Mike writes:
Somehow, this reply from M_____'s college friend's third cousin's step sister-in-law's second grade teacher's wife, to the Presidential Assistant That Replies to Letters, about the 2nd Amendment and 9/11, found its way into my inbox. Thought I'd share it.
Senor Sanchez:
Seems like you've been spending too much time ropin' cattle out there on Dubya's ranch. You've plumb forgot what bullshit smells like, cause you're too used to wadin' in it.
Let's talk plain. Ask yourself this: I've got one of them suspected terrorists in jail. I can read his mail, listen in when he's talkin' to his three-piece-suited lawyer, investigate everything he's done, where's he's gone, and what he's spent since he entered into this freedom-lovin' country with murder in his heart.
Except for one thing: that little trip he made to the shop to buy hisself a gun. No sir, that's off limits.
Now he might have gone and bought an assault weapon, and armor-piercing ammo a-plenty. Now, we both know that's his right, so long as he's passed the background checks to make sure he's no criminal (yet, anyway.) But even though his name's right there on the gubmint's list, in black and white, well we can't very well look up his name on that list.
Hell, does that make any sense to you? Do you think this what they had in mind when they wrote #2, way back when? If I was trying to investigate these folks, and they told me I couldn't even find out if they had bought a gun, why I'd be madder than a wet hen at Colonel Sander's.
This is where I smell bullshit. Because I don't believe for a New York minute that we're upholding the Second Amendment rights of these terrorists out of concern for their rights, or so those pesky protesters won't claim that we've suspended the Big C. Those protestors -- that riled-up tenth -- are mostly liberals anyway who'd be just as happy if the Second Amendment went away for good. (Just read the New York Times articles for proof.) The reason we won't do gun checks on these "folks," (as your boss likes to call 'em) is plain and simple: it's against conservative principles. (Just like federalizing airport security was against conservative principles, even though it made sense to 100 senators, and 98% of Americans who thought about it. Maybe the other 2% were terrorist sympathizers.) The GOP and the NRA are against the gun checks. That doesn't mean that the people are against gun checks. Or that doing these gun checks is a bad idea, from the point of view of fighting terrorism. Like you said, we can't back down now. No room for idealism, no matter who's ideals we're talkin' bout, the right's or the left's.
See, you're right about one thing: the rules have got to change. Question is, which rules? This is where Ashcroft and I part company. If he said, "well, these rules that protect terrorists, they've got to go," I'd respect that even if I disagreed with his plan. But for him to ban the gun checks, that's rank hypocrisy. Is that a rule that protects terrorists? Why, you'd better believe it. So why do we keep it? I'm waiting for a practical answer. Still haven't heard one. As my Pappy used to say, "You can't make chicken salad out of chicken shit." Maybe that's why your boy Ashcroft says that anyone who questions him must be a terrorist himself -- it's easier to tell us to shut up than answer the questions.
My Pappy also used to say "When you step in a field full of bullshit, you'd better watch out for the bull." It's not the hypocrisy of this-amendment-over-that that gets my gander, it's the way the executive branch has taken it on itself to make the decisions for us. The real question is, not which rules, but who decides and how? Is it just your boss? Not the last time I checked the rule book (the one that's kept us from tippin' the canoe for the last 200-plus years.) Nothing in there about suspending the courts, or the legislature, during a war. (In fact, I seem to remember that only the Senate's got the power to declare a war.) Even during a war, we've got the right to stand up and say what we believe. Even during a war, we've got rights as well as responsibilities. Even during a war, the folks in Congress have a say in how we run things. Even during a war, we're a democracy. Just in case you forgot.
-- Mrs. Lila Mae Boone, Laticuff, TX
PS. Oh, and you're also right that there's only so much taxpayer money to go around. Thank your boss's tax cut for that. And tell that to your boy Ashcroft as he spends his money making sure folks in Oregon don't kill themselves, instead of hunting down killers.
| Law | Second Amendment | Guns | War on Terror | 9/11 | George W. Bush | John Ashcroft |
