Liberals stopping us from self protection
The fast that leftists are using the Orlando terrorist attack to attack our Second Amendment right is truly disgraceful. Perhaps they forget that the targeted dance club was a “gun free zone,” meaning the terrorist filth that targeted it knew his victims could not fight back.
How many lives could have been saved in even one of those good people were armed? And how exactly does disarming everybody allow us to protect ourselves in the future?
We all know that no terrorist will stop to obey a gun law, so the only ones disarmed will be the law-abiding people who are actually responsible with firearms.
The only one making any sense on this is Donald Trump. We were targeted by a radical Islamist, one of many dedicated to our annihilation simply because we choose not to practice Islam. We already have radicalized Muslims in our border, so letting even more of these people in with our current lax immigration laws makes no sense.
Leftists, like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, are hesitant eve to say the words “radical Islam,” much less confront it. Their politically correct ideology fills their heads with “narratives” that don’t allow them to see radical Islam as a problem. And when reality gets in the way of this, they jettison reality to cling to their narratives.
How exactly are leftists going to stand up to the threats facing us if their very beliefs prohibits them from even seeing it? They won’t, and should be kept far from public office.
Our actions have long lasting consequences
The First Amendment was selectively incorporated into the 14th Amendment by and through the requirement for due process.
This is our legal protection of free speech. But for our country to retain its innovative edge, I submit we need not only protection of free speech but respect for it.
There is a curious Biblical passage relating to the first homicide, the fratricide wherein Cain slew his brother Abel. The passage reports that God confronted Cain by telling him that his brother’s blood cried from the ground. The curious thing about the passage is that the Hebrew does not use the singular word for blood but rather its plural. Why the plural? Why your brother’s bloods?
One suggested interpretation from ancient scholars offers that Cain, in killing Abel, killed not only Abel but all of Abel’s potential progeny. The results of an act often lay far beyond the act itself and this act of murder may have denied the future to a multitude. Thus our actions, everyone’s actions, can be far weightier, far more profound, far more reaching than we can or dare imagine.
This old lesson may apply to some of our other children, our ideas. Our ideas can come to life, can procreate, can grow, and can flourish. They can also be killed. They can be killed by a contemptuous sneer or an active prejudice. There are so many ways to murder them. And in their deaths there may disappear from the future those ideas that would have followed, and perhaps those ideas would have been better, more fit, and more full of fruit. Yet, they can be denied, erased, by the murder of their ancestral idea.
I suggest it is better to let ideas live and develop and die in a natural way, yielding to stronger and better ideas in the marketplace of concepts. Lewis F. Powell, Jr., Associate Supreme Court justice, put it this way, “Under the First Amendment there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an idea may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries but on the competition of other ideas.”
Liberals use Hitler’s tactics to attack GOP
It seems several times a week, some liberal/Dem writes in disparaging GOP nominee Donald Trump by saying he is like Hitler, when it is they themselves that use Nazi-like tactics.
Attempting to break up Trump rallies and attack his supporters like Hitler’s Brownshirts did in the ‘30s is one example of this Nazi-like behavior. Another is expressed in Bob Mantello’s June 11 letter, where he quotes Hitler’s book, “Mein Kampf,” saying “slogans should be persistently repeated…” which is exactly what all these letters comparing Trump to Hitler are doing.
Adolf would be proud of you and your liberal friends, Bob; just keep saying it ‘til it sticks. What comparing the two does is attempt to sway the uneducated voter by demonizing, nothing more. Very Nazi-like.
Diane Hombach also wrote June 11 and seems to think Hillary Clinton’s great accomplishment was getting questioned by the Benghazi committee, which (she left out) proved with her own email that she lied about the attack as it was happening and then for weeks to the American people. Worse still, Clinton lied to the faces of the families of those who were killed. That alone should disqualify her from ever holding any office, even dogcatcher.
Diane also talks how she kept her doctor and health plan. But what about the millions who didn’t? Also the Democratic governors/congressmen kept their doctors/plans — not just the Republicans.
And finally, Diane, what does Dick Cheney (who isn’t running for president) have to do with Hillary, other than you trying to say he’s a bigger liar then she is. To quote Hillary: “What difference does it make?”
Marc A. Smalkin
Don’t demonize NRA for lax enforcement
Mr. Frank Donegan’s ltter of June 16 [“NRA makes it easier for terrorists to kill us”] in which he thanks the National Rifle Association (NRA) for making America safe from terrorists is decidedly fraught with emotion and completely devoid of facts.
Obviously, he has never attempted to procure a firearm of any sort or he would be aware of the realities involved.
The reality of the situation is simple. It is not, repeat not, a simple and easy task to procure any type of firearm merely by “popping into your local gun store to pick up an assault rifle and maybe a semi-automatic 9mm pistol and just start shooting.”
I suggest that there are existing laws on the books in this country to prevent a “shooting spree” from happening. When these laws are properly enforced, those would-be felons who wish to indulge in a “shooting spree” are discovered, apprehended and punished.
I strenuously object to the demonizing of the National Rifle Association by Mr. Donegan, who plainly knows little of firearms in general, the laws already in place regarding them and absolutely nothing about the NRA and what it stands for.
Michael G. Decker
Gazette is not giving Trump fair coverage
Let me begin by saying that I am an independent voter who has said “Never Trump” and “Never Hillary.” Now I have to decide which to vote for.
On June 11, CNN broadcast back-to-back speeches of both candidates. The June 11 paper had a quarter-page article covering Hillary’s speech, but not a single word on what Trump had to say. Hillary said nothing new and spent much of her time ranting about Trump.
The Trump speech was not the typical Trump speech. It was a serious scripted speech on issues that I, as a voter, wanted to hear. Trump made a serious speech with many cogent comments.
Based solely on the content of the two speeches, I would have voted for Trump. Yet, if I relied on The Gazette, I would know nothing of Trumps words. It makes me think there is some truth to Fox News comments on prejudice in the liberal press.
I guess I’ll have to rely on CNN and Fox rather than The Gazette for information on the candidates.
Very disappointed in The Gazette.
Categories: Letters to the Editor