Writing at the appropriately named Crooks & Liars, Susie Madrak openly asks when the progressive-led federal government will do away with the pretense of civility and declare open war on gun owners:
Rick Perlstein writes about how Democrats completely surrendered our political will to control guns when the Obama administration backed away from the Bundy ranch. And I have to admit, he makes a good point. I assumed the feds would be back later — as in, a few weeks. How long has it been now? By the time anything actually happens, will it have any real deterrent effect?
But Perlstein doesn’t mention the big honkin’ elephant in the room: Namely, at what point does the federal government literally go to war with its own citizens? Because we’re not talking about bank robbers here, we’re talking about (mostly) non-criminal cranks — scofflaws and political malcontents. So what line has to be crossed in the good old U.S. of A. before we start mowing them down to make our point? Because you can’t talk about the Bundy ranch without talking about Ruby Ridge, and Waco.
So here’s the political corner into which we’ve painted ourselves.
Do we have the ATF and BLM agents roll up in armored tanks? Do we use drone strikes? I can see the administration’s reluctance to have that confrontation — after all, it’s not as if gun control advocates were flooding the White House switchboard, screaming to ‘take them out!’ And then we do have the militia types all over the country, just waiting for an excuse to start their own local uprising. These assholes want a civil war so bad, they can taste it.
Some days, I wonder: Should we let them, and just get it over with? You know, settle the burning question about whose is bigger.
Madrak isn’t just a low-level blogger at Crooks & Liars. The radical Philadelphian is the site’s managing editor.
Madrak, Rick Pearlstein (the equally radical leftist writer she quotes from heavily in the piece), and their fellow travelers on the road to an imagined Marxist utopia are obviously upset that the federal government hasn’t taken a violent stand on the limits of the Second Amendment.
She not talking about pushing for background checks, magazine limits, registration, nor even confiscation. She seemingly wants to drop all pretense of respecting the Constitution and simply put her political opponents to the sword, leaving their broken bodies to grease the treads of the government’s tanks.
Perhaps most disturbing about this admission is that Madrak knows that she’s not asking the government to go to war against terrorists, but simply against people who hold differing political views about the political direction of the United States.
Read it again (my bold):
Namely, at what point does the federal government literally go to war with its own citizens? Because we’re not talking about bank robbers here, we’re talking about (mostly) non-criminal cranks — scofflaws and political malcontents. So what line has to be crossed in the good old U.S. of A. before we start mowing them down to make our point?
Of course, when Madrak says “we” should start “mowing down” American citizens, what she actually means is that the military and law enforcement should do the dirty work for her. The bloated and infirm 60-something-year-old woman and her fellow travelers like to issue diktats, but they expect the military and police—whom they regard as mindless, bloodthirsty minions of the state, lacking free will—to carry out the literal executions of millions of their fellow citizens.
[continues on next page]