—
You
Utter Berks
|
|||
|
Friday, August 12, 2016
Ya know guys ...
7 comments:
-
Helly said...
-
"... in case the people elect a [destructive] moron!"
The wisdom of the Founders is difficult to overstate. I see it as direct evidence of Providential action. However mortal, they never foresaw and could not equip us to cope with an entire government of morons with 3 million federal employees and 10 billion bullets, and a treasonous 4th Estate.
-
8/12/16, 10:48 AM
-
Unknown said...
-
And this is why, at the risk of being accused of being blasphemous or sacrilegious, I have as much reverence for the Bill of Rights as I have for the Ten Commandments.
-
8/12/16, 10:55 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams
It seems, of late that more of our population fit neither of these categories which causes our current problems.
Fence sitters need to at least vote Trump to push the pendulum in the other direction to give opportunity for future administrations to begin repairs. The alternative is to have the pendulum cut off by hildabeast, et al.
Incidentally, I believe it was last year that I read somewhere that the population of the federal bureaucracy is greater than the 13 colonies at the founding.
-mech -
8/12/16, 11:17 AM
-
Anonymous said...
-
Our founding fathers never for a day intended every living breathing cretin to have a say in the government. They very much left voting rules up to local powers knowing that they would only let people vote who had some skin in the game. This still continues today but is being rendered moot by Marxist judges. Ben Franklin said our Democratic means would be destroyed as soon as people realize they can vote themselves stuff. Well, that happened with the passage of the 15th Amendment which was nothing more than the Feds removing obstacles preventing them from manipulating elections. So bad is it now that the act of showing ID is akin to riding in the back of the bus or eating in the kitchen, but only if you are a dishonest liberal. -Anymouse
-
8/12/16, 1:26 PM
-
Skoonj said...
-
This is a commentary on the meaning of the 2nd Amendment by Penn and Teller, found on Tammy Bruce's site. It was contributed by Maynard.
The debates on the Second Amendment never cease, but when was the last time you heard an insight that hasn’t been repeated a thousand times before? Penn and Teller’s interpretation was something new to me (Maynard), and I’ll share it here.
The Second Amendment is short and sweet:
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.
But what exactly does that mean? The latter portion is perfectly clear and inarguable to anyone who hasn’t gone to grad school, but the introductory phrase about the militia may give reasonable people pause. What is the connection between the right of the people to bear arms and the state militia? Would the Founders have allowed a citizen to be stripped of his right to bear arms because he was not attached to a state militia, or something like that? It’s a question we should be able to answer.
Penn and Teller acknowledge that the Founders did indeed attach the right of the individual to bear arms to the necessity of the state militia existing and bearing arms, but the relationship is the inverse of what the anti-arms people allege. I’ll explain in my words and then let the boys speak for themselves.
Flashback to the Concord Hymn. You’ll remember these lines:
By the rude bridge that arched the flood,
Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled,
Here once the embattled farmers stood,
And fired the shot heard round the world.
This is the story of the Battles of Lexington and Concord. In brief, the British marched to seize colonial weapons and thus nip the nascent revolution in the bud. The colonists declined to be disarmed, and instead shot back, and the British retreated.
The Second Amendment was written in living memory of Lexington and Concord. The Founders knew that the state must necessarily maintain an armed militia. And the Founders knew from world history and their personal history that a tyrant seeks a disarmed and impotent people; an imbalance of power that assures that the state can overwhelm the people if it chooses to do so.
In this context, the preface of the Second Amendment’s reference to the state militia isn’t a manner of supporting the state militia; it’s a cautionary check that the people will always have the ability to oppose the state militia. The Concord Hymn would have it that those that shot back against the British army were “embattled farmers”. Got it? Farmers! The people!
In other words, the meaning isn’t “The state militia must exist and be armed, so therefore you are allowed to be armed so you can help.” It’s “The state militia must exist and be armed, so therefore you must be armed to prevent that militia from having a monopoly of power.”
Or, by analogy, “There will always be wolves in the forest; therefore the forest residents must be allowed to arm themselves.” You arm yourself to protect yourself from wolves, not to join them.
Video is located here: http://tammybruce.com/2016/08/penn-teller-offer-an-interesting-take-on-the-2nd-amendment.html -
8/12/16, 1:44 PM
-
DougM said...
-
That's why I'm voting for Trump.
He'll be easier to impeach. -
8/12/16, 1:55 PM
-
Bill Brower said...
-
Bingo, DougM
I'll never vote for anybody I think can't be impeached. Like Obama or Hillary. -
8/12/16, 8:00 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)