The UN Statue -No Need for Words here - image from Chicago Outdoor Sculpture Blog - New York and Chicago
Rand Paul, the Senator from Kentucky, is pretty darn smart – that from someone who watched C-Span for hours on end, while the Senator spoke endlessly, with certainty, eloquence and did not miss a beat hammering home the dangers of an Executive Branch who could not, or would not answer a simple question – did the President believe he had the authority to drone U.S. civilians into oblivion? The answer came to Paul in the form of a note after endless hours on the floor of the senate – Nope – the President does not have that authority. That’s when the nation stood up and took notice of Senator Paul - and it was a varied bunch supporting him – a vigil of sorts, watching C-Span into the wee hours of the morning and tweeting “I stand with Rand” – from Code Pink to your grandmothers who had never tweeted – to Republicans and Democrats who found a common issue.
In other words, the Senator breached the political divide - he’s also headed to New Hampshire and Iowa – a sure sign that he has eyes on running for President in 2016. Now the Senator is a crackpot – according to the Press. There will be derogatory remarks made against this Doctor turned Senator, some will be more aggressive than others, there may even be the outright lie, here and there – however, one knows he is upsetting the applecart of DC when the press goes nuclear.
The latest attempt to suggest the Senator may have a screw loose comes from the Washington Post – the blog title: ”Rand Paul and the Politics of Paranoia”, written by one of those anti-gun nuts that are battling the NRA and the Second Amendment (more on that). In the article, it suggests that Rand Paul is “feeding the craziness” that surrounds sane gun control measures, simply because he believes that that UN is pushing the US to a global gun-control measure, and that is stopping progress of insuring that law abiding citizens can’t get their hands on guns without going through hoops.
One who understands that Senator Paul is a Libertarian leaning Republican, and one who understands the differences between the political philosophies, will also understand that Libertarians are keen on the U.S. Constitution – A global treaty that the UN is pushing would restrict U.S. citizens second amendment rights – which is fine with the Post’s blogger who obviously cannot see the forest through the trees.
The UN is a political body that is protected and funded by the U.S. as its headquarters sits in NYC. They unsuccessfully attempt to solve world conflicts, and come up with ways to stop hunger in third world nations (also not going swimmingly well) – which is where their “authority” should stop.
Therefore, when the US and some members of its body politic are seriously considering a UN treaty that would be a conflict to our Constitution – it would not be unusual for a Libertarian to suggest it’s a bad idea. It should not be unusual for the entire nation to stand up and say – hey- bad idea. Those Democrats and some Republicans who are pushing for gun control, most likely have good intentions, but there is the Law of the Land (Constitution), and they might find another way to control violence.
However, the article on the face of it is not solely about gun control (as it appears) but at taking a swipe at someone who is currently polling in single digits against Hillary Clinton in 2016 (Public Policy Polling). (She polls ahead of every Republican named in this survey by single digits – and she is the frontrunner for the Democrat Party in this 2016 poll.) It’s planting the seed for 2016 – just in case there is a repeat performance of support for Paul – in a primary and general election. Out will come the “crackpot” articles and interviews on CBS, NBC and ABC, et al. The problem these sources have, is that the louder they scream, it appears the fewer viewers they have – go figure. Expect more of the same in the coming months and through the 2016 election cycle.
On the gun control issue – the problem we face is multi-faceted, and unless and until the politicians and the media get a grip on the situation we are faced with in this nation – mass shootings such as the ones in Newtown Connecticut and Aurora Colorado, will continue to occur. The focus should not be on those who legally own guns, who already go through background checks in the licensing process (Check the individual state, pick one, any one licensing requirements, such as Massachusetts for example: you will find that a criminal background check is in order, complete with FBI fingerprinting, a mental health questionnaire, et al.) The individual attempting to legally own a gun is doing so for protection, hunting, and or sport, not to go out on a rampage. Massachusetts, with some of the strictest gun control laws, has murders nightly and routinely (just Google shooting in Massachusetts) – those that take place, are generally gang related, and one can bet the house it was a gun purchased on the street – when no gun is available, knives do quite well. Yet no one appears to be talking about legislation that would lock up someone for possession of an illegal weapon for an extended period of time – no parole. Neither is there much talk of monitoring those who have serious mental nervous issues that might suggest a mass killing. If one looks back at the multiple murders (high profile) committed over the past few decades, one finds a disturbing pattern – the majority were males, with serious mental/nervous conditions. Yet, the big focus is on the individual citizen who is in possession of a firearm. Those that are sitting in ivory towers may theorize that if the citizens can’t get guns, neither can the criminals, may also be a step closer to the crazy train than those who feel that having a gun may protect one from those same criminals, or that the UN has no business interfering with U.S. Constitutional Rights. Surely the Post Blogger is smart enough to grasp that concept – therefore, one might suggest that it is a “political hit”.
Go figure.
No comments:
Post a Comment