The American Spectator

When considering Second Amendment issues for the citizens of Washington D.C., remember  that we now live in AmeriKKKa. What is AmeriKKKa, you ask? AmeriKKKa is the USA under one-party rule. And the Klan, historically, has been the terrorist wing of the Party.

Ghosts of the Klan make their presence felt to this day. Had you asked a Klansman whether Negroes could be trusted with firearms, he’d think you were crazy, and tell you that  is why it is illegal for them to be armed. Party thinking on this issue has not changed.

When you hear Party leaders advocate waiting periods and background checks, think poll taxes and literacy tests. The Party also adopted complex voting registration processes, at inconvenient places and times, to discourage minority registration. The same methods are deployed to hinder gun ownership.

One might argue that the rules apply to all uniformly, but a disparate impact on African-Americans is obvious. An Equality Impact Assessment is not even required — just look at the political jurisdictions, and the targeted groups, where these roadblocks are erected.

There is another sinister, but intended, consequence to restricting gun access. Driving While Black is not a crime, but racial profilers have treated it as probable cause. Carrying While Black, in many jurisdictions, has been made a felony. Does anyone doubt that the  federal government will follow a states’ rights approach? That is, the feds will turn a blind eye while local jurisdictions wield gun laws to harrass and intimidate their subjects.
— Dan Martin
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

The Heller decision was symbolism over substance. What 25,000 colonists died to secure and was enshrined in the Bill of Rights and Constitution combined is now just the Bill of Privileges for those with positions of power and funds to pay the entry fee for their privileges. It is the same scam it has been throughout time. Words don’t mean anything; the only thing “governments” respect is power (to remove them). At the end of the day lawyers win on both sides of this issue while nothing changes down where the masses have to live and survive. 400+ years of tradition and practice came down to over 150 pages of stating the obvious while then leaving the Fox still in charge of the Hen House. Nothing is going to change until the Supreme Court of the United States gets a “pair” and fulfills its duty to protect the Constitution.
— Thom Bateman
Newport News, Virginia

PRESIDENT SUFFIX
Re: Joseph Shattan’s The Four Pillars of Obamaism:

Le mot juste.

A friend of mine recently came up with the perfect adjective to describe Obama, his minions, and others of his ilk:  Obamunist!
— Gretchen L. Chellson
Alexandria, Virginia

TIP-NATO-ING OUT OF THE ALLIANCE
Re: Doug Bandow’s What’s NATO for Again?

Patriotism, power, and self-interest once again collide. Just as a young man may be well served having his broker take an aggressive stance in playing the stock market and changing to a more conservative posture as he enters retirement years, Americans are served best if they demand that their leaders check that their policies are sufficiently cautious.

What is the current value in being not only a member, but the first among equals, in NATO?  From the moment of its inception until the day Soviet Empire died, the self-interest in belonging to NATO was clear: America had self-interest, morally, ethically, historically, and financially, in keeping the Russian bear in check and out of Europe.  Once the U.S.S.R. was brought down and its military shown to be a hollow shell of its once proud self, America had less interest in maintaining its presence in Europe: the threat of attack was lessened.  But asking Europe to go cold turkey after being dependent on America’s largess for so long would have led to many difficulties, especially along the diplomatic and public relations fronts.  A slow, sure and steady stand down of American troops was the logical move.  Europe was strong enough to handle its own affairs, including enough standing troops to manage the Kosovo conflict. Yet, more than 20 years after the fall of the “Evil Empire,” American troops and dollars are still being transferred for European defense.  The value of this transfer does not meet its costs.  It is illogical to maintain our troops in high numbers or to be a member of NATO.

If America were to pull out of NATO, the organization would die. Further stimulating the economy would be the savings that could come from withdrawal from NATO; the savings would be in the billions.  The monies would be well directed into increasing troop levels and readiness here at home.  Withdrawal from NATO is not withdrawal from the world; now is not the time for neo-isolationism (thank you Messrs Paul and Buchanan).  Now is the time to use our military prudently in our self-interests.     

NATO: an idea and an organization whose time has come — and gone.
— Ira M. Kessel
Rochester, New York

DRUDGING FOR EVIDENCE
Re: William Murchison’s Killing Time: