The revealing nature of Republican attacks.

Following Representative Wilson’s outburst during the President’s address before a joint session of Congress, I believe we have to ask ourselves some questions:  Is it a coincidence that the first such outburst was aimed at our first African-American President?  Is it a coincidence that the outburst came from a Congressman from South Carolina?  Is it coincidence that this is the first President accused of being born in another country despite indisputable evidence to the contrary?  Is it coincidence that this President is accused of creating death panels for senior citizens despite the facts?  Is it coincidence that this President is accused of trying to “indoctrinate our children” by merely encouraging them to work hard?  And is it coincidence that the number of death threats against our President has increased dramatically?

The conclusion is inescapable.  The attacks against President Obama represent more than a mere difference of opinion or ideology. 

From the moment he was sworn in, President Obama has been faced with an unprecedented combination of crises – a floundering economy, a failed financial system, a collapsed auto industry, millions of foreclosed homes, out of control health care costs, skyrocketing deficits and two wars.  These weren’t crises of his own making.  These were crises created under the previous administration.  Yet rather than rallying behind the President in the face of these crises as Democrats rallied behind Bush after 9/11, the Republicans have done everything possible to undermine Obama’s attempts to right our ship of state.   

Granted the attacks against President Obama are coming from a small, angry minority in Southern states.  (Okay, okay, I know I just described the Republican Party.)  But, in my lifetime, no President has faced such venomous and personal attacks.  Not Richard Nixon following the cover-up of the Watergate burglary.  Not Ronald Reagan following the cover-up of the sale of weapons to Iran.  Not George W. Bush following the lies that led to the unnecessary invasion of Iraq. 

Perhaps the real lesson of a Republican shouting “You lie!” at President Obama in the House chamber is this:  Pathological liars often assume everyone else is like them. 

The myth of guns as self-defense weapons.

For years, the NRA and its associated wing nuts have been trying to convince Americans that everyone should carry a gun.  And some of those card-carrying dimwits came to Congressional town hall meetings armed with guns to make their point. 

The 2nd amendment in the Bill of Rights 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.”  The gun-toting NRA supporters always focus on the second part of the sentence.  They choose to ignore the first part.  In any event, the amendment raises more questions than it answers.  It seems the intent of the founding fathers was to ensure the defense of our nation and the ability to protect it from an insurrection.  But what is the definition of a well regulated militia?  Is that not intended to refer to our nation’s military?  Or perhaps the National Guard?  Or does an armed mob of “tea baggers” and sheet-clad, anti-Obama fascists qualify?

Similarly, if everyone is permitted to keep and bear arms, where do you draw the line?  Currently, anyone can purchase assault rifles and semi-automatic handguns.  But should an NRA member also be allowed to own a 50-caliber machine gun (I hear they’re fabulous for deer hunting)?   A fully-functional Abrams tank (maybe for big game)?  A nuclear-tipped cruise missile?  Certainly, the nation’s founders would have drawn a line in there somewhere. 

Moreover, despite statements of NRA gunslingers to the contrary, a gun is an offensive weapon.  It is, in fact, a lousy defensive weapon.  If you’re attacked while carrying a gun, you have to count on drawing your gun and getting off an accurate shot before the attacker gets to you.  If you don’t, the attacker may actually turn your own gun against you. 

And if both you and the attacker are armed with guns, the “winner” is determined by whoever gets off the more accurate shot first.  (I hear you want to give yourself an edge by keeping the sun to your back.)

The fact is that guns tend to escalate confrontations more often than they solve them.  If you have a gun, you feel compelled to use it.  (My distant relative, Billy Clanton, was armed at the OK Corral, and look how well that turned out for him.)  But if you don’t have a gun, you tend to avoid confrontations or look for other ways to resolve them. 

I own several rifles and a shotgun, but I don’t carry them to public meetings.  Neither do I carry my Tibetan sword, Chinese hook swords, butterfly swords, broadsword, Tai Chi sword, Indonesian Kris, chain whip, 3-section staff, spear, staff, nunchakaus, tonfas, and knives.   But maybe I should.  There must be a Republican town hall coming to my vicinity soon.