mikesoh.com

The next 4-6 hours holds the future of gun control and gun rights in the United States.  Washington D.C., having a handgun ban, has appealed to the Supreme Court to ask for their ruling on the 2nd Amendment.  Legal scholars have all had their expectations.  Many expect the court to rule that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms.

I believe that the 2nd Amendment, much like the 1st, protects individuals.  In fact, I believe the Bill of Rights protects individuals, not organizations or state-sponsor groups.

I am betting a 6/3 split in favor.

With election season in full swing, it’s a good idea to have a refresher on the Constition.  Answers follow in the full article:

1. The President has the power to do all of these EXCEPT
   1. introduce a bill
   2. create a health care plan
   3. reduce taxes
   4. the President can’t do any of these things
2. Congress has the ability to
   1. dismantle the military
   2. borrow money
   3. decides who should be the next supreme court judge
   4. make the President to whatever they want
3. Politicians make promises that they know they can’t keep because
   1. it sounds good to people who don’t know any better
   2. they know they can blame someone else when they can’t live up to their promises
   3. "change" sounds good
   4. all of the above

 

Answers:

1. D
2. B
3. D

Surprised?  A lot of people are.  I would actually like to ask how many people have actually sat down and read the Constitution.  I’m guessing very few because of the large number of people who just believe everything that the candidates of saying!

The one that upsets me the most is "Mr. Change" Barack Obama.  Senator, as President, you won’t have the power to create health care.  You can’t.  You can’t "cut income taxes" for working families.  You can’t "reform bankruptcy laws."

The same goes for Mrs. "Health care for everyone so that I can tax them later" Hilary Clinton.  You don’t have the power to create health care.  You don’t now and you won’t if you become President.

Where do you guys get off?!  Yes, this all sounds good to the average person…but it’s only because you’re taking advantage of their stupidity!  Now, granted, there are a lot more stupid people in this country than there are smart educated people…which, I guess that’s why you want to appeal to them.

Hell, you should promise people a BMW in front of every house and a turkey on every table because your ability to do that is just as probable of you actually "changing" anything.

All a President can do is sign a bill, execute a bill, and manage the military.  (Obviously, this is over-simplified.)  The most you can do is ask Congress to create a bill; but that is no guarantee that you’ll get what you promised.  Well, I guess you know that you can always blame them for not doing what you wanted.

This past election, all these democratic candidates for the House and Senate promised "change" and to "withdraw" the troops.  They don’t advertise that their approval rating is WORSE than the Presidential approval rating.

Here’s the funny thing about both Barack and Clinton: They would have better power as legislators than as President to do what they propose.  As President, they would be stripped of this power!

Why is it America doesn’t get this?

Here’s a great article from the Examiner.  How many of you saw this story on the news?

Snow cones are like communism: it’s a great idea in theory, but it never works out in practice
– Andy Whittin

This week, President Bush vetoed the expansion of the SCHIP, a healthcare bill that would have effectively given children who aren’t poor enough to qualify for MedicAid but aren’t rich enough to buy health insurance health coverage.  It would be paid for by increasing the cigarette tax.  Bush vowed to veto the bill on the grounds that it would be too expensive and it would be the first stop to socializing healthcare.

While this law is a great idea in theory, it would not work out in practice.  Here’s why:By tying such an important bill (at least to the democrats) to a tax, these supporters are failing to see the long-term problems that will come along with such a bill.  The President was right veto because it is too expensive.  Cigarette tax, like most taxes that are tied to sales, is a tax that mostly effects the poor.  (If you’re confused about this, consider reading up on flat taxes.)  As you make cigarettes more expensive, you will encourage more and more smokers to quit smoking.  (By the way, a large percentage of smokers are in the lower tax bracket.)  As more people quit smoking, let money is available to fund the healthcare.  And since the democrats are determined to provide this socialized healthcare, they will more than likely increase taxes again to compensate for the lose of funding.  This cycle will repeat itself until cigarettes become prohibitively expensive.

And now, there’s a problem.  No more smokers, but a lot of children needing healthcare.  By this time, the population of children needing healthcare will have expanded.  Where will this money come from?

Where else?  More taxes.  But who to tax?

If you are going to use a tax, I think a more socially responsible thing to do would be to tax fast-food restaurants.  Places like McDonald’s, Burger King, Taco Bell, et al are contributing to children becoming obese.  (Actually, at the alarming rate this is happening, I’m beginning to wonder why there isn’t more hoopla about this in the same way as global warming.)

In the end, who suffers?  The children and the poor.  Most people don’t see this because the short-term benefits are so obvious.  I see this tactic similar to people that sell snake oil.  It’s a great product because it makes you feel better…but in the end, snake oil doesn’t do anything except get you drunk.

So while the democrats vilify the President, they push the attention off of this fact that ultimately shows who they really care about: socially assassinating the President.

Once you take away the smoke and mirrors, once you take away the policital saber rattling, you’ll begin to see that the democratically controlled congress doesn’t really care about important issues.  All they care about showing the President as a baby-hating, murderer protecting, war mongering monster.

And in the end, isn’t that all that matters?

Note: I’ve added a new section!  A "politics" section will contain all my political editorials.  Please refer to the disclaimer.

About a month or so ago, Michael Vick, Atlanta Falcons Quarterback and Virginia Tech alum, pleaded guilty to federal felony charges related to his dog-fighting ring.  I’m not a pro-football guy.  Heck, I only watch my Terps play, and even then, I don’t even know the players!  When Vick was brought in for arraignment, there was a huge group of protesters outside the U.S. District Court, condemning him!  Here are some pictures, in case you don’t remember:

It’s great to see that PETA unconditionally trusts the police department as well as the government.  I’m actually encouraged that they believe that the police has done such a great job with the investigation that no public review is necessary.

In fact, I think we should get behind this.  I propose that we completely get rid of the judicial system here in America.  Yes, that’s right.  Think of how much time and money we’ll save by simply allowing public opinion dictate the punishment of everyone and anyone that is charged!  Seriously, it’s worked for several teachers that have been accused of raping their students.

In fact, in New York, there was a custodian accused of raping an 8 year old girl.  He was ostracized by the public.  The District Attorney’s eventually dropped the charges.  Why?  The DA said, "Oh, we simply got the wrong guy."  But had we gotten rid of the judicial system, we could have gotten rid of this sick pedophile.

Call your senators, your congressmen, your delegates, all your elected officials.  Tell them that you want them to pass a constitutional amendment abolishing the fair trail process in place of a trail by public opinion.

Please note: The preceding editorial is meant to be satirical.  It should not be taken seriously.  Images © 2007 by AP.  Used under fair-use policy of US Copyright Laws.