June 28, 2008


I didn't hear this on the radio the other day, but it's worth reading the whole thing before it becomes unavailable. Some excerpts:

RUSH: John Paul Stevens in his dissent on the DC gun ban bill today wrote that the majority, meaning Scalia and the gang, "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons." Folks, that is scary. I know Justice Stevens has been around for a long time, but that kind of interpretation -- there is no way, I don't care how convoluted a way that you read the Second Amendment, there is nothing in it to indicate that the Framers intended to grant the federal government, elected officials, the right to police people.

I too was shocked to hear that statement. It seems like a really jacked-up and backwards way of looking at the Second Amendment. The Framers never envisioned a day when elected officials got to decide whether people could own guns.

And it just gets worse.

Here Jeffrey Toobin, legal expert, CNN, talking to Heidi Collins at CNN. Listen to this question. Memo to Jonathan Klein running CNN: Do you understand how incompetent some of the people you have on your network are? Listen to this question. Heidi Collins to Jeffrey Toobin: "Specifically, Jeffrey, that's really what it's about, isn't it, the Constitution trumping policy?" The Constitution trumping policy? The Constitution trumping policy? (interruption) Yes, of course it is, but for this to be a question to a legal scholar? Here's the answer.

TOOBIN: This is just a big, big event in American constitutional history because the Second Amendment has been a true mystery.


TOOBIN: No one really knew for decades what it meant --

RUSH: Yes, they did.

TOOBIN: -- in practical terms.

RUSH: Yes, they did.

TOOBIN: Now the Supreme Court, by and large just 5-4, has said that there is a constitutional right to own a handgun inside the home.

RUSH: Stop the tape here a second. The only reason, Mr. Toobin, anybody ever debated this is because people like you, liberals years and years ago tried to tell us it didn't mean that, and you've been passing laws throughout these local municipalities and states chipping away at the Second Amendment because you don't like it. Nobody had any question about this 'til you liberals got involved, tried to obfuscate it and confuse everybody about it. And now we have to get to the point where the Constitution, which is plainly clear in this case, has to be affirmed by the US Supreme Court?

I too am shocked to hear someone talk about "the Constitution trumping policy." All policy is derived from the Constitution. The Constitution always trumps.

Rush goes on. I mean, he was just on fire that day.

RUSH: One of the problems that we're having here in our culture with all of this is the bastardization of the meaning of the word "right," as in, to have a right. For example, look what the left is saying today. We don't have a right to own guns. I mean, that would be their preference, that there be no Second Amendment. Just get four or five justices to wipe it out. We have no right, even though the Constitution specifically says we do. Yet, they further the notion that we all have a "right" to health care. We do not have a right to health care! That we all have a "right" to a home. We do not have a right to a home! That we all have a "right" to go to college. We do not have a right to go to college, because those are not rights! That we have a "right" to be free of the pollution of oil. That is not a right.

That's good squishy.

Posted by: Sarah at 05:05 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 657 words, total size 4 kb.

June 26, 2008


I just wanted to say that if you haven't seen Ania Egland's response to that stupid MoveOn ad where the mom won't "give" John McCain her son, make sure you go check it out.

Posted by: Sarah at 07:14 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 38 words, total size 1 kb.

June 24, 2008


I too find myself mesmerized by Bjorn Lomborg and giddy every time I see him on TV. He must just have some quality that makes straight men and housewives hang on his every word. Heh.

His interview in The Spectator: 'Global Warming Is Not Our Most Urgent Priority'

Posted by: Sarah at 04:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 56 words, total size 1 kb.

June 21, 2008


Rachel Lucas says it so I don't have to.

Posted by: Sarah at 04:14 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 11 words, total size 1 kb.

<< Page 1 of 1 >>
52kb generated in CPU 0.0252, elapsed 0.1288 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.1104 seconds, 179 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.