Liberal Says 2nd Amendment Meant to Give State Right to Bear Arms

John Ransom

12/23/2012 12:01:00 AM

 

Wendy60 wrote: The neoconservatives are the reason why Boehner is not putting up a fight. The neocons do the thinking for the Republican leadership on all matters of strategy and morality in politics. Boehner wouldn't take a dump if the neocons told him not to, and if they told him to do so, he would strain for hours. Neocons want tax increases, because paying higher taxes is a sacrifice. Neocons believe that the little people have to be forced into sacrificing for the "collective self," i.e., the state, because that is the only way to preserve the social order. What they really want to protect is the philosopher - from the vicissitudes of real life. - GOP Fairy Tale: We Came, We Saw, We Surrendered

Dear Comrade Wendy,

I didn’t know there were any neoconservatives left. I suppose by neoconservative you mean guys like John McCain? Or are you a true liberal and just use the term for anyone who doesn’t agree with you?

It’s hard to tell from your rant what you are talking about specifically. You might notice that Boehner couldn’t even bring up his Plan B- or the “Morning-After Tax” as I like to call it- up for a vote.

Boehner’s Plan B was a “Morning-After Tax” because it attempts to fix a several decade-long, promiscuous love affair with federal spending in way that is consequence-free for almost everyone. And standing up for the victims of the plan is just considered bad taste.



What plan could be better than that for liberals??!!  

I don’t know you can make the case the “neocons” want tax increases when there hasn’t been a vote.  So perhaps the neocons, or RINOs or whatever term you are thinking of in that disordered mind  sheltered from the vicissitudes of real life don’t have as much sway as you think.

Canetoad wrote: Let's face it you lost, you don't get to call the shots. Obstruction by the minority is not a good look. If you are so damn sure the President is doomed to failure, you can rejoice because next time around you will be there to pick up the pieces. Democrats had to wait until 2008 to start putting the economy back together again, so if you are right you just need to be patient. By the way, time to do something about those extra pounds, honestly, I love our little back and forths, don't want you falling off the perch. - GOP Fairy Tale: We Came, We Saw, We Surrendered

Dear Comrade Toad,

Did I ever tell you how much I enjoyed your Wild Ride at Disney when I was a kid?

I really did.

I didn’t lose anything actually. If you are referring to the election I would say that it’s pretty much a tie at this point.

There isn’t much different now than there was last year. I think Americans are reserving judgment.

Of course that’s disappointing because Obama- speaking purely objectively- has been truly the worst president we have ever had.

Worst jobs recovery ever; worst budgeting ever; worst foreign policy; worst economic growth. Carter added $690 billion in GDP in four years, while Obama only added $750 billion in GDP in four years- in real terms. He also owns the lowest tax revenues as a percent of GDP.

Gosh I don’t know how those terrible Republicans under George W got so much tax revenue with the same tax rates Obama has. Oh yeah, that’s right. They cared about economic growth. And they didn’t give tax breaks to their corporate cronies like Obama has. The GOP breaks went across the board.

You guys really care about tax revenues? Quit holding back the economy. It's the key to our fiscal mess.

As to the extra pounds, it’s an occupational hazard.     

Kibitzer wrote: Mr. Ransom what do you not understand about the fact that the higher tax rates for everyone are already the law of the land, and Obama and Senate Democrats aren't going to negotiate away the rate increase for the "rich" that they win by doing nothing. - GOP Fairy Tale: We Came, We Saw, We Surrendered

Dear Comrade Kibitzer,

I understand it perfectly. But here’s the thing: The Republicans won’t take all the blame for tax increases on everyone if it happens.

In fact, they’ll take little of the blame, despite what polls say about “who’s responsible” for the fiscal cliff.

Ask voters generally speaking which party wants higher taxes and which party wants lower taxes. Just because voters and the public are momentarily caught up in the tax lust that the Democrats rely on to get more money for government by taxing “someone else” won’t change the fact that on election day Obama and the Democrats will have to be the party of higher taxes no matter what.

Republicans have little to lose by doing nothing.   

RyanM wrote: “Not since the poilus surrendered to Hitler in 45 days has an opponent backed up so much talk with so little fight."

Give me a break. The French took a million casualties during the 1940 campaign. They lost not from a lack of will to fight, but to incompetent commanders who saddled themselves with an obsolete doctrine. - GOP Fairy Tale: We Came, We Saw, We Surrendered

Dear Comrade Private Ryan,

Eh, the French lost 50,000-85,000 killed and about 120,000 wounded in the Battle of France, not even nearly close to the million you claim. A million and a half Frenchman surrendered however rather than fight. 

Actually, morale was a serious problem for the French in the Franco-Prussian War, World War I and World War II, hence the jokes, which have become commonplace, about French troops not wanting to fight.

But the “incompetent commanders who saddled themselves with an obsolete doctrine” sounds like the Democrats and their brand of socialism. It seems they have built in our economy an exact replica of the Maginot Line, kind of a Maginot economy: centrally-planned, static everywhere and too costly to complete.

Next time, for all that’s holy, please read the book. Don’t just look at the pictures.       

Dick4260 wrote: We have restrictions on automobiles --- licenses, inspections, traffic lights, even parking. They don't prevent accidents entirely, but what's such a big deal about putting restrictions on automatic weapons which are even more deadly? Almost everybody can own a car, but nobody's protesting the sensible restrictions that go with automobile use. I'm an army vet and a gun owner. Not all gun owners agree with the NRA.- Thanks for the Gun, Stupid

Dear Comrade Dick Numbered 4260,

More people die in auto accidents than in gun violence every year. Plus as our Constitution says "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Your argument seems to be that since we regulate something, we ought to regulate everything, which, sadly, is probably your point. Because it’s definitely the point of the politicians in power, especially liberals. "Because I said so" seems to be the argument liberals mostly make now.   

Stuart95 wote: Makes you wonder why the constant murder of young blacks by other young blacks in urban areas hardly merits a raised eyebrow from the Left and their flying monkeys in the MSM, but when 20 white kids are murdered, suddenly the Left and MSM can think of nothing else. If you hadn't heard that it is the Left that selflessly and constantly champions the minorities and that it is the Right that is hopelessly bigoted, you might draw the wrong conclusion. - Thanks for the Gun, Stupid

Dear Stuart,

The worst thing to happen to blacks in our history was slavery, and the second worst is the Democrat Party. As cities fall apart, crime rates rise, tell me when the Democrats will ever do anything about the high rate of incarceration of black males? Or the high rate of violence in black communities? Half of all murders happen in the African American community even though they make up only 12.5 percent of the population.

Despite what you read, the US lags much of Europe in violent crime.

Legal gun ownership makes for safety, not more violence as this article from our friend Dan Mitchell makes clear.

MrL53 wrote: I wonder how many people have ever read the full text of the Second Amendment to our Constitution. It does not give citizens the right to bear arms. When people say that they are taking things out of context. Take another look, and read the whole amendment. Wikipedia is as good a source as any. It guarantees the right for civilians to bear arms, yes, but for a "well-regulated militia." That means police and military. - Thanks for the Gun, Stupid

Dear Comrade L,

If you read this column regularly then you have probably read the full Second Amendment to the Constitution. And since Mr. Comrade L has misrepresented the amendment by selectively quoting from it, I will post is again here, as I did elsewhere in today’s column:

"A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

While a well-regulated militia is mentioned, it says nothing about people only owning guns if they belong to a well-regulated militia.

Your constitutional theory says that our Founders wrote the Second Amendment in order to guarantee to the STATE- remember: “police and military” only- the right to keep and bear arms?

Seriously. How stupid can you be?

Right-o. Stupid question. You’re a liberal.       

Don the Britton wrote: It is time to start taxing campaign contributions. No more free money. - Tax Congress!

Dear Comrade Don,

Let’s just tax people who vote too. Maybe you can go back to Britton…now.

JustMC wrote: Mr. Ransom, you wouldn't know a defensive war if it were fought in your own backyard. (HINT: it would be.) You might do well to read a little of the Founders' advice on avoiding entangling alliances and not going abroad in search of monsters to destroy. You are either completely ignorant of history, or you are a liar. I'll lay odds on the former. FOLLOW THE MONEY, man! Look at the global bankers and the powerful who have benefited from our wars, and look at the cost in blood and treasure to the American people. This stuff is a RACKET. -Can We Make Love and Not War? Sorry, No

Dear Comrade MC,

I think bankers did better when the Cold War ended and Al Qaeda wasn’t a threat. Might want to look at a market chart.

Remember that whole banking bailout thing?

As far as the Founder’s advice goes, check out Civility Rules. It was a guide of 110 rules written by French Jesuits that Geo. Washington reputedly read.

Here’s some quick tips:

Number 87- “Let thy carriage be such as becomes a Man Grave Settled and attentive to that which is spoken. Contradict not at every turn what others Say.”

Number 69- “If two contend together take not the part of either unconstrained; and be not obstinate in your own Opinion, in Things indifferent be of the Major Side.”

Number 13- “Kill no Vermin as Fleas, lice ticks &c in the Sight of Others, if you See any filth or thick Spittle put your foot Dexterously upon it if it be upon the Cloths of your Companions, Put it off privately, and if it be upon your own Cloths return Thanks to him who puts it off.”

Number 90- “Being Set at meat Scratch not neither Spit Cough or blow your Nose except there's a Necessity for it.”

I’m guessing following some of these would go a long way toward getting you out of your parents’ basement.

Consider this a Christmas gift. Merry Christmas: Number 108- “When you speak of God or his attributes, let it be seriously & with reverence. Honor & obey your natural parents although they be poor.”      

Doctor Roy wrote: "If there's a 1% chance that Pakistani scientists are helping al-Qaeda build or develop a nuclear weapon, we have to treat it as a certainty in terms of our response. It's not about our analysis ... It's about our response."- Richard Cheney

Note that this type of foreign policy doesn't even consider whether or not something is true or even likely to be true. Only that there is a slight chance it could be true. We are going to be very busy if someone with this attitude gets to be in charge for a while again. -Can We Make Love and Not War? Sorry, No

Dear Comrade Doctor,

So if someone said they wanted to find a gun and come kill you, you’d want to do odds first before deciding to protect yourself?

Look if you don’t think Pakistan hasn’t already hurt us with nuclear weapons technology then you haven’t been reading the news.

Where do you think North Korea got the technology for their program?

From the Washington Post:

The founder of Pakistan’s nuclear bomb program asserts that the government of North Korea bribed top military officials in Islamabad to obtain access to sensitive nuclear technology in the late 1990s.

Abdul Qadeer Khan has made available documents that he says support his claim that he personally transferred more than $3 million in payments by North Korea to senior officers in the Pakistani military, which he says subsequently approved his sharing of technical know-how and equipment with North Korean scientists. 

And guess who was in attendance at the recent missile launch in North Korea. No, not Al Qaeda, but Iran:

From NightWatch:

The real concern of the US, Allied powers and the UN should be that this rocket is a working model of an Iranian ballistic missile. North Korea lacks the finances to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile without foreign support. North Korea never develops a weapons system unless it has a customer who fronts the primary finances

No open sources have reported, yet, the presence of Iranians at the launch, but they have reported Iranian technicians were observers of the April failed launch. This is the same system. Last week one news agency reported Iran has established a permanent military liaison office in North Korea.

More pertinent is the North's practices of financing developmental weapons systems. North Korean missile sales and arrangements with Syria, Pakistan, Iran and Libya showed that the North requires a customer to pay the development costs up front. North Korea has no money for this effort so it persuades a customer to pay before North Korea finalizes development. The customer in this instance is Iran.

Once the North develops a workable prototype, the North buys enough materials to make a missile for itself for every one it makes for the customer. The customer gets a working missile system and a finished launch complex before North Korea gets one, but the North ultimately does get one.

This is an alternative to Western practice. It is distributive and places the burdens of development costs on the customer, not on the developer.

NightWatch judges that North Korea launched an Iranian ballistic missile prototype on 12 December. North Korea and Iran will benefit from the science.

God wrote:

Luke 2

King James Version, my favorite.  

9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the glory of the Lord shone round about them: and they were sore afraid.

10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.

12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying in a manger.

13 And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and saying,

14 Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.

Merry Christmas,

V/r,

JR

MERRY CHRISTMAS! 

Public display of religion in Denver