Kagan "channels" on Second Amendment Rights
Kagan "not sympathetic as Law Clerk to gun rights argument". First we had Hillary Clinton walking the pathway around the White House chatting with Eleanor which I can appreciate when Hillary was under stress caused, of course, by 'bimbo bill' and now we have as a nominee to the Supreme Court, a lady that through no fault of her own clerked for Thurgood Marshall who asked his law clerks to "channel him" in deciding which cases the Court should or might hear. I know, I know, they were asked to try to think like he would and come up with the cases they thought he might want the Court to hear and to give him a little synopsis regarding the prospective case issues. Nice exercise and better choice of descriptor. Now I have some idea why the far-left "gun grabbers" have it wrong with the Second Amendment but also why - Ms. Kagan on the Court, our rights are in severe jeopardy. They think "a well ordered militia and individual rights to bear arms are two separate things". They aren't two separate things and never have been. A well-ordered militia and an individually armed citizenry are one and the same. In the founding of our nation, it would have been unthinkable that citizens would be denied the right to protect themselves with guns. Ladies riding in stage coaches long ago kept Derringers in their little purses next to the miniature novels they were reading on their journey. Individuals keeping and bearing arms in their homes and on their persons are the militia that the states and the federal government would call up as needed back in the day when no one knew from where the attacks against our lives and our sovereignty would come. We citizens are all one individually as well as collectively "part and parcel" when it pertains to our nation's defense. That and the fact that we have a right and a duty to protect our persons and our homes and families as well as each other from death or assault from those who would take away our lives and liberty. Ruby Ridge comes to mind as an extreme and very sad example of why we must be armed. Another heinous example of government overtly failing in its duty is measured in the numbers of Americans being murdered in their homes along our Southern Border or killed and maimed on our highways due to the intent of some in our federal government to violate their most sacred sworn duty in allowing us to be invaded - this in no way is a comment against the brave Border Patrol men and women who are put in harms way every day by an ineffectual government that gives Miranda Rights to Islamic Fundamentalist terrorists who are committing acts of war, not "crimes" although their acts of war may also include "crimes". I don't know why liberal progressives cannot see who the enemy is. The Islamic jihadists are certainly clear in their efforts... On the other hand in an example that should be clear even to the most ideologically warped far-left liberal: Think about Switzerland where everyone, every citizen, is part of the nation's defense. They are ordered to be armed in their homes so that they can come to the defense of their nation. That may seem a quaint notion in this day and age but it isn't. Ms. Kagan has stated that the matter is now settled law and that we have the individual right to have arms under the Second Amendment but this right can also be eroded through regulations... She didn't say that exactly but the implication is clear. I submit that nothing is settled law with a Supreme Court where every vote matters and among whom are sitting justices who look to foreign law and apply that law to our U.S. Constitution (Ruth Gingsberg). The Court has been splitting for some time now in 5-4 decisions down the line. With Ms. Kagan the split will remain the same. BUT... When Ginsburg retires from the Court, under President Obama, and it'll happen FAST, you'd better forget about what Ms. Kagan says today is settled law today. Remember, liberal justices do not interpret cases under the U.S. Constitution. They "make law" through their own ideological agenda which will trump our rights each and every time if those rights do not conform with the socialist/Marxist agenda of taking power away from the people. Abortion is not an issue. That is a "states rights" issue as the Constitution does not address abortion on demand or God forbid, partial-birth late term abortions. But abortion "rights" will not be enfringed upon and so many molesters of our young girls will go unidentified and unpunished... And abortion will still be used as "birth control." On a personal level, I know of one young woman in her late-thirties now who has had eight abortions simply for birth control, all eight pre-borns fathered by the same man... Can you imagine or "channel if you will" what Madison, Monroe, Jefferson and others in the Continental Congress would have had to say about partial-birth abortion. Or how about a federal government seizing our guns. In the latter case, they would no doubt - just guessing here, not channeling - be jumping up and down screaming the citizenry have to be individually armed to protect themselves from the British or from an over-reaching federal government among other things perhaps such as drug gangs crashing into homes and threatening or attacking the citizens... We are one justice away from overturning much "settled law". The existing Court thanks to David Sutter got rid of our sacredly held "private property rights" in Kelo vs. City of New London. What's next? Difficult to predict but Mr. Obama did promise to change America fundamentally and it seems this is one promise he will keep... Maybe they're reading 1984 up there in the White House along with Saul Alinsky. Perhaps they should be careful what they "wish" for because once they have successfully infiltrated our nation with folks from the South who are used to rebellions and revolutions and enough jihadists have gotten in, there's no telling what could happen. Once that genny (sp) is out of the bottle even the "progressives" can't put it back - the Time Square "jihadist" is a case in point or perhaps the Ft. Hood assassin will get the message out. We, our nation, is under attack. If you want to see and hear it clearly and well-articulated, watch the first few minutes of the movie, Breach, when John Ashcroft spoke about Robert Hanssen having been arrested for espionage... We are a nation at risk from enemies within and without who are international in scope and who want to do us serious harm. The 12,000 Americans maimed or killed by illegals every year doesn't come close to the damage our enemies want to inflict upon us. When our elected "leaders" turn their back on me - then we need new elected leaders - and when they continue to fail in their sworn duty - probably had their fingers crossed behind their backs when they took that oath - I don't want to be completely defenseless. I wrote the following opinion when Bush-43 was in office and it holds today. It is just my humble opinion but I believe when elected leaders do not hold their sworn duty and intentionally put us at risk, give over our sovereignty, and play footsie with European Socialism and a Global Government, their actions fall well within the framework of "high crimes and misdemeanors." But then, that's just one woman's opinion and I'm not a Constitutional scholar or don't claim to be. Maybe the best way to unravel our U.S. Constitution is to be a so-called "constitutional scholar". Well, take care follow our laws. Somebody has to follow them.