At CNN, Clintonista Paul Begala frets over a remark that Joni Ernst, the Iowa candidate for the Senate, made in 2012 to the NRA;
“I do believe in the right to carry, and I believe in the right to defend myself and my family — whether it’s from an intruder, or whether it’s from a government, should they decide that my rights are no longer important.”
Huh?
This notion — that the Second Amendment gives citizens the right to fire upon federal officials, or their local police, or sheriffs or even U.S. military personnel — is common among right wingers.
Of course, his point is that it is irresponsible for a Senate candidate to make remarks about defending her self and her family from the government. Begala continues;
President Washington and his Treasury Secretary, Alexander Hamilton, sought to enforce a tax on whiskey, which Congress passed in 1791. A group of Pennsylvania whiskey distillers objected, violently. In what was known as the Whiskey Rebellion, they refused to pay the tax and burned the home of the federal tax collector.
Washington personally led 13,000 troops to crush the rebellion (the only time a president has commanded troops in the field). Washington was willing to shed blood to ensure no one took up arms against his or her own country.
To argue that the Second Amendment allows citizens to turn their guns on their government is to repudiate the actions of George Washington, as well as the Constitution itself.
Um, Mr Begala, President Washington had just finished a war against his government and tossed that government out of the country and led a new government, so how do we know that was his intent in Pennsylvania? And since then, the government’s taxing power has led the State government of Maryland to tax homeowners for the amount of rain that falls on their houses. I’m pretty sure that President Washington would be leading Maryland property owners to Annapolis to toss out Marty O’Malley and his criminals in response to that odious tax. So you really need another example, Mr Begala.
So he goes on to tell us how he owns guns…the typical liberal “I know a black person…” response. You know, how folks tells us that their cousin’s neighbor’s doctor knows a veteran so they understand veterans’ issues.
At last count I have 22 guns. I use them to hunt, shoot targets, and bond with my family. My grandfather was a hunter and gun owner, as is my father, as am I — as are my sons.
But neither we, nor Ms. Ernst nor any American has the right to turn those weapons on American military personnel, peace officers or other government officials. To suggest otherwise betrays our Founders, our Constitution, and common sense.
Um, yes, we do have that right, and the right isn’t granted by the government, it’s granted by our Creator, whoever you think He is. At least that’s what the Founders said in the Declaration of Independence. Hopefully, we’ll never have to use that right, but having that right, having guns in my home with an appropriate amount of ammunition for my modern sporting rifles will keep the government in line without actually pointing my firearms at anyone.
As long as there are people like Ms. Ernst to remind the government of our rights, the less likely it is that we’ll need to fulfill that prophecy.
“I use them to hunt, shoot targets, and bond with my family. My grandfather was a hunter and gun owner, as is my father, as am I — as are my sons.”
These are all fine reasons to own firearms, but are not the intent of the Second Amendment.
Exactly.
So, under no circumstances should a citizen take up arms against a repressive government? So why is President Obama shipping weapons to rebel groups in the Middle East?
Hack, that’s “different” because “shut up.” Hope that helps.
*Hack, that’s “different” because “YOU’RE A RACIST!!” Hope that helps.
There, I fixed it for ya 😉
Well, “You’re a raysis!” usually only comes out after it becomes obvious that “Shut up!” has failed.
Perhaps the “esteemed” Mr. Begalia should refresh his memory on early US history, including how and why this country came into existence. Perhaps he should also reflect on Jefferson’s quote concerning the tree of liberty. And perhaps he should consider the fact that Jefferson is generally claimed by his own party as its intellectual founder.
Sadly, I’m also guessing Begalia knows those truths full well – and is deliberately ignoring them.
“Perhaps the steamed Mr. Begala …” — there, fix it for ya.
Occam’s Razor. This isn’t about the truth. It’s about the fact that the Democrats are in danger of losing control of the Senate in November, and political operatives such as Begala are willing to go to any length to prevent it. Up to and including pounding a round truth into a square agenda.
Begala’s concern for the safety of our troops is touching. Also ironic, seeing as how Ms. Ernst is a LTC in the National Guard, while Mr. Begala apparently never saw fit to serve in the military.
Begala is a smarmy little prick political hack. He’s a gutless wonder that couldn’t find his ass with both hands and a GPS. His command of history and the intent of the founders is as poor as his command of anything intellectual.
I like your analysis best. Short and to the point.
As soon as I saw the letters “CNN” I was certain that it was going to be yet another snot-spined, candyassed, sniveling and sneering liberal hack pushing the left’s agenda at every turn, I see I was right!
A Proud Infidel®™…CNN? That’s The “Crescent News Network” to us.
“But neither we, nor Ms. Ernst nor any American has the right to turn those weapons on American military personnel, peace officers or other government officials. To suggest otherwise betrays our Founders, our Constitution, and common sense.”
Is he now working for King George III?
Guess he’s not concerned about things like lawful orders or any of that silly sort of thing. And, I’m wondering why he isn’t making this speech from a curb in Ferguson MO.
Sounds like he’s scared.
If he’s running for office, he should be scared of the people.
“I should not have to fear my government. My government should have to fear ME”.
NO, NO, NO! The 2cd Amendment is so we can go hunting. It’s got nothing to do with defending yourself against either criminals or a tyrannical government. Government loves us and we should always do what it says without question
Clown.
“Washington personally led 13,000 troops to crush the rebellion (the only time a president has commanded troops in the field).” No he did not. This is simply not true. Washington never rode into PA during the rebellion. He did ride out to meet with subordinates but the citizen army was led by Harry “Light Horse” Lee. And it is extremely doubtful that Washington would have bloodied anyone. The objective was a show of force, and it worked. There never was a confrontation, let alone a battle. There were arrests but only two men who convicted. Guess who pardoned them? Right. Washington. And that tax? It was largely uncollectable and was later repealed. Oh, and if the Founding Fathers wanted to ensure that Americans would be free n the future merely to target shoot, they would have preserved our right to keep and bear targets, as well as arms. One last point about Svengali here. A free people cannot threaten to take up arms against a tyrannical government, a thing. So, as shocking as this may be, it is that tyrannical government’s paid agents that must bleed. That’s the way it worked during the American Revolution and that’s the way it will always work, if ever it comes to that.
This handwringing weinie is a member of “Gamechanger Salon”, secret group of leftist activist’s, journalists and broadcast media that are hosted on Google+. Unlike Kleins JournoList group, these people vet their members and gleaning intel on them is scant at best but, what I have been getting is better than none at all.
I wonder if he would have offered the same rosy speech in Germany in 1934.
Anyway, aside from all the historical examples that this Communist News Network hack clearly doesn’t get, here’s one that’s been worrying me. Remember the Dorner clusterfuck in LA? Specifically two incidents where the local cops saw somebody that looked nothing like Dorner in a truck that in no way resembled his, naturally assumed that it MUST be him, and proceeded to empty ALL of their magazines at these vehicles driven by random citizens, two of whom were shot and wounded. The Ossifer Fifes in question did not order these people to stop first, or make any kind of contact with the citizens in these two vehicles, nor were they particularly interested in identifying their target before they employed all the deadly force they had trying to KILL these innocent people! That the cops involved aren’t in prison for attempted murder is the very definition of whitewash.
Now I am not some loon who thinks he’s at war with “the man,” in fact, I’m generally pro-police. I know and trust the lawmen where I live (and know that they possess enough functional brain cells that they wouldn’t pull something like that) and am generally inclined to give LE anywhere the benefit of the doubt, though police in the LA area as well as a few other big cities seem to be trying their damnedest to convince me not to.
But I have wondered what I would do if that had been me in one of those vehicles, with my wife and daughter. The uncomfortable conclusion that I come to is this: if they come in hot with that “shoot first, ignore police work, law, and common sense later” attitude and are trying to kill my family (because as an old retired GOOD cop taught me long ago, if you’re shooting at someone, you’re trying to kill them) without warning and offering no avenue to identify myself or otherwise get them to stop shooting at us, then I would need to protect my family from the aggressors. That means that if I have a weapon, I will return fire with intent to kill the attackers until the threat is neutralized (or I am), and later plead my case all the way to the Supreme Court. The fact that they are police officers does not supersede my right to defend my family from an unprovoked attack.
^^^^ +1000. Very well put, Whitey!
Would he have said that in 1934 Germany? After Nacht der langen Messer, certainly – whether he meant it or not. Unless, of course, he was a bona fide idiot or had a death wish.
Because after Nacht der langen Messer, in Germany it was quite clear what the government was prepared to do to those with whom it disagreed, or who publicly opposed it. And the German government had already largely disarmed the German population years previously (post Versailles gun control legislation).
An armed man is a free citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.
“At CNN, clowntonista Paul Begala. . . . . . ”
There. Fixed it for ya.