Paul Rassinier - The Real Eichmann Trial or the Incorrigible Victors
‘Dear Senator Obama’ - Dillon Precision · being an incorrigible one-issue voter, ... the FBI...
1
By Peter Caroline At my age, I should know better, but I’ll admit I was curious about this young Senator who wanted to be President. I checked out his website and read all sorts of stuff about hope and change and letting the sunshine in and the American Way. But being an incorrigible one-issue voter, I fired off an e-mail asking the Senator about his views on the Second Amendment, specifically as it related to firearms for personal protection. Never mind hunt- ing…as we know, any candidate can send off to Orvis for that costume. After several months and a half-dozen e-mails from the Obama campaign seeking funds and/or my participation in street theater, I received an answer…of sorts: Dear Friend, Thank you for contacting me about gun laws and the Second Amendment. I appreci- ate hearing from you on this important issue. Americans broadly agree that guns must be kept from those who may pose a threat, and that the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen should be protected. We must work to ensure that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals or the mentally ill through an effective background check system. We also have to strike a rea- sonable balance between public safety and sportsmen’s rights. I will continue to work for effective gun laws, including reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that the last Congress allowed to expire, and effective law enforcement. I will also speak out against the culture of violence that traps so many of our young people. Thank you again for contacting me on this important issue. Sincerely, Barack Obama Okay, let’s look a bit closer at what Senator Obama had to say. In the first paragraph, he said that Americans broadly agree that guns must be kept from those who may pose a threat. That sounds reasonable at first glance, but who is defining the terms of who may pose a threat? To Sarah Brady or Charles Schumer, everyone reading The Blue Press may pose a threat. Good God, man, we have all these guns and we even manufacture our own ammunition! And with the Democrats in charge of both the House and the Senate, they may well act on the perceived threat that we pose. So, Senator, let’s say that we broadly disagree on what “we” may broadly agree on. How about, “…the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen should be protected?” WTF does the Second Amendment have to do with hunters and sportsmen? I hunt on occasion; I shoot holes in paper, and I collect guns. But mainly I keep and bear arms because I take responsibility for my own safety. If that gets your knickers in a twist, Senator, please stay out of Arizona; there’s an awful lot of us here. We don’t need you to protect our rights; the Second Amendment assures us of our right to protect all our rights…against whomever might threaten them. Next paragraph. We do currently have a fairly effective background check system. The system does have one major gaping hole, as witness the tragedy at Virginia Tech. Thanks to the ACLU and federal medical privacy laws, even if you are a certifiable looneytune, your records may not be accessible to the FBI database, depending on your state of resi- dence. That can be good or bad, depending on whether your illness was a mild depression in your youth or an ongoing paranoid schizophrenia. What about this “We also have to strike a rea- sonable balance between public safety and sports- men’s rights” stuff? “Sportmen’s rights” are no dif- ferent from anyone else’s rights. The Bill of Rights applies to us all. We the People, not the National Guard or Reserves. Who’s doing this bal- ancing act? Ted Kennedy? Hillary? Never mind “sports- men”…what about the rest of us? In my experience, when you hear a politician talking about “hunters and sportsmen,” you can bet the farm that you are in the presence of an anti-gunner. In Paragraph Three, Senator Obama finally drops his mask altogether. “I will continue to work for effective gun laws, including reinstatement of the assault weapons ban that the last Congress allowed to expire…” Assault weapons? You mean like the Ruger 10/22 and Browning Auto 5 and other such ferocious threats to public safety that Rep- resentative Carolyn McCarthy’s new “Assault Weapons” bill would proscribe? Or perhaps the same cosmetically challenged Evil Black Rifles and hi-cap magazines targeted by the Clinton fiasco legislation? Senator Obama, you present yourself as a fresh face in American poli- tics, but when pressed, you sure sound just like the same old anti-gun sons of bitches! And how about “I will also speak out against the culture of violence that traps so many of our young people.”? You’re from Chicago, right, Sena- tor? While you were involved in state government in Illinois, did you ever speak out against the pri- marily inner city culture of violence there? More important, did you ever do more than just speak out? Let’s face it, the reason our inner cities are so dangerous, Chicago being a case in point, is because politicians – particularly Democratic politicians from the time of Reconstruction on – have passed laws to disarm and render minorities defenseless against the bad guys. Talk is cheap, particularly in politics. And I will readily admit that Senator Obama is a smooth talker. He makes a good first impression, and I might even think of buying a used car from him. Unfortunately, when you take a good look under the hood, it’s the same old liberal Democrat rattletrap. 10 D P ‘Dear Senator Obama...’ Faster than a speeding-bullet ban! More powerful than voter logic! Able to dodge major issues in a single bound! Oct 07 Blue Press 1-19 8/15/07 8:56 AM Page 10
Transcript of ‘Dear Senator Obama’ - Dillon Precision · being an incorrigible one-issue voter, ... the FBI...
By Peter CarolineAt my age, I should know better, but I’ll admit I
was curious about this young Senator who wantedto be President. I checked out his website andread all sorts of stuff about hope and change andletting the sunshine in and the American Way. Butbeing an incorrigible one-issue voter, I fired off ane-mail asking the Senator about his views on theSecond Amendment, specifically as it related tofirearms for personal protection. Never mind hunt-ing…as we know, any candidate can send off toOrvis for that costume.
After several months and a half-dozen e-mailsfrom the Obama campaign seeking funds and/or myparticipation in street theater, Ireceived an answer…of sorts: Dear Friend,
Thank you for contacting me about gunlaws and the Second Amendment. I appreci-ate hearing from you on this important issue.Americans broadly agree that guns must bekept from those who may pose a threat, andthat the rights of legitimate hunters andsportsmen should be protected.
We must work to ensure that guns donot fall into the hands of criminals or thementally ill through an effective backgroundcheck system. We also have to strike a rea-sonable balance between public safety andsportsmen’s rights.
I will continue to work for effective gunlaws, including reinstatement of the assaultweapons ban that the last Congress allowedto expire, and effective law enforcement. I willalso speak out against the culture of violencethat traps so many of our young people.
Thank you again for contacting me onthis important issue.
Sincerely,Barack ObamaOkay, let’s look a bit closer at what Senator
Obama had to say. In the first paragraph, he said thatAmericans broadly agree that guns must be kept fromthose who may pose a threat. That sounds reasonableat first glance, but who is defining the terms of whomay pose a threat? To Sarah Brady or CharlesSchumer, everyone reading The Blue Press may posea threat. Good God, man, we have all these guns andwe even manufacture our own ammunition! Andwith the Democrats in charge of both the House andthe Senate, they may well act on the perceived threatthat we pose. So, Senator, let’s say that we broadlydisagree on what “we” may broadly agree on.
How about, “…the rights of legitimate huntersand sportsmen should be protected?” WTF does theSecond Amendment have to do with hunters andsportsmen? I hunt on occasion; I shoot holes inpaper, and I collect guns. But mainly I keep and beararms because I take responsibility for my own safety.If that gets your knickers in a twist, Senator, pleasestay out of Arizona; there’s an awful lot of us here.We don’t need you to protect our rights; the SecondAmendment assures us of our right to protect all ourrights…against whomever might threaten them.
Next paragraph. We do currently have a fairlyeffective background check system. The system doeshave one major gaping hole, as witness the tragedyat Virginia Tech. Thanks to the ACLU and federalmedical privacy laws, even if you are a certifiablelooneytune, your records may not be accessible tothe FBI database, depending on your state of resi-dence. That can be good or bad, depending onwhether your illness was a mild depression in youryouth or an ongoing paranoid schizophrenia.
What about this “We also have to strike a rea-sonable balance between public safety and sports-men’s rights” stuff? “Sportmen’s rights” are no dif-ferent from anyone else’s rights. The Bill of Rights
applies to us all. We the People,not the National Guard orReserves. Who’s doing this bal-ancing act? Ted Kennedy?Hillary? Never mind “sports-men”…what about the rest of us?In my experience, when you heara politician talking about“hunters and sportsmen,” youcan bet the farm that you are inthe presence of an anti-gunner.
In Paragraph Three, SenatorObama finally drops his maskaltogether. “I will continue towork for effective gun laws,including reinstatement of theassault weapons ban that the lastCongress allowed to expire…”Assault weapons? You mean likethe Ruger 10/22 and BrowningAuto 5 and other such ferociousthreats to public safety that Rep-resentative Carolyn McCarthy’snew “Assault Weapons” billwould proscribe? Or perhaps thesame cosmetically challenged
Evil Black Rifles and hi-cap magazines targeted bythe Clinton fiasco legislation? Senator Obama, youpresent yourself as a fresh face in American poli-tics, but when pressed, you sure sound just like thesame old anti-gun sons of bitches!
And how about “I will also speak out againstthe culture of violence that traps so many of ouryoung people.”? You’re from Chicago, right, Sena-tor? While you were involved in state governmentin Illinois, did you ever speak out against the pri-marily inner city culture of violence there? Moreimportant, did you ever do more than just speakout? Let’s face it, the reason our inner cities are sodangerous, Chicago being a case in point, isbecause politicians – particularly Democraticpoliticians from the time of Reconstruction on –have passed laws to disarm and render minoritiesdefenseless against the bad guys.
Talk is cheap, particularly in politics. And I willreadily admit that Senator Obama is a smooth talker.He makes a good first impression, and I might eventhink of buying a used car from him. Unfortunately,when you take a good look under the hood, it’s thesame old liberal Democrat rattletrap.
10
DP
‘Dear Senator Obama...’
Faster than a speeding-bullet ban!More powerful than voter logic!Able to dodge major issues
in a single bound!
Oct 07 Blue Press 1-19 8/15/07 8:56 AM Page 10
