Republicans! Don’t get me started. You can’t sneer at constitutional rights for a decade and a half and then expect them to be a credible shield when you abruptly decide they matter again. With few exceptions, Republicans arguing about Second Amendment rights resemble a kid becoming a sudden rules-lawyer halfway through a game of Calvinball.
Ken White
December 7, 2015
Talking Productively About Guns
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]
I read the whole article – actually, it was rather well-written, pointing out errors that both sides of the gun control issue have made. In fact, from the article its difficult to discern the writer’s actual opinion about guns themselves, but his stance on supporting rights – and not infringing them on the basis of ill-defined terminology – seems pretty sound.
Republicans are whores. They’ll pretend to stand for the constitution only when it suits them politically or financially. Ultimately it’s up to us then, as in fact it has been all the time. Politicians aren’t worth spit.
That is reminiscent of John Nance Garner’s statement about the worth of the office of Vice Presidency, only he didn’t say “spit”.
And as for the worth of politicians, I’m thinking in terms of more solid such materials.
Traditionally, each party has supported about half of the Bill of Rights. Republicans supported 2nd,9th and 10th and part of the 1st. Dems supported 1st, 4th, and 5th as well as made up stuff from the 6th. Starting with the Clinton administration and accelerating thereafter, Democrats went negative on the 1st, 4th and 5th. Republicans then got more positive on those items in sheer self defense.
The more revealing question is where they stand on Article 1 Section 8. The answer is: they hate and despise it, every single one of them, and have at least as far back as Teddy Roosevelt. Or possibly Alexander Hamilton.
Huh. I’d say they Dems only support right for their preferred groups on an ad hoc basis, and use them as a bludgeon against their foes.
1st? Nope, not if you’re christian, or speaking out against global warming or abortion or in favor of gun rights or a newspaper investigating a Democrat. 4th? they support civil forfeiture every bit as much as the Rs do, mass surveillance, gun purchase records, etc. 5th? Dems fully support duplicating, overlapping, and redundant laws at the county, state, and federal levels, in such a way that they can try you in one court to get a first crack at you, then charge you with a “different crime (statute)” and try you using a different jurisdiction. They also support having so many laws nobody can possibly know them all, so you are bound to break at least one of them.
With a little research, I found that the Federal Register runs, on average, 200 pages per day or thereabouts.
I submit that not a single person in the United States knows the laws. No one, not even a legal professional, can possibly keep up with 200 pages of new material every day.
I grabbed a random issue of the FR a while ago, and skimmed through it to see if I could find even one single thing in it authorized by the Constitution. I think the answer came out to be “yes, one, probably” — a short item on the naming of a new Post Office building. Arguably that’s authorized by the postal service clause in the Constitution. But that was about it. Give it a try some day, it’s revealing. And scary.
Strange, the next item (Buchanan quote) doesn’t have a Reply box.
Try it now.
There were a bunch of weird things with that post. I suspect it got messed up during the posting. I think I have it all cleaned up now.
Yes. Thanks much.