SO, WILL HUCKABEE AND CRUZ LOCK AND LOAD?

Because we've tolerated the right's my-way-or-the-highway attitude for so long, this is the armed confrontation we deserve as a nation:

Oath Keepers Send Armed Guards To Protect Kim Davis From US Marshals

The Oath Keepers, the anti-government “Patriot” group that mounted an armed standoff with the Bureau of Land Management at the Bundy Ranch, stationed armed guards outside of military recruitment centers after the Chattanooga shooting, and unsettled Ferguson protestors when they showed up carrying assault rifles, is now offering anti-gay Kentucky clerk Kim Davis a “security detail” to protect her from further arrest if she continues to defy the Supreme Court’s marriage equality ruling.

Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes announced yesterday that he had reached out to Davis’ lawyers at Liberty Counsel to offer the protection of his group, which he says is already forming a presence in Rowan County, Kentucky....

“This is exactly the kind of thing that our Founding Fathers dealt with when dealing with the magistrates and the officers of the crown who wanted to run roughshod over the rights of the colonists without a jury indictment, without any of that,” Rhodes declared. “Same thing. They’re going to show their power and show you who’s boss.”

A shootout between these self-important bastards and the authorities might be the what finally makes clear to America that conservatism has gone stark raving mad, but there won't be any bloodshed -- at worst, these guys will show up armed and the authorities will back down, sensibly seeking to keep the peace. The crazies will get a win, it'll be a one-day story at best, and we'll just shrug and forget all about it as a nation, because nobody died.

I wonder, though, whether Davis's most prominent champions, Mike Huckabee and Ted Cruz, will join the Oath Keepers in armed insurrection. In theory, you'd think they'd have to. Both have described what's happened to Davis as "tyranny." Here's Huckabee:

What we’ve seen here is the overreach of the judiciary," [Huckabee] said. "This, if allowed to stand without any congressional approval, without any kind of enabling legislation, is what [President Thomas] Jefferson warned us about. That’s judicial tyranny."

And Cruz:

"Today, judicial lawlessness crossed into judicial tyranny," Cruz said. "Today, for the first time ever, the government arrested a Christian woman for living according to her faith. This is wrong. This is not America."

Both have specifically said that guns are necessary to prevent government tyranny. Here's Huckabee, on his campaign site:

The Second Amendment is the last line of defense against tyranny and must be protected.

And here's Cruz:

... Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny....

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

Since they've both described this as government tyranny, and they both say that privately owned firearms are a citizen's defense against tyranny, aren't they obligated to participate in an armed intervention if an evil federal judge sends Davis back to jail?

If not, why do they hate freedom?