|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Are We Now Electing Supreme Court Justices?
Submitted by:
Mark A. Taff
Website: http://www.marktaff.com
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
Within our current framework, the Judicial Crisis Network’s ads strike me as slick but entirely conventional in their blandness. But assuming that there’s still a line somewhere, I believe the National Rifle Association has crossed it with a commercial declaring that “President Trump chose Brett Kavanaugh to break the tie” between the “liberal justices” who “oppose your right to self-defense” and the “four justices” (who are seemingly without left-to-right ideology) who “support your right to self-defense.” The ad concludes: “Your right to self-defense depends on this vote. Tell your senator to defend our right to self-defense. Confirm Judge Kavanaugh.” |
Comment by:
PHORTO
(8/16/2018)
|
A complete mis-characterization.
Political "left" and "right" is a smoke screen when considering SCOTUS nominees. The issue is the nominee's fealty to the Constitution, as it was written and intended to mean.
The vetting must be geared toward embracing originalism and rejecting consequentialism.
As a general rule, that means rejecting Democrat nominees and confirming Republican ones.
There will always be exceptions but they will be far and few between, and exceptions don't make the rule.
|
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence. Thus when my eldest son asked me what he should have done had he been present when I was almost fatally assaulted in 1908 [by an Indian extremist opposed to Gandhi's agreement with Smuts], whether he should have run away and seen me killed or whether he should have used his physical force which he could and wanted to use, and defend me, I told him it was his duty to defend me even by using violence. Hence it was that I took part in the Boer War, the so-called Zulu Rebellion and [World War I]. Hence also do I advocate training in arms for those who believe in the method of violence. I would rather have India resort to arms in order to defend her honor than that she should in a cowardly manner become or remain a helpless witness to her own dishonor. — Mohandas K. Gandhi, Young India, August 11, 1920 from Fischer, Louis ed.,The Essential Gandhi, 1962 |
|
|