National Park Gun Ban Defeated
Score one for the good guys! After a last minute, half-hearted attempt by the Bush administration to end the blanket ban on functional weapons on National Park Service (NPS) land was thwarted by an activist judge, gun owners finally killed the ban in Congress.
Pro-Second Amendment congresscritters (most notably Senator Tom Coburn [R-OK]) attached an amendment ending the ban to the Democrats recent credit card legislation. The Messiah is expected to sign it.
Far from cutting National Parks loose into armed anarchy, the provision would merely allow the gun laws of the state where the park is located to be enforced. This brings NPS in line with the gun policy of the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, which have allowed state authorized weapons carry for years.
Trash In, Trash Out On Supreme Court
The Messiah has nominated anti-Second Amendment Judge Sonia Sotomayor (whose primary qualification appears to be possession of an Hispanic vagina) to the U.S. Supreme Court. If approved by the Senate, that is a lifetime appointment.
She would replace anti-Second Amendment, anti-property rights "Justice" David Souter. Although Souter was no friend of gun owners and constitutionalists, he was at least capable of occasional spurts of independent thought. Sotomayor promises to be a mindless rubber stamp for the liberals' big government, anti-Second Amendment agenda.
According to Gun Owners of America (GOA): "Sotomayor was part of a three-judge panel earlier this year which ruled in Maloney v. Cuomo that the Second Amendment does not apply to the states. [...] In United States v. Sanchez-Villar, she stated that “the right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.” Thankfully, 65% of her rulings have been overturned. But on the Supreme Court, there would be nowhere else for cases to go.
Her two theses at Princeton were “Race in the American Classroom, and Undying Injustice: American ‘Exceptionalism’ and Permanent Bigotry" and “Deadly Obsession: American Gun Culture.” In the latter she stated the Second Amendment did not protect an individual right, but only government entities like the military. She went so far as to suggest that the Second Amendment itself BANS civilian gun ownership. Holy poop!
At GOA's legislative action center you can find your state's senators and send them a pre-written email asking them to vote against this moonbat.
Majority of Americans Oppose New Gun Control
A number of polls show that support for gun control is dwindling in America, even among Obama supporters. A couple of examples:
An April CNN poll showed that only 39% wanted more gun laws. 46% supported the status quo, while 15% thought gun laws should be loosened.
A Zogby poll, also in April, showed that 50% of Obama supporters thought that the government should enforce existing laws, NOT adopt new ones.
Editor of the Gallup Poll, Frank Newport says that "every bit of data is showing us that Americans are getting more conservative about gun control."
No, more libertarian Mr. Newport, more libertarian.
10 comments:
I read that she is also a member of, and contributor to, La Raza. I thought that was on the list of "terror organizations"? Oh, I am sorry, they are just misunderstood...
I still believe she is just a decoy for the one they really want.
Your comment on Sotomayor's qualifications was offensive. More vetting remains to be done, but her resume is impressive--BA and JD from Ivy League schools, district attorney, lawyer in private practice, professor of law at NYU and Columbia, and years of experience as a US District Court judge by Bush senior. I'm not an expert in judicial affairs, but would seem to me that this is an appropriate background for a justice. Your real issue seems to be that you don't agree with a few of the rulings doled out over the course of her judicial career. If you don't agree with her opinions, fine, but taking cheap shots by referring to a nominee's "Hispanic vagina" weakens your argument and insults any readers except those just looking for a rabid blogosphere rant.
PS Other than Tancredo, whose CNN statement was riddled with factual errors, can you point to any authority calling La Raza a terror organization? I mean a reputable source--print media, govt. agency, reputable thinktank? Anonymous blogs don't count.
Yeah Ben! Just because she doesn't believe that the U.S. Constitution protects individuals' rights and that her personal agenda should trump that pesky rule of law and that judges should openly legislate from the bench should in no way disqualify her from serving on the nation's highest court and interpreting the Constitution in question. Besides, the messiah picked her. That's all you need to know, punk.
Anonymous (if that IS your name), I wrote my qualification comments after reading the article "Sotomayor Pick Not Based on Merit" which you can read here: http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=10249
If my use of "Hispanic vagina" was in anyway offensive, I apologize. I should have said "Latina hooha."
As for La Raza being a terror group, I'll let Mark field that question. But it seems to me that if people taking part in tax day tea parties or supporting third party candidates can be branded as terrorists, La Raza sure as hell can.
Sorry Anonymous #2 (if that is your real name), your comment wasn't there when I started writing my comment. You're right. I withdraw my objections.
I see that claims of Sotomayor belonging to La Raza are just a bunch of lies from right-wing kooks...such as the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION.
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/ hispanic_s.html
I will defer to Ben and Bawb since it is their blog. A persons resume says nothing to me. I have met many people with impressive looking resumes that don't know, or do, squat. A persons actions speak more to what a person really is.
Since the rest of the attack/debate is done by someone who is a coward, I will not further define my information.
Okay, okay folks. I don't want things to get too personal here, except against Sotomayor (who poops her pants and eats small children, by the way).
Bawb and I treasure all of our precious flock of readers EQUALLY. Of course those of you who patronize our advertisers (in the banner ads at the top), generating revenue, and our numerous sex-crazed female fans are a bit MORE equal.
So let me calm the waters and end the debate with a unifying message that we can ALL agree on: I'm always right.
Thank you.
You are of course correct Ben so you have my most sincere apologies.
-Mark
Certainly no need for apologies Mark. I just wanted to use my Solomon-like wisdom to bring peace to the discussion.
Post a Comment