball of wax is connected to the bizzare abuse of our Second Amendment...do these lunatics really think THEY are the "well regulated militia" in the content and intent of:

"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."

This just may be the reason for their insistance about carrying loaded guns every place where innocent people without guns are present...or the hoarding of guns and ammo even before the election. These bozos are so brainwashed by the scare tactics of the hate pundits that all their online threats,permoted ad nauseum, will most likely be embarassing when they shoot themselves in the collective foot and get arrested for threatening the life of the President and our elected officials.

"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."

I've never been sure quite how to take this.

On the one hand, arrying a gun or rifle was pretty common back in the Republic's early days. People on the frontier, which often times was just outside the city, had to deal with Indian raids, criminals, and had to hunt and gather in order to survive. Small villages themselves were under the threat of raiders a good bit of the time.

Did the Founding Fathers put in "A well-regulated militia...." to put clear restrictions on gun use? When looked at in the context of the times, that doesn't seem reasonable.

Maybe the phrase was placed in there to send a message to potential enemies. As in "Count on us always being armed and ready, because a good many of us are armed anyway and their barrels can be pointed in your direction if need be."

On the ohter hand, I don't agree that the 2nd amendment bestows upon gun carriers the status of a self-deputized law enforcer.

The dogmas of the quiet past, are inadequate to the stormy present.
President Abraham Lincoln 1862