I fail to see the perfesser's objections to the Constitution. It's not like leftists actually follow it, or even respect it, considering the 22,000 plus guns laws we have now, every one of which are unconstitutional.
A sample from TFA:
So let's repeal the Second Amendment. It is dated, lethal, and morally abhorrent.
Americans have repealed amendments before. The Constitution is not a sacred text. It is a framework for government, the product of dozens of compromises. The men who framed the document envisioned that it would be changed. They made the process difficult and time-consuming, but it has happened.
The NRA advocates an untrammeled right to keep and bear arms and asserts the constitutional right to do so. Meanwhile, the killings continue. Let's take aim at that part of the Constitution that provides cover for the NRA. At our current pace, we will continue to bury too many victims of gun violence each month.
There has been an unending assault on the 2nd for years. People like Feinstein, Schumer, the Clintons, and others have tried background checks, repeal, registration, control of firearm features, making firearms illegal in blue cities such as Chicago, NYC, and Washington. It goes on and on and is unrelenting. They want to take American firearms from lawful citizens while nothing is done about thugs in the cities who have stolen or illegally obtained firearms. At the same time, Mexican drug cartels have been supplied with firearms (F&F) and now the Syrian rebels are being supplied with arms. What's wrong with this picture?
Posted by: Barbara ||
06/16/2013 10:13 Comments ||
P2K says...That never seems to smack the gun grabbers in the face does it?
You are not ascribing enough evil to these people. As soon as they get the "law" they want they will start sending the gestapo around to confiscate any & every gun they can find and shoot those who resist.
On the House floor on Friday, Texas Representative Louie Gohmert accused various federal agencies of aiding Islamic terrorists organizations such as the Council on American Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America in their attempts to enact Sharia Law.
We need to address the political correctness that is blinding our agencies and blinding our military of its ability to see who the enemy is, because its getting people killed, Gohmert said. When you refuse to acknowledge that the Afghans youre training, may be willing to turn their guns youre training them on and kill you until you recognize that and who our enemy is, and that our enemy can be among us, and that our enemy can be in uniforms that were supposed to be friendly with, then more Americans are going to be killed needlessly.
Gohmert accused the Obama administration of changing policy so that the FBI, State Department, and others had to partner with CAIR and ISNA, rather than treat mosques as terrorist recruitment centers.
Any time CAIR says, This offends us, the FBI says, Oh, gee, wed better change it, Gohmert claimed. When youve had the Fifth Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals confirm that, yes, the evidence shows that CAIR, Islamic Society of North Americathose are front organizations for the Muslim Brotherhood. They want Sharia law to be the law of the land, not our Constitution. And that is what we did not take an oath to allow to happen.
Gohmert also recalled his theory that the Obama administration and various Congressional offices had been infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood, especially by citizens born in the US to parents on VISAs and later radicalized in their homelandsso-called terror babieswhich he called a misinterpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment.
So [Anwar] al-Awakis family was free to come in on a VISA for college, have al-Awlaki, take him back to Yemen, and radicalize him, so that he had America, and as he did lead prayers here on Capitol Hill with congressional Muslim staffers, and also have contact with people in the administration, Gohmert said. He was free to come and go and radicalize people in America because he was an American citizen.
Due to ailing kinfolk, I had to make the pilgrimage back home over the Memorial Day week end. We used to call it Decoration Day, and one of the obligatory tasks in fly-over is to visit the local cemetery place flowers on graves. I visited two. When entering the second I slowly drove past a well attended, small town American Legion memorial service. Memories of the fallen, both friends and family can bring a quick knot to one's throat as you hear those old Garands bark their salute. As a survivor, words from Steven Speilberg's epic film came to mind:
Old James Ryan: Tell me I have led a good life.
Ryan's Wife: What?
Old James Ryan: Tell me I'm a good man.
Ryan's Wife: You are.
I was lucky. Most chaplains were further forward than I was, but I still hated it. I suspect the only thing I hate worse than war are those that bring it. Palin is right, "Let Allah Sort it Out". It's not worth a single headstone, these senseless interventions. We've seen far, far too many. Damn them that bring them on with no good reason. Damn them all.
You were a chaplain, Besoeker? Somehow that had not occurred to me, possibly because the only former military chaplain I have known is our former rabbi, who was prone to dancing in the aisles with the torah and wonderfully erudite sermons, baroque in their organization. But then, he was originally intended to be a concert pianist, before realizing his calling was on a different stage.
I hope your ailing relatives have since recovered, aided by the pleasure of your company.
No, certainly not a chaplain. Damn poor example I'd have been at that. It was an early morning attempt at comparison as Shipman has indicated. Yes, doing better, the kin. Thanks for your well wishes TW.
The Syrian conflict is not some expansion of the so-called Arab-Spring as some originally advised. Neither is it an autocratic governments brutal repression of its citizenry. And no its not even, as popularly described, a civil war that threatens to explode into a regional conflict. Even though the situation in Syria may exhibit all those elements it should be plain to see what the current reality is. It is a Holy War the same Holy War thats been going on for well forever. Palin is right in her own folksy style. The US has no moral obligation to intervene. The POTUS must clearly articulate what is in the US National or Strategic Interest. And, as important, what is the obligation after the Assad regime falls? Otherwise, maybe as they battle each other theyll have less enthusiasm to attack the West.
We don't think we'd ever heard of Oakland University, a second-tier institution in suburban Rochester, Mich., but Barbara Oakley, an associate professor in engineering, may help put the place on the map. Earlier this week Oakland's Oakley published a fascinating paper, "Concepts and Implications of Altruism Bias and Pathological Altruism," in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
...Oakley defines pathological altruism as "altruism in which attempts to promote the welfare of others instead result in unanticipated harm." A crucial qualification is that while the altruistic actor fails to anticipate the harm, "an external observer would conclude [that it] was reasonably foreseeable." Thus, she explains, if you offer to help a friend move, then accidentally break an expensive item, your altruism probably isn't pathological; whereas if your brother is addicted to painkillers and you help him obtain them, it is.
As the latter example suggests, the idea of "codependency" is a subset of pathological altruism. "Feelings of empathic caring . . . appear to lie at the core of . . . codependent behavior," Oakley notes. People in codependent relationships genuinely care for each other, but that empathy leads them to do destructive things.
Spot on. I have continually fought people who were this way and felt it was their "christian" duty to behave this way. What's interesting about this tidbit is that it casts the preachers who exploit and encourage this dependency as the "drug dealers" of the problem.
Dr. Jonathan Haidt's work on moral maturity is very much worth looking at, since it helped me to understand leftists of my acquaintance better. (Quick summary: there are five areas of morality that the professor identified and developed tests to measure how developed a person was in each area of morality. Self-identified leftists/liberals score very high in two of them, but very low in the other three, while self-identified conservatives score high in all five. He likened leftists/liberals as morally colorblind: able to "morally" see, but unable to see the full spectrum, and thus contemptuous of conservatives for factoring in moral qualifications that they (leftists) assert do not exist.)
The high-school civics class version of American democracy, at least the version I learned, said that individuals are largely free to do what they do and believe what they believe in private (within the bounds of law), while representative government has a duty to be accountable and transparent.
All this NSA and surveillance-state debate in the past week has shown that our understanding of that order has flipped. Now government has the privilege of operating in opacity and secrecy, while our day-to-day must be transparent and scrutinized (without any meaningful input from us about that arrangement).
I am not much for NYT but even the far left seems to be getting it.
Posted by: Bubba Big Foot1639 ||
06/16/2013 00:00 ||
Top|| File under:
Our vigilant leader was moody,
for his was an onerous duty:
"What we've got to do
is say 'please' and 'thank you'
as I shine a light up your patootie!"
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.