Is He One of Us?

Town Hall ^ | October 21, 2005 | Jonah Goldberg

[de Buillion]

"The Constitution says in Article I, Section 8, "The Congress shall have the power.... To provide for the calling forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and Repel Invasions;..." Since we are being invaded and the laws of the Union are being violated should the Militia be called up and placed on the borders to protect the laws and the American people? Composite Opinion Yes 83.8% 5,640 No 10.3% 692 Undecided 3.5% 236 Pass 2.4% 163 100.0% 6,731 Member Opinion Yes 81.9% 3,497 No 10.4% 446 Undecided 4.2% 181 Pass 3.4% 145 99.9% 4,269 Non-Member Opinion Yes 87.0% 2,143 No 10.0% 246 Undecided 2.2% 55 Pass 0.7% 18 99.9% 2,462 "

82% to 10% fr member opinion to place Militia on the border, and a corresponding Non-member of FR of 87% to 10%, is NOT an "overwhelming anti-ILLEGAL-immigrant sentiment among Americans" to you? What are your requirements for "overwhelming"?

[md2576]

It's a very important distinction here as to who is conservative and in what context.

You said it better there than anyone. Liberals and Conservatives have suddenly taken new meanings in the media today and I would like to know where the heck they get off? Stop changing our names d@mnit!

[md2576]

In many was the president has governed as a conservative.

I'd like to see some examples. I think most conservatives here have been waiting so long to see it that Miers is the final straw.

[Congressman Billybob]

The Bork hearings were televised, and I watched them in detail. Your instincts about what he did wrong are right on the money. 1) He made it crystal clear that he was smarter than every Senator in the room. (That was obviously true, which made his behavior even more galling. John Roberts, who could have made the same mistake, was careful not to.)

The other mistake was to continue to wear that ratty beard.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "How's your wife?" "Compared to What?"

[kenth]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1506340/posts

I agree, something is not right.


My (wild and unfounded) take on the Miers' nomination? She was Laura's pick.

[TAdams8591]

The following was taken from a post by Conservative Dude. I hope he doesn't mind my posting it here:

"GWB told the UN to go to hell on several occasions (Kyoto, Iraq, Mexico City policy) and I just love that. He isn't at all concerned about what France and Germany think of us, either.

He has appointed some outstanding people to the US Court of Appeals.

He at least talked about social security reform (though it appears he wasn't prepared to actually send a bill to Congress).

He has not embarrassed us morally or led to the general corruption of our country unlike the Clintons. That can't be overlooked. (And you could say that in many respects Ford sort of helped clear the air after some of the questionable Nixon goings on).

He has carved out a good policy on stem cell research, one that is eminently sensible."

I would add tax cuts, his War on Terror and his foreign policy generally.

There is more, and when I have more time will compose a better list. He is not as committed as conservative as many of us, but then I never thought he was.

The Miers pick is an utter fiasco and must be stopped.

[TAdams8591]

"She was Laura's pick."

Agreed.

[TAdams8591]

The italics didn't come out right.

Everthing but the last two lines is Conservative Dude's.

[razorback-bert]

Found this tidbit...

The truth is -- and one would hardly know it from the mass media -- that since the Supreme Court's unanimous Miller decision in 1939, all federal appeals courts, whether dominated by liberals or conservatives, have agreed that the Second Amendment does not confer gun rights on individuals. The NRA view, opposed even by such right-wing judges as Robert Bork, has been consistently rejected.

[razorback-bert]

oops


http://www.fair.org/articles/gun-control.html

[cryptical]

There is a lot that Bush does that I don't like but he is already president and when we attack him we lessen our chances of electing more Republicans in '06.

So the best thing to do is just ignore how poorly this Administration is handling things, so when it comes time to elect more Republicans in 2006 the Party will give us more of the same?

If we don't speak up now, and things aren't corrected I'm predicting a lot of conservatives will stay at home and not vote in 2006. What's the point, when we gave them the executive and legislative branches and they still act like they can't get anything passed? Fool me once and all that...

[TheDon]

I've discovered that many conservative pundits are not "one of us". I agree with them on many issues, but have found their commentary on the Miers nomination appalling.

[razorback-bert]

The Second Amendment, the bete noire of the gun gestapo, states that ``a well regulated Militia, being necessary for the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'' It is the core of the constitutional argument against gun control, long held to secure the right of individuals to own (buy, sell, keep, and carry) firearms. Judge Bork, however, doesn't think so.

Discussing the carnage of violent crime, Judge Bork rejects gun control as an effective means of reducing it. ``Gun control,'' he writes, ``shifts the equation in favor of the criminal,'' and he's right, as he often is. But when he gets on to the constitutionality of gun control, he's simply wrong, as he usually isn't.

In a footnote on page 166, Judge Bork writes that ``the Supreme Court has consistently ruled that there is no individual right to own a firearm. The Second Amendment was designed to allow states to defend themselves against a possibly tyrannical national government. Now that the federal government has stealth bombers and nuclear weapons, it is hard to imagine what people would need to keep in the garage to serve that purpose.''



http://www.users.fast.net/~behanna/bork.html

[BIRDS]

I find offensive and quite disagreable the term, "the gun gestapo."

Bork, I have little problem with EXCEPT his interpretation of the Second Amendment. While it DOES provide defensive capability to states, it's quite realistically interpretable to also apply to citizens of those states. The "citizens' (or is it, "citizen's") right to bear arms" can be any group of citizens, or a single citizen, or, yes, a state.

I agree with Bork that efforts to control gun ownership BY the state (or, "government") produces a criminal-dominated unlawfully owned gun population, and, it lays pathway for government use of arms against citizens in a military capacity with citizens left undefensible, which is why the Second Amendment is so important to citizens and not so important to "the state" in this regard ("the state"/governments will always appear in human groups who intend military rule over populations, witness Castro at present, and many others).

Anyway, I agree with Bork and disagree with Bork but he's a great intellect. However, it is NOT unimaginable as to why any citizen would want or does want to own firearms, given that government now controls such an awesome arsenal. It would not remain the awesome arsenal that it is without citizen, individual defense, as to use and application. About this, Bork reasons incorrectly, concludes the opposite of reality there. But, his opinion, he's entitled.

I do believe that this is the issue that cost his appointment given that he's going to and always has offended the Left (they'd be expected to find him offensive) but his clouded reasoning in this regard alone cost him the support of conservatives.

[BIRDS]

Well, I agree with the NRA view, in this regard. If only for the fact that "the citizen right to bear arms" (citizen's/citizens') can be a group of citizens and can be an individual. Still citizens.

I'm no legal scholar, however, and this represents my opinion only as to TCRTBA.

[BIRDS]

So, O.K., not "citizen's/citizens'" but this:

The Amendment is only 27 words: "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."

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE.

As liberal Tom Joad says in liberal Steinbeck's THE GRAPES OF WRATH, "and, we're the people."

[BIRDS]

Yeah, me, too, as in: DITTO.

[BIRDS]

Very well written, and I fully agree with your logic and suggestions there. Excellent analysis of Bork, as with the other issues. And, yes, state's rights were painted with a wrongful, pejorative set of labels from the '60's forward and yes, I agree with your statements about that. I guess that makes me a states-rights-conservative but I can't figure out how to translate that to the voting booth, given the choices that I'm presented with.

[The Red Zone]

Drilling a hole in the 2nd amendment (pardon the pun) is the move non plus ultra to turn the People into the Sheeple. Bork borked it big big big time here. I'd sooner have a Court full of Mierses than a Court full of Borks.

[BIRDS]

hahahahaha...