Promise Keepers march comparison

[runderwo]

I think we can learn a few things from the Promise Keepers marches:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promise_Keepers

1) People would rather go to a national march than regional marches
2) The media pays little to no attention to a million people in D.C.

This seems to instruct us to march once, where it makes the most impact in absence of the media -- at the Republican National Convention in September.

And hey, if the media covers it, that's great too.

Just remember, you can't even take your personal firearm into D.C. For me, that automatically disqualifies that venue. It's a rally to celebrate freedom, not a rally to comply with extraconstitutional regulations that are only valid because D.C. is a haven for bureaucrats and monarchs.

 

[PaulineDisciple]

Wow, that is a good point, never even thought about that one. I believe all laws that infringe on our right to keep and bear arms are unconstitutional and complying with them is a compromise of our basic rights as sovereign citizens.

But I must ask one question, can we bring our personal firearm to Republican National Convention?

Actually, I have one more question, is the fact that we cannot bring our personal firearm to D.C. the reason that Montana is threating to secede from the union? They seem to be blatantly disregarding the constitution on this issue.

 

[risk_reward]

I plan on being inside voting for Ron Paul, not chanting outside. If you want to help the revolution run for office with a GOP endorsement or convince another supporter to do so.

 

[JS4Pat]

1) People would rather go to a national march than regional marches
2) The media pays little to no attention to a million people in D.C.

This seems to instruct us to march once, where it makes the most impact in absence of the media -- at the Republican National Convention in September.

I will go to either one or both but I agree with having only one huge March at the Republican National Convention.