Second Amendment Solutions

I have several entries that are in draft status.  Yet, I’m starting another one.  I decided today to address this Second Amendment debate that is ongoing in the United States.  There was a link on my Facebook page and I clicked it and, after a small ride, I ended up on The Second Amendment Man’s blog.  I decided not to discuss how much his little logo looks like the cross of the White Knights of the Klu Klux Klan.  (I’m pretty sure it is supposed to be crosshairs on a gun sight.)  And, over the past few months, the context on his blog have not had a whole lot to do with gun rights.  They range from Health Care to Tax Cuts (and just about every Tea Party party line.)  But if you do a quick internet search, you find entire sites dedicated to “gun rights” and discussions of the Second Amendment.

Let me state here:  I do not have a hardline view either way on this issue.  I think murder is wrong.  I also think, as Malcolm X stated, “It is criminal to teach a man not to defend himself, when he is the constant victim of brutal attacks.”  I am not proposing any stance against, or for, gun control.

What concerns me is the application of the Second Amendment to the argument of the “Right to Bear Arms.”  This is constantly misrepresented by gun enthusiasts time and time again.  The Constitution states:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

(more…)

Tags: Charlton Heston, Constitution, Huey Newton, Katrina, Malcolm X, Mao Tse Tung, Second Amendment, Ted Nugent, Xe Services
Category Main category |

Patriots, Freedom, Constitution, Rhetorical Vocabulary

There is a virtual plethora of topics to write about today.  But, I decided to vent instead.  There are these ads all over the interweb.  I know you have seen them.  They are on Facebook and YouTube and Google and every other site.  I’m sure, soon, that we will soon be seeing them on sex websites.  They are these Patriotic ads, ranging from support groups to products.  They are all about Freedom and Constitution and every other über-nationalistic, neo-fascist propaganda you could imagine.  During the past election cycle, there were ads on my page for John Boner Boehner, Meg Whitman, Christine O’Donnell and the Kitchen Table Patriots, the Heritage Foundation, and every other indoctrination group for the New Right.

Yesterday, there was an advert on my Facebook page for We The People Bracelet.  On the surface, what’s the problem?  I do not see a problem with bracelets of the US Constitution.  (As long as they are not actually made out of the Constitution.)  I have spent hours studying the Constitution and resulting legislation.  I think it would benefit our society if more people understood their Constitutional rights.   Their site claims, “Every Silver Bead Represents an Amendment to The United States Constitution.“  They sell bracelets, necklaces, cuff links, keychains, pendants, and more!  Good, right?  Well… right on the top right corner of the page, it says “Stop the assault on our Constitution.”  Who is assaulting the Constitution?  And how does buying a bracelet with Amendments on it stop this?

(more…)

Tags: bernie sanders, Constitution, far left, fascism, freedom, fundamentalism, Glenn Beck, John Boehner, Kitchen Table Patriots, Koch industries, meg whitman, Neo-Fascism, patriot, sarah palin, We The People Bracelets
Category Neo-Fascism, New Right, Tea Party movement |

Argumentum ad hominem

Bill O’Reilly was on The View yesterday.  In the discourse, he was discussing the concept of “Pinheads and Patriots” and how there are both in America (and the title of his book).  The event, for anyone who does know know, went like this:

BILL O’REILLY: LET ME BREAK THIS TO YOU. 70% OF AMERICANS DON’T WANT THAT MOSQUE DOWN THERE, SO DON’T GIVE ME THE “WE” BUSINESS.

[APPLAUSE]

JOY BEHAR: WHERE IS THAT POLL? I WANT TO SEE THAT POLL.

O’REILLY: YOU WANT TO BET ON THAT? YOU WANNA BET? I’LL SHOW YOU THAT POLL IN A MINUTE.

[CROSSTALK]

O’REILLY: 70% DON’T WANT IT DOWN THERE.

WHOOPI GOLDBERG: WHY IS THAT?

O’REILLY: BECAUSE IT’S INAPPROPRIATE.

GOLDBERG: WHY IS IT INAPPROPRIATE WHEN 70 FAMILIES DIED…

O’REILLY: BECAUSE MUSLIMS KILLED US ON 9/11, THAT’S WHY!

GOLDBERG: NO! OH MY GOD! THAT IS SUCH [EXPLETIVE DELETED]!

O’REILLY: MUSLIMS DIDN’T KILL US ON 9/11? THAT’S WHAT YOU’RE SAYING?

GOLDBERG: EXTREMISTS DID THAT!

[CROSSTALK]

O’REILLY: I’M TELLING YOU, 70% OF THE COUNTRY…

BEHAR: I DON’T WANT TO SIT HERE. I DON’T. I’M OUTRAGED BY THAT STATEMENT.

O’REILLY: YOU’RE OUTRAGED ABOUT MUSLIMS  KILLING US ON 9/11?

[BEHAR AND GOLDBERG WALK OFF THE SET]

Transcript from Fox Nation

In the spirit of fairness, when confronted with his comment being “offensive,” O’Reilly then responded, “ALL RIGHT. IF ANYBODY FELT THAT I WAS DEMEANING ALL MUSLIMS, I APOLOGIZE.”

My problem with all of this is the rhetorical devices being utilized by the O’Reilly’s, the Becks, the Hannitys (how do you pluralize Hannity?) . . . et al.  What happened in that instance on The View?  Well, the conversation quickly devolved from “What is a Patriot?” and the context of the discussion to an argument about how ‘appropriate is Islam or a Mosque’ in the vicinity of the site of the Twin Towers in NYC.

The Right wing methodology is similar to playground arguments.

A: Why do you feel the need to make me play with you every day?

B: Why do you feel the need to complain every time I want to play?

A: Can you play with someone else?

B: Can you make your mom stop being so fat?

A: My mom isn’t fat.  She is 5’4 and 120 pounds.

B: Well, you look like a flying wombat.

A: Wombats don’t fly . . .

B: I never said wombats can fly, you did . . . I just wish you would not try to play with me every day.

What started out as a discussion about a person’s actions devolves into an argument on the merits of Wombats flying and the weight of a person’s mother.  Rhetorically, these are brilliant argumentative moves.  Nothing gets resolved.  Let’s take a look at the most common devices used.

(more…)

Tags: argument from ignorance, Argumentum ad hominem, barbara walters, Bill O'Reilly, black-or-white fallacy, Christine O'Donnell, conservative, Constitution, cordoba house, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, equivocation, fallacies, first amendment, genetic fallacy, Glenn Beck, ground zero, ignoring the issue, Islam, Joy Behar, Liberal, mosque, muslims, New Right, park 51, partisan, patriot, polarize, post hoc ergo propter hoc, rhetoric, sarah palin, Separation Clause, September 11, straw opponent, Tea Party, The View, Twin Towers, us vs them, Whoopi Goldberg, World Trade Center
Category Definitions, news |

What Is The Tea Party Movement? – Day Two

It is day two of my mission to discover the foundational tenants of the Tea Party movement.  Yesterday, I looked at Tea Party Express – which just asked to contribute to 3 “Tea Party” candidates.  (I guess, I should have examined the three candidates and looked for commonality, but that would take a bit of time.)  And I looked at Lloyd Marcus and the elusive Black American Tea Party members.

Today, I skipped any farther research into those two avenues, and went to the website of the Tea Party Patriots.  It is a huge website.  There is a huge graphic at the top, that they have received a $1 million donation.  There’s nothing clickable in this statement, so I guess it is just there to be there.  Who made the donation?  What is it for?  How is it to be used?  Are they going to create jobs with it?  Who knows?  (There was a link to a Facebook update, farther down the page, that states that the money was donated anonymously, and will be distributed in grant form.)

This website is much better, though.  There is a link at the top to “Read The Tea Party Patriots Mission Statement.”  (I have mentioned this page in the past.)  It states:

Mission Statement
The impetus for the Tea Party movement is excessive government spending and taxation. Our mission is to attract, educate, organize, and mobilize our fellow citizens to secure public policy consistent with our three core values of Fiscal Responsibility, Constitutionally Limited Government and Free Markets.

Finally, some real platforms.  Is my search finally over?

(more…)

Tags: Christine O'Donnell, conservative, Constitution, Democrat, Express, Glenn Beck, Google, Joe Miller, Liberal, libertarian, patriots, platform, Republican, sarah palin, Sharon Angle, Social Liberal, stance, Tea Party
Category Definitions, Tea Party movement |

What Is The Tea Party Movement? – Day One

I keep getting more adverts for the Tea Party movement and Tea Party Candidates on my websites. Meg Whitman has spent more on her campaign for California Governor than any politician in American history. Christie O’Donnell has made massive headlines for her primary win in Delaware. Joe Miller (Alaska) recently stated that Unemployment Insurance is “unConstitutional.” And there is Sharon Angle, Sarah Palin, and Glen Beck the gifts that keep on giving.

So, I started to wonder, “What exactly is the Tea Party?”

What are their primary ideals? What do they stand for? What is their Party platform? What is their agenda? None of these things came to mind immediately.

(more…)

Tags: Bakongo Fetish Doll, Christine O'Donnell, conservative, Constitution, Democrat, Express, Glenn Beck, Google, Joe Miller, Liberal, libertarian, Lloyd Marcus, patriots, platform, Republican, sarah palin, Sharon Angle, Social Liberal, stance, Tea Party, YouTube
Category Tea Party movement |