traditionally, it is the correct word. when they first got together,  
they had them dangling from their hats. how's that for an image?


On Feb 17, 2013, at 6:26 PM, Jill McCormick wrote:

> Really? Did you have to resort to the word Teabaggers ? You sounded so
> credible up until that point. If the other post has no relevance,   
> then
> neither does your comment. Let's get back to discussions of historical
> Archaeolgy please.
>
>
>> If nothing else, this paranoid kind of revisionist history has no  
>> place on
>> a site about historical archaeology.
>> The Nazis actually liberalized gun laws (after the bans dictated by  
>> the
>> Versailles Treaty).
>> A better, contemporary example of "armed people" trying to defend
>> themselves might be the Warsaw uprisings: first the Jewish ghetto
>> uprising, then the city itself.
>> Now try to imagine "armed" Teabaggers trying to "defend themselves"
>> against drones and the 101st Airborne...
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of  
>> David
>> Parkhill
>>
>> We could become "Schindler's America"--a nation where only the  
>> police and
>> the military have guns, the people are disarmed and unable to defend
>> themselves.
>>
>
>
> H. Jill McCormick, M.A.
> Archaeologist
> Professor of Anthropology
> Arizona Western College