It’s been too long since I’ve posted. I was in the middle of moving (hopefully my last) and I thought the next post would be about owning my first home. Unfortunately, I haven’t had any mind altering thoughts on the matter. Now I’m sitting in my new home with the wife and turned on the “CNN National Security Debate.”
It’s 8:42 now and Wolf Blitzer isn’t doing a bad job as the moderator…he isn’t doing a good one either. Mitt Romney just effectively shut him up after he asked for the twelfth time for one of the candidates to acquiesce on immigration amnesty. But about an hour ago I had a shocking reality check.
Why is CNN labeling this debate the “National Security” debate? Two reasons: Ron Paul and Herman Cain. These guys have shown unmistakable popularity amongs Americans who have been polled. However, Ron Paul’s international policies aren’t exactly popular and Herman Cain flubbed a national policy question recently.
My guess (because I have no evidence whatsoever) is that the kingmakers at CNN are trying to get a two for one deal here. First, it’s no secret that the debates are great for ratings. Americans have been viewing in droves to learn about the next president (because it ain’t gonna be Obama). If you doubt this, then check your TV guide and you’ll find this was scheduled during O’Reilly who continues to whoop CNN tail when it comes to viewership. In the end, I guess the network’s love for Obama ends when the dollars run out.
Second, by focusing on National Security CNN is effectively exposing the Achilles heel of the two men that the CNN kingmakers hope to expunge from serious competition. Ron Paul has often been described as an isolationist. Check out his website if you want more info. Aside from brushing off the over-inflated sexual misconduct scandal, Herman Cain doesn’t appear to have the experience that the rest of the candidates do. Unfortunately for CNN, Herman Cain pulled off what any person of intelligence could accomplish…he brushed up on current world events and gave a lot of good answers.
My fellow Americans, you don’t have to pick between Romney and Perry. Hell, I wouldn’t mind at all if you started a Kinky Friedman write in campaign. Just know that if the news networks are cramming something down your throat, you’re not obliged to swallow it.
Before watching last night’s debate the only preconceived notion I had was that I’m about burned out on them. I usually watch them on YouTube in order to skip commercials and fast forward through non-answers. But last night turned in to a low point for the Republican presidential primary.
Long story short: desperation is a stinky cologne.
The only people who came out smelling like a rose (no one really wins these things) were Herman Cain, Ron Paul, and Newt Gingrich. They constantly kept their cool (which says a lot for Dr. Paul) and didn’t de-evolve in to Lord of the Flies type bickering. I’m not supporting Newt Gringrich by any means, but these situations prove time and again why he was such an effective Speaker of the House. Unfortunately, he’s the reason why you have to balance words with actions when choosing a candidate.
The other two RINO’s almost went to fisticuffs. The night’s low point was reached when Romney and Perry kept speaking over each other with increasingly ugly language. I don’t even recall the topic or the question asked (which are often two different things in a presidential debate) but I know that after the smoke cleared both of those guys would have been better served with broken noses and a round of beers…well, it would have been more cathartic that way. In the end, their numbers are slipping and they know what every American already knows: whoever wins the Republican primary will be the next president. Their falling numbers are reminding them that their vaunted wish is diminishing daily and there’s nothing they can do about it.
And of course the campaign’s little brother and sister kept trying to get noticed. Michelle Bachman and Rick Santorum tried endlessly to prove to America that yes, they do indeed exist. Unlike Bachman, however, Santorum actually made some three-dimensional arguments. The more Bachman spoke the more I wish she’d crafted her arguments with more depth than a dinner plate. It’s plain to me that her campaign is being run by lightweights.
Added together, this whole event put a black eye on the Republican primary. Until now, it’s been almost light-hearted. This should most likely bring some reality to the race. But I can’t help but think it was a low point and made all the candidates look bad, even if that guilt is only by association.
Note: Updated at 1726 to reflect grammatical corrections.
Amendment II of the Constitution says thus:
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.
Please take not of the phrase, “shall not be infringed,” (emphasis added). What is the definition of infringed? Dictionary.com says,
1. to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress: to infringe a copyright; to infringe a rule.
2. to encroach or trespass (usually followed by on or upon ): Don’t infringe on his privacy.
Is the use of Class III licenses an infringement? You are subject to an ATF (a bureau not specified in the Constitution) inspection at almost any time. What about state issued conceal/carry licenses? I know for a fact it is easier to acquire a concealed handgun license in Florida than it is in Texas… weird, right?
What about states who don’t recognize a conceal/carry license from another state? Can New York legally infringe on my right to carry a concealed weapon that I legally acquired in Florida?
What about California? Check this out. As tough as it is to get a concealed handgun license in California, now they don’t want your piece in public either. My friends, this is how modern-day communism works. There will not be an out right law to disarm the public. Over the course of many years bureaucrats and hippies will shout for a gradual increase to gun restrictions. This will happen until the paperwork for buying a gun will equal that to a home loan. Thomas Jefferson said it best, “The beauty of the second amendment is that it will not be needed until it’s being taken away.”
It should be noted that the militia, while necessary to prevent despotism at home is also a major factor to consider against foreign aggressors. I submit to you, dear reader, no foreign army wins a land war on US soil because of the already well armed public. Should North Korea attack us, God forbid, they wont make very good progress. While the hippies in LA and New York City are busy sun burning their arm pits in surrender, hunters and good ol’ boys from Alabama to Montana will be polishing their favorite dear rifle with a smile on their faces.