How do idiots like this one rate a cushy gig with a major network? [More]
Oh, this explains it: He's lauded by The New York Times and The Washington Post. He's got "passion and idealism." His commentary is "sprinkled with bitter irony."
Good Lord. These well-heeled regressives are so full of themselves. Guess that makes up for them being a bunch of agenda-driven subversives.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I remember that retard... he used to be the token liberal for the Orange County (CA) Register Op-Ed page...
Was always going on about injustice to illegal aliens that they couldn't simply walk anywhere on earth and expect to be showered with love & riches...
Chris
Navarette writes "Do you remember the part of the Constitution where it says that people have the right to buy two or more automatic weapons within five days without law enforcement knowing anything about it? Me neither."
“Automatic weapons”? Really?
I do not recall anything in the Constitution specifically allowing this individual to express himself on the Internet, yet he does. At the time the Constitution was written, the Internet, automatic weapons, and our Federal, State, City and Town police forces had not even been imagined yet. However, if a private citizen wanted to buy swords, cannon, any number of rifles, muskets and pistols, shot and powder, he could if he had the funds. Could he use those weapons to harm his neighbors unnecessarily or to damage the property of others? Not at all. Would government have any ready means to know about the acquisition of these weapons? No.
Article I Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution does state "Congress shall have power ... To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States..." Sheriffs, an office defined by State Constitutions, historically served as heads of the local Militias. Militia training and appointment of officers was left to the states in the U.S. Constitution. Militias at the time were armed civilian volunteers comprised of adult males who were not serving in the army or the navy. Arms not provided by the individual Militia members were provided by their cities, towns or states.
So, if Mr. Navarette wants to argue about what was or was not in the U.S. Constitution, I suggest that he draw on the skills developed either before or at Harvard and actually read the U.S. Constitution. While he is at it, Mr. Navarette can also read the Articles of Confederation, the Bill of Rights, and the Militia Act of 1792. The people who wrote those documents would hardly recognize what we have today as anything other than a perversion of what they intended.
Word Verification: "stica" - in the Massachusetts vernacular, an emblem of good work worn by school children Example: Because of the poor quality of his work, Mr. Navarette does not get a "stica".
Post a Comment