SecNav Richard Spencer wore a sidearm when he visited Marines and Sailors at Camp Shorab in Afghanistan on December 28. When The Marine Corps Times posted the photo, liberals lost their minds. Gee, do you suppose people might shoot at American leaders there? Ya think?
This is the post that made liberals squirm:
Equipped with a sidearm, Secretary of the Navy Richard Spencer visited Marines and sailors at Camp Shorab, Afghanistan, to wish them a happy holiday season. (Sgt. Lucas Hopkins/Marine Corps) pic.twitter.com/X3TChTv0yz
— Marine Corps Times (@Marinetimes) December 28, 2017
First, SecNav Richard Spencer is a Marine. He served as an H-46 pilot for 4 years after his graduation from college. We previously reported on his continued involvement with the military. He’s qualified to carry a gun.
Second, he’s the Secretary of the Navy. He’d be a top prize if captured by the Taliban or any other of the jihadi groups in Afghanistan. As Tom Knighton of Bearing Arms noted,
“I think we can all agree that the secretary of the Navy would be quite the catch for the Taliban, and Spencer would be unlikely to enjoy the experience, much less survive it.”
But for some unfathomable reason, libs had a problem with a “civilian” Secretary of the Navy carrying a weapon.
“Equipped with a sidearm” is that normal for the Sec of the Navy visiting a combat zone?
— quade (@pquade) December 28, 2017
— Barbara Starr (@barbarastarrcnn) December 28, 2017
Spencer may have been trying to impress the Marines pictured, who are not carrying weapons. Their expressions suggest how well he succeeded.
— Joseph Britt (@Zathras3) December 28, 2017
Wants to look “cool”…
*has opposite effect…
— Joe (@JoePlenzler) December 28, 2017
That’s just a smattering of the stupid responses. No, he wasn’t trying to “look cool.” According to a San Diego Tribune report, he was offered the weapon by Marine Commanders and he accepted it. From complaining about the kind of holster he was wearing to other stupid remarks, libs apparently believe civilians and military leaders should all be sitting ducks and not protect themselves. Oh, wait – that’s exactly what they think.
Some of the excellent responses were:
The fact that this question is being asked tells many of us, that many of you dont have a clue what it means to serve in uniform!
— john (@laurinjohn5) January 1, 2018
The man is a former Captain (aviator) & Marine vet in a WAR zone, let him carry, and SHUT UP!
— The Best Mind (@MrBrilliance1) January 1, 2018
Hey snowflakes, he’s in a combat zone. He should be armed at all times.
— Frank Symptoms (@dogmahitbykarma) January 1, 2018
Amazing the number of commenters here who believe that someone would only carry a sidearm in a war zone to feel cool or manly.
A lot of projection going on.
— The Very Model (@RD_52169) December 31, 2017
My personal favorite, though, is this one:
Unlike liberals, Marines don’t freak out when they see a gun.
— Jym Bo (@Jymbo59) January 1, 2018