Shooting Down the Constitution

Even a simple guy like me can figure out these words from the U.S. Constitution: “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” That’s contained in the Second Amendment. So why did four Supreme Court justices this week vote to infringe on the right to bear arms?

The court ruled 5 to 4 that 76-year-old Otis McDonald, an African-American Democrat who lives in Chicago, can own a handgun. Mr. McDonald, a retired working class guy, sued the city for taking away his right to protect himself. McDonald was blunt. He said his neighborhood is full of thugs who threaten his well-being and the city cannot control the situation. So he, Otis, has to protect himself from harm.

But Justices John Paul Stevens, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg all basically told Mr. McDonald to take a hike. They opined that guns cause a lot of damage to society; therefore, if a city wants to ban them, it can. But that is a policy belief, is it not? Where in the Constitution does it say if guns become a menace to society they can be banned? Where does it say that?

The Founding Fathers well understood the need for individual protection. Under King George, British soldiers routinely threw Colonial families out of their homes using a bogus law called the “Quartering Act.” Also, the colonists had little protection from harm because there was no federal authority and state governments were in their infancy. The Founders also recognized that armed rebellion was a possibility even after we threw the British out. So they allowed the new American citizens the right to “bear arms” as protection and, indeed, wanted the folks to form “militias” in case of emergency.

A smart fifth-grader understands all that, but apparently four Supreme Court justices do not.

If these liberal jurists really cared about gun control, they would urge Congress to pass a law making all gun crimes federal offenses with mandatory prison sentences of ten years. That would mean that any thug who carried a gun illegally, or used one to commit a crime, would be facing a ten-year stretch on top of whatever else he or she had done. You want bad guys with guns off the streets? That’s the way to do it.

My opinion on gun control changed drastically when I saw the chaos in New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. Armed bands of looters in boats cruised the city, taking pretty much any thing they wanted, because the local police presence had collapsed. If you had remained in town in order to protect your property, you would have been at the mercy of these looters unless you had the firepower to ward them off. That is why all Americans have the right to bear arms.

It is depressing to think that the Ruth Bader Ginsburgs of this world do not care a whit about the welfare of Otis McDonald and other Americans who find themselves at risk. For Justice Ginsburg, it is all about her liberal philosophy, not what benefits the American people.

The Supreme Court is just one justice away from giving Ms. Ginsburg and her leftist crew the power to completely usurp the Constitution. Be very afraid.

Visiting the White House

The day before Halloween, the White House released a partial list of visitors since January 20 of this year. The list is fascinating and highlights exactly what kind of house the Obamas are running.

Topping the visitor chart is Andy Stern, the president of the far-left union SEIU. Andy has been received by the Obamas 22 times. Wow. He must be quite a guy. In fact, shouldn’t he be getting frequent visitor points like they give in hotels?

Kim Gandy, the President of the National Organization for Women, clocks in with 14 visits. This has to be a Michelle Obama play. I know the president is a sensitive guy, but hanging around with Ms. Gandy that much is incomprehensible—unless she plays basketball, which I believe she does not.

John Podesta has visited 17 times. He used to advise Bill Clinton and now runs some wacky far-left organization that specializes in vile personal attacks against conservative Americans. Podesta is one mean motor scooter. I hope he’s not scaring the Obama kids.

Showing up for six visits while keeping hope alive was Jesse Jackson. Not sure what the Reverend is offering the Obamas, but they seem to like him better than Al Sharpton, who’s visited the White House twice.

The late Ted Kennedy chalked up seven visits. You have to assume that was on health care. The liberal lion was a prime backer of Obama-care, which is shaping up as an absolute disaster.

General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt was chauffeured to the White House five times. As you may know, NBC News, owned by GE, has been extremely generous to Barack Obama, and now GE is hot on the trail of government contracts for environmental work. This has the appearance of a quid-pro-quo, and NBC News has one of the best investigative reporters in business: Lisa Myers. I hope she looks into it.

Radical left financier George Soros showed up to see the Obamas four times. This is a tough one to figure out. Word on the street is that Soros has been shorting the U.S. dollar, which is not a good thing for the economy. Soros is a slippery guy who once nearly ruined the British pound and was convicted of a felony in France. But, hey, those incidents could make for some great story-telling, so perhaps that’s why Soros is a repeat visitor.

Al Gore must miss the White House, so he’s been back four times, courtesy of the Obamas. I understand why Al was a guest. Here’s a guy who’s made a reported $100 million from global warming projects and investments. Certainly, the Obama administration, which is running up deficits in the trillions, could use a little savvy financial advice. So you go, Al.

Finally, Oprah has visited the Obamas twice. This is nice. Oprah is basically responsible for Barack’s fame, and now she is being warmly received. I like this. I like loyalty to friends.

By the way, your humble correspondent has not been invited to the White House… yet. But I am thinking about shorting the U.S. dollar, so anything could happen.

Getting Radical

In the beginning, there was Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a fire-breathing Chicago preacher who believes America is a bad place. The reverend and Barack Obama were friends for twenty years.

Also, radical Catholic priest Michael Pfleger, another Chicago cleric, was part of the Obama neighborhood gang. Father Mike was the guy who mocked Hillary Clinton, portraying her as a white woman of entitlement.

Then there was Bill Ayers, a casual acquaintance of Mr. Obama in Chicago. Ayers, a former Weather Underground guy, is unrepentant to this day about the group’s violent activities in the 1960’s.

Barack and Michelle Obama were also friends with Rashid Khalidi, a radical professor who routinely condemns Israel. Mr. Obama spoke at Khalidi’s farewell dinner in Chicago just before the professor took a job at Columbia University.

After being elected president, Mr. Obama appointed Carol Browner as Director of the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change Policy. Formerly, Ms. Browner was a leader in the Commission for a Sustainable World Society, a group that calls for “global governance.” That group is an arm of the Socialist International organization.

The president also hired Kevin Jennings as the “safe schools czar.” Mr. Jennings believes that sexual orientation lessons should begin in kindergarten.

And, of course, there is Van Jones. The president brought him into the White House to be the “green jobs czar.” Unfortunately, Mr. Jones has a radical left resume which includes support for the convicted cop killer Mumia Abu Jamal. He was forced to resign when the folks found out exactly how far out there the man really is.

Judge Edward Chen might be on par with Jones. On August 7, the president nominated Chen for a lifetime federal judgeship in San Francisco. Chen used to be a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberities Union and, just a few days after the terror attack on 9/11, Chen stated he had a “sickening feeling in his stomach about what might happen to race relations and religious tolerance on our own soil.

“One has to wonder whether the irresistible forces of racism, nativism and scapegoating which has recurred so often in our history can be effectively retrained.”

Sounds a bit like Reverend Wright, does it not?

So what does all this tell us about Barack Obama? Some conservatives say it indicates that the president is committed far left guy. I’m not so sure.

What I am sure about is that the Obama administration hates to be associated with the far left and will hammer anyone who makes the link. If you want the bottom line on the White House/Fox News controversy, that’s it.

But it is important to understand the precincts in which the president feels comfortable, and there is no question that he has snuggled up to the far left.

Does that mean he’s Che Guevara in disguise? Not necessarily. But it does mean Barack Obama is somewhat out of step with mainstream America.

Fighting the Good Fight

President Obama should fire Rahm Emanuel and hire me as his top advisor. Don’t laugh. I can almost guarantee higher poll numbers for the president if he brings me on board.

The first thing I would do is declare a truce with Fox News. Right now, the president is spending more time launching offensives against FNC than the Taliban. I mean, come on, the American people want Bin Laden’s head on a stick, not Glenn Beck’s. What exactly does attacking FNC get the president? Plus, it’s hypocritical. Didn’t Barack Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize?

Next, I would suggest that the Commander-in-Chief actually listen to his top general in Afghanistan and his Secretary of Defense. After listening, the president should immediately send 40,000 more troops to provide more security in that God-forsaken place. As a trusted advisor, I would remind the president that the United States military is a vital enterprise and deserves a chance to win in Afghanistan.

After accomplishing those two things, President Obama and I would get lunch. Then, back to work.

Bringing down health care costs is huge for the president, and I would advise him to drop the so called “public option” and concentrate on increased insurance competition across state lines. If insurance companies could compete nationwide, health premiums would begin falling. And if you add tort reform to blunt the out-of-control medical lawsuit industry, doctors and medical personnel could charge less because their enormous medical malpractice bills would shrink.

By the way, the vast majority of Americans would support both of those things because they are free. They don’t cost the taxpayer anything. The public option would cost trillions. A good advisor should be frugal with taxpayer dollars.

Having dealt with all of that, the president and I would sit down for a heart to heart. I would tell him that he has to tamp down his fascination with far-left guys. Hanging around with Reverend Wright was okay when Barack Obama was a Chicago community guy playing hoops in the school yard, but now that he’s the most powerful man in the world, the left-wing loon factor becomes a red flag. I would gently suggest to the president that he might tell his top aides not to publicly say Chairman Mao was a great philosopher, as White House Communications Director Anita Dunn recently did.

In fact, while Mao was weaving his philosophy, more than 30 million Chinese died grisly deaths. So, as the president’s top advisor, I would advise the following: NO MORE REFERENCES TO MAO!

Finally, I would advise Barack Obama to stay off TV for a while. There is no question he is overexposed. However, I would advise him to go on The O’Reilly Factor. Because O’Reilly is no longer in the anchor seat, having taken the White House position, the president might even be able to complete a sentence. So, okay, to Fox News. Detente, at last.

Faithfully Angry

It took a while—we’re�talking decades—but finally, some American religious leaders say they �are fed up. � A few days ago, a faith-based group including New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan issued a scathing indictment of secularism in the USA entitled “The Manhattan Declaration: A Call of Christian Conscience.”

The document, which includes input from protestants, Catholic and Orthodox Christians, basically says that Christian values are under siege in America and people of faith need to act aggressively to stem the tide. � The Declaration goes so far as to encourage civil disobedience and uses Dr. Martin Luther �King, Jr. as a model for that.

So why now? Why are some Christians leaders coming out of the sacristy at this point in time?

The Declaration�gives a strong hint that abortion is the lead issue. � There is no question that the Obama administration and the media in general are ardently pro-choice… no surprise there. � But the fact that so many Democratic Congresspeople are supporting public funding for abortions as part of �health care reform has rocked the pro-life world. � The issue is simple: Should a country that values sincere conscience require taxpayers who believe abortion is murder to pay for the life ending procedure? � Obviously, millions of Americans say no.

The intensity of the debate is made crystal clear in the showdown between the Bishop of Rhode Island, Thomas Tobin, and Congressman Patrick Kennedy, the son of the late Ted Kennedy. �The bishop has ordered the congressman not to receive communion because of his support for abortion rights. �Kennedy, like many pro-choice Catholics, falls back on personal belief versus public policy. � He says that just because he takes a pro-choice position�doesn’t mean he personally approves of abortion.

The bishop is having none of it.

On my television program, Bishop Tobin said flat-out that Kennedy has a moral obligation as a Catholic to fight against abortion. � And if he doesn’t, his soul is in danger of damnation. Words don’t come stronger than that. �

So it is apparent that some religious leaders are engaging in high stakes rhetoric, including condemning homosexual marriage. � After abortion, gay nuptials dominate the Manhattan Declaration, and once again, the language is stark. �The tract states that the drive for same-sex and multiple partner marriage is diminishing “true” marriage. “Marriage is made possible by the sexual complementarity of man and woman… no one has a civil right to have a non-marital relationship treated as marriage.”

The Christian manifesto concludes with a call to arms and, some believe, a direct arrow aimed at the Obama administration: “Unjust laws degrade human beings. �They lack any power to bind in conscience. �[Dr. Martin Luther] King’s willingness to go to jail, rather than comply with legal injustice, was exemplary and inspiring.”

So, with the stroke of a pen, the Christian writers have turned the tables on those who say gay marriage and unfettered abortion are civil rights and therefore should be constitutionally protected.�Obviously, there is severe disagreement on that.

With polls showing that more than 80% of Americans believe in God, the question now becomes, will they rally behind the Manhattan Declaration? �So far, the secular media has given it little attention and that might well continue. �But even if the manifesto gets a full airing, are people of faith as upset as some of their leadership with secularism of America?

At this point, I simply don’t know.