Posted on 05/15/2008 1:28:25 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The political hot button issues of guns and judges have become intertwined in this election year. The fate of both issues will be decided by the candidate we elect as president. Why? Because over a four-year term, that president will likely appoint at least two and possibly three justices to the United States Supreme Court. Simply stated, this year when we elect a president, we will also cast our ballot for the next Supreme Court.
Everyone concerned about the Second Amendment and judicial accountability should heed John McCains speech to the NRA on May 16. The presumptive Republican nominee will speak directly to guns owners about the Second Amendment at the NRAs Celebration of American Values event at the NRA Annual Meeting in Louisville, Kentucky.
And in America today, there has never been a greater opportunity or a greater threat to gun rights. In March, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the watershed case of District of Columbia v. Heller, a lawsuit challenging the DC gun ban. Residents of the District of Columbia are categorically prohibited from possessing handguns and operable long guns (rifles and shotguns) in their homes, even for self-defense.
The Heller case turns on whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms refers to private, law-abiding citizens, or whether it is a right of the people collectively to have guns only when they serve in the National Guard or a state-sponsored militia unit. The Court is scheduled to decide the case the third week in June.
Whatever the Court decides, that decision will shape gun rights in America for generations to come. The Heller decision will become the definitive standard for gun rights in America. The Second Amendment is the insurance policy on American liberty. And whether you own guns or not, you cannot afford for a single minute to think that it doesnt matter to you, your family or the security of this country.
Just like other controversial decisions, such as those on religious liberty and free speech, the Heller decision will lead to many more questions than it answers.
When the Court decided Everson v. Board of Education in 1947 it created the doctrine of separation of church and state. For over 60 years this nation has grappled with what that doctrine means, in a raging cultural battle.
When the Court declared a previously unnoticed right to abortion in Roe v. Wade in 1973, Americas courts and presidential politics were thrust into an issue that still stirs deep passions and is ever present in political debates.
From now on, the same will be true of the Second Amendment. The Heller decision will launch 30 years of defining the nature and scope of gun rights in our courts. The Heller holding will likely be narrow, and will leave open countless other questions, such as what kinds of guns are protected, how far that right extends beyond your home, and whether the Second Amendment controls state law. At least some of these questions will find their way up to the Supreme Court years later. Who sits on the Court when those cases arrive matters a great deal to those of us who believe in the value of widespread lawful gun ownership in America.
Thats why the 2008 presidential election has unprecedented importance for gun owners. Despite their campaign rhetoric purporting to support the right to keep and bear arms, both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are categorically opposed to our Second Amendment rights. Hillary Clinton opposed the 2005 tort reform law that saved the American gun industry from bankruptcy. Barack Obama has declared his opposition to all concealed carry laws. He has refused to repudiate his answer to a 1996 questionnaire, where he answered yes to a question asking if he supported laws banning the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns. And Senator Obamas true contempt for gun owners came out when he described us as clinging to our guns out of bitterness.
In contrast, presumptive Republican nominee John McCain joined bipartisan majorities on a Congressional amicus brief in the Supreme Court in DC v. Heller for the proposition that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. Both Clinton and Obama refused to sign that brief, instead supporting the District of Columbias law that prohibits its law-abiding residents from possessing any operable firearm at home, even for self-defense.
The president of the United States appoints all federal judges. Senator McCain has stated he will appoint justices like John Roberts and Sam Alito, and Antonin Scalia, all of whom seem likely to vote to uphold individual gun rights. Senator Obama, on the other hand, has promised to nominate liberal judicial activists and wants the Court to uphold the DC gun ban.
So who Americans elect as president this year will determine the fate of the Second Amendment. In electing a president we also elect a Supreme Court, and in the coming years the makeup of the High Court will be crucial in defining our rights.
For that reason Im honored to serve on Senator McCains Justice Advisory Committee, and will do everything I can to make sure that Americas 90 million gun owners elect a president who will appoint Supreme Court justices faithful to the text of the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the Second Amendment.
Gun owners are very sensible people. Americas heartland is filled with people devoted to faith, family and classic American values like lawful gun ownership for hunting, recreation and self-defense. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama could learn a lot from them, but I doubt theyll be joining us at the NRA convention.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Froman is the immediate past president of the National Rifle Association of America, only the second woman and the first Jewish American to hold that office in the 136-year history of the NRA. The views expressed are her own and not that of any organization.
Don't you think that might be a little late? Purchasing on the black market will make you much more likely to be caught in a "sting" operation.
Don't hold your breath. It will someone pretty much as "moderate" as he is. Maybe not as much of a "Maverick", but definitely another Socialism Lite, no borders, GloBull warming, guns are icky type.
Maybe you consider C+, his 2004 rating, good, but my Mama didn't, and doesn't. C+ as a republican is about like a D- or so as a Dem.
Maybe after "Operation Chaos" states will wise up and close their primaries. It's really in the interest of the GOP and conservatives. Especially when their political philosophy is a reactionary "don't rock the boat" style of how are you going to pay for this and what about unintended consequences. How many cockamamie schemes come from the right? It's always the left, by and large, and the RINOs who want to compromise with them.
Actually, I can't agree with that 100 percent. I do believe it is a mistake to sit out the election, but can't go so far as to say it is morally wrong.
As far as voting democrat being immoral ... the presidential candidates are really bad, but there are reasonable people in this world that will vote democrat being totally unaware of some of the nastier aspects of each candidate. Additionally, there are democrats in this part of the country that are far more conservative than many republicans in the NE, a few of them are even fairly acceptable except that I just don't vote for democrats because of what the party (overall) represents.
As for RINOS, my comments would be similar to those on the democrats. McCain is an awful candidate, but I can't go so far as to judge as immoral the act of voting for him. Above my pay grade. Like I've said before ... reasonable people can come to totally differing conclusions about McCain's fitness for office. I'm just not certain that it boils down to a moral decision for everyone.
If I somehow misunderstood your post, please feel free to correct my understanding. ;-)
Source and date for that quote please. It's 180 degrees from the actual position he ran on, which was build the fence, empower local governments to enforce immigration laws, crack down on employers, and give illegals 120 days to self-deport. Those that did could sign up to immigrate legally, at the bottom of the list. Anyone caught here after that time could never enter the USA legally again.
Now is it logical to write in someone who cannot win? What would that accomplish? The only logical choice is to vote for the candidate with a chance to win who will do the least damage to the country.
I can no longer find the specific source for that quote. If you do a web search on Huckabee, slavery and atone you’ll find lots of secondary references to it.
To the best of my recollection, it was about two years ago, currying favor at a LULAC convention in Little Rock.
Before he was running for President.
Earlier this year he said something to the effect of “If you want someone strong on the border, I’m not your guy”.
My nose will stay in place also, even though I'll have to hold it while voting for McCain. As unpalatable as he is, he's still infinitely better than Hitlery or Osama. Even thinking of one of those Democrats as president is ..... actually unthinkable.
The choices we've got are akin to choices between being shot at close range by a 155mm howitzer, beheaded or being run over by a Caterpiller D9.
Ah! Our “friend” the Huckster! :-) I’m glad you found that DW. I was lurking and waiting. :-)
I think that there will always be an emergency that will have people saying, "But you've gotta vote for the RINO! Abortion/2nd Amendment rights/Welfare/Supreme Court Nominations/etc depend on it!"
There will always be people who will tell us that we have to swallow garbage because they are somehow of the opinion that conservative garbage is better than liberal garbage as long as it is for a good cause, whatever that good cause is.
But there comes a time when we have to realize that the lesser of two evils is still evil and that moral relativism is an insidious mental disease conquered only when one says "no more!" and means it, come what may.
It has to stop somewhere and now is as good a time as any other.
Actually, now is a better time than any other, because the longer we wait to fix what is broken, the harder it will be to fix.
Took me a while to find it - I remembered the statement being about “slavery”, when the key word was actually “African”.
Personally, to rest assured in my heart that I did NOT support the status qou...IE pandering, professional liars whose sole purpose in life is to screw people over for power and money...
'Politics' used to be about serving your country and advancing society, it has become the domain of whores and the pursuit of the darkest human souls...
Having lived in that sub-human spiritual condition [outside of politics] for years and then been given a chance to be a helper rather than my old, selfish POS suit of skin, I detest the very sight of the bitch or the jihadi.
mccain aint AS bad as those two, but he nor 95% of the suits that claim to be my masters wouldnt be trusted to dog-sit, much less welcome into my home or exposed to my children. and Id pass an invitation to theirs as well.
I dont socialize with, tolerate nor support/condone drunks, sinners and general perverts that dont have any desire to 'change' themselves...
William, if your heart tells you that mccain is the best choice and you can live with that, I can respect that and say God bless ya dude, but please give us the same courtesy, we are not trying to hurt anything, just trying to be honest with our conscience... LFOD...
It certainly doesn't benefit me to bequeath to my grandchildren a nation in ruins due to socialism. You mistake my meaning when I refer to how your vote benefits YOU.
Assuming the Heller decision comes out 5-4 in favor of an individual right to keep and bear arms, then I will KNOW that my votes for Bush and against Gore and Kerry benefitted me greatly.
I'm waiting to hear how your morality is going to benefit you when you withhold your vote for McCain and permit Hillary or Obama to take office.
I refused to vote for Arnold because he is a RINO. I remain convinced that Kalifornia would have been better off dealing with bankruptcy under a Democrat rather than bankruptcy under Arnold.
Is there some way in which the nation will be a better place because Obama or Hillary take office rather than McCain?
when I read that, it can come on a little strong,
I read it more as 'morally wrong to vote for dem [rino] that has proven to me to go against my moral beliefs'...
or any other area of life, I no longer buy 'hot' car stereos for example...I wont support that theif either...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.