“After all the second amendment is a freedom every bit as important as the other freedoms in the first ten amendments. Just think of the language of it — ‘the people shall be secure’ –let’s see, this is my wife calling…”I agree with Stop the ACLU that "What Rudy was quoting was most likely the 4th Amendment." But I'll go a step further and charge that the "well timed phone call [that] saved him" was a transparent manipulation of the audience--some of whom dutifully applauded. My money says it was a staffer telling him he was entering a swamp of no return.
Besides- Rudy told his first wife he loved her, too. And his second. Now we're to believe he loves us?
And here's another insight into The Bill of Rights According to Rudy:
"You should know I understand that the right to bear arms is just as important a right in that Constitution as the right of free speech and the other rights ... It's not going to change, unless something dramatic has happened to make it change, and then I'll explain to you why," he said.
Why don't you "explain why" right now, Rudy, or at least "how."
About the only perversion of founding intent that could even be "legally" raised--however implausibly--would be to repeal the Second Amendment. And that would not only require the Constitutionally-mandated ratifying process, but you'd still have at least some of us resisting on the principle that unalienable rights are not bestowed by government. But if that's what you're talking about, Rudy, we don't need you to tell us "why"--we'd be on top of that "debate."
So the only alternative scenario I can come up with is Rudy hinting at imposing martial law as a result of some "disaster"--be it natural or directed. I read this as nothing less than a promise he'll read us the edict when he orders mass citizen disarmament.
I see some in the "gun rights community" are already paving the way for how we'll have no choice but to support this monster if it boils down to Rudy vs. Hillary. The hell with that, and yes, I'm aware of the appointment of judges and bureaucrats argument. I see no difference between either proto-tyrant, and see no evidence that Rudy wouldn't pad his team with statists and functionaries loyal to his particular brand of fascism. And it should be obvious that the Republicans would at least offer token opposition to a Democrat president. When it's their boy in power, incentives to go along for the good of the party--quid pro quo rewards or punishment for "disloyalty"--will do much to keep all but the already marginalized in line.
We celebrate the anniversary today (or at least we should) of the immortal words (or at least they should be) "I have not yet begun to fight." If either Rudy or Hillary ascend to the Imperial Throne, we'd better come to terms with what they mean--and prepare ourselves to give up before the fight begins if we're unwilling to do so.
[Via John S and 45superman]
what a huge load of crap from a complete windbag of a person!!Completely and obviously scripted to avoid his real intentions to disarm us ALL!!
ReplyDeleteWhen a coworker asked who I'd vote for between Hillary and Rudy, I told her I'd sit the vote out, as there was no real difference. They would both grow the government monstrously and accelerate our loss of individual rights.
ReplyDeleteI've come to the decision that if it is between those two, I will vote for Hillary. For some reason people hate her and may resent her as president more than Rudy. Putting Rudy in the White House would produce the same end result, but few would notice. If I'm going to be ruled by one of those tyrants, I'd rather elect the more honest tyrant, and have more of my fellow Americans wake up.
Ron Paul would be an excellent President (and I'm doing my part to help get him nominated), but it may be too late to work within the system, the system won't have him. So let's get on with the revolution.
As I've said before, and will say as often as possible, Rudy is neither (R) nor (D).
ReplyDeleteHe is an authortarian who wants, needs even, to be in charge.
I lived in NYC for every single minute of both Giuliani Administrations, and he has no real respect for the Bill of Rights. At the time he left office, he was 0-for-14 in terms of First Amendment lawsuits. It was his decision to use the police for stuff other than traditional police work, a blight that has spread across the nation over the last 15 years. Yeah, nobody liked the squeegee guys, they were real pests (got the smeared windshield and everything to prove it, too!), but who better than a powerless group with no real access to the legal system to begin to attack our Bill of Rights?
As one of the only white people in an otherwise black/hispanic area, I was regularly stopped and illegally searched because 'the only white guys around here are scoring drugs or hookers' (actual quote from a PO from the 52nd Pct NYPD). It continued after I demanded that the patrol sgt come to the scene and I showed him that my keys actually worked in the lock of the building that I claimed to live in. Didn't matter. The cops knew that Rudy would back them, and they could do just about anything they wanted.
I remind you all of both the Diallo and Dorismond shootings, where Rudy read aloud the records of both dead men to the media. Being shot dead under questionable circumstances wasn't enough, Rudy had to further demonize Citizens who should have been under the NYPD's protection, not their amateurish guns (Diallo: 41 shots, 19 hits from 6 feet away!)
Here is the difference between Rudy and Hillary: either would sign a Confiscation Order, there's no doubt in my mind on that one. Hillary would at least pause the confiscation, perhaps to let it quietly die from neglect after a well publicized gun battle. Rudy would not, he would escalate. That's been his MO all along, since his US Attorney days. Within a week, the next group of resisters would be facing attack choppers and indirect fire weapons.
You do not defy Rudolph W. Giuliani without him trying to either discredit or outright kill you.
I have added another 100 rounds to my Bug Out/ Combat rig. I'm going to need them.
Wow, it's sounding like November 10th, 2008, the day before the vote is going to be the day to stockpile. Sorry if I don't share the hysteria.
ReplyDelete"'It's not going to change, unless something dramatic has happened to make it change, and then I'll explain to you why,' he said."
ReplyDeleteThere's no such mechanism for this. In such dire circumstances, it's limited to the suspension of habeas corpus.
I can only image one circumstance where his plan may apply, and unfortunately that involves the destruction of our republic. Even then, a True American would argue that natural rights are apart from any fallible government conceived by men.
So he admitted in front of a national audience that he'd panic and destroy the republic at the first sign of trouble, implied that he doesn't know which amendment in the Bill of Rights the NRA purportedly defends, and he can't recite even a single clause from the rather terse Second Amendment.
And here I've been feeling guilty all these years because I couldn't completely memorize part of the Gettysburg Address for a sixth grade presentation.
I guess it's no surprise that the NRA crowd clapped. I'm sure they were full of liquor and hoping they held the winning raffle ticket for some mundane household item with an ugly chunk of stag horn glued to it.
I'm having a hard time understanding why Giuliani was invited to an NRA event in the first place. It's not as if his record on gun rights is exactly secret. Things like this make me want to let my NRA membership expire.
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymous,It's things like this that made me drop my NRA membership years ago!!
ReplyDelete