"Weapons free" -- a statement by a commander to a subordinate unit that it is free to use its weapons if attacked by an enemy.
You know, I was having a conversation about this subject with a friend the other day and up pops this op-ed piece in the Washington Times.
Mr. Holder says his department’s aim is to “expand the franchise.” This begs the question: Expand it for whom? Jim Crow is long dead; not one single eligible voter has been turned away because of an ID requirement. In other words, minorities are not being disenfranchised. What Mr. Holder really means is to expand the vote to groups that will help ensure a Democratic victory in 2012 - ACORN and its nefarious allies.Stealing an election is not beyond this administration. After all, it’s the Chicago Way.
Indeed, my friend made this argument using almost exactly these words. I smiled, and said, "I don't suppose we could get that lucky."
"Huh?!?" he reacted. "LUCKY?"
Sure, I told him. Any election of Obama presupposes that he would avoid responsibility for the truth about the Gunwalker Conspiracy, that the political remedies had failed utterly. For Obama to steal the election -- in the era of the Internet -- would be the final, self-administered coup de grace to his, and the two-party predatory system's, legitimacy.
"We couldn't ask for a better declaration of war on the American people than that," I told him. "After that, we're 'weapons free' to defend ourselves against any assault, for the regime will be plainly illegitimate and will lack the standing to enforce ANY of its diktats."
He looked troubled -- as troubled as I felt even though the logic of such a situation took me to that conclusion.
He shook his head, and said, "Yeah, well, 'when democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote,' right?""Right."