The right wing is really confused right now. They love to demand "freedom" for themselves, but as they watch Egyptians celebrate after overthrowing their dictator, they are really stumped.
Freedom is good, but since this happened under President Obama, they have to find a way to criticize it to keep their followers convinced that the entire world is going to hell in a hand basket under Obama.
Freedom is good, but lots of the Egyptians are Muslims and of course the right wing has to keep everyone afraid of Muslims constantly or pretty soon they'll be able to build mosques anywhere and worship as they please in this country. Of course, the right wing can't have that because fear of other people is one thing that keeps the right wing together.
Freedom is good, but you have to have your own personal AK-47 to protect it from the big, bad government. But these Muslims, whom the right-wing tells us are inherently violent and evil and out to destroy freedom, didn't use any AK-47s to bring off their revolt. They just peaceably assembled.
And that is really confusing for the right wing. How do they argue that they need "Second Amendment Remedies" here in the United States when Egyptians were able to topple an entrenched dictator without firing a shot? How do they argue there can be absolutely no restrictions on gun ownership (while there are plenty of restrictions on our other freedoms under the Bill or Rights), when it is possible to change the government with just free speech and free assembly?