I was encouraged to learn that the Supreme Court affirmed what many of us have believed for a long time; that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to own and use a firearm. In a recent case involving a draconian gun ban in Washington D.C., District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court had an opportunity to decide the meaning of the second amendment for the first time. The decision was made after thoroughly researching the meaning of the text, surrounding history and other proposed drafts of the amendment. A logical decision was reached. The right to own and use a gun is an individual right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.As great as this news is, it does come with some concern. The decision was a 5-4 split and decided by only one vote. Since two of the elder justices are 88 and 75, they will likely be replaced during the tenure of the next president. More importantly, the next president could potentially replace up to four of the sitting justices. The next presidential cycle will be the most important time in the history of our nation for the composition of the Supreme Court. We as voters will have an important decision to make. Will we continue to support the appointment of justices who enforce the plain and logical meaning of the Constitution, or do we want a court that decides cases based on international influence and popular opinion? We have watched in utter disbelief as recent American cases were influenced by African Law and European Union concepts while the plain meaning of our own founding documents was ignored.

This close decision and the aging of the Supreme Court is why the next presidential election will be so important. As a voter we will directly influence who can select the replacements for the Supreme Court justices. We can select Sen. John McCain who has already voted to confirm Justice Alito, and Chief Justice Roberts and has pledged to appoint "strict constructionists" who apply the law instead of inventing it. Or we can choose Sen. Obama who voted against each of these confirmations and seeks to impose his personal views on the second amendment and the US Constitution. In this case actions speak much louder than words. During these appointment proceedings Sen. Obama's true colors shined through long before he was running for president and adjusting his views based upon present political winds

In 1996 Sen. Obama indicated on a Independent Voters Of Illinois Questionnaire that he supported "banning the manufacturing, sale and owning of handguns". Afterwards claiming that he never saw or filled the survey out he was confronted with the fact that he was also interviewed in person for the survey. He subsequently filed an amended form changing his position. During his tenure in the Senate he has also voted against providing legal protection for homeowners who shoot an intruder in self defense (Vote on S.B. 2165 on 3-25-04).

Furthermore, we only need to look as recently as an interview with the Chicago Tribune on 11/20/07 where he supported the DC gun ban and believed it was constitutional. In an ABC interview on 2/12/08 he again confirmed this belief. Clearly, Sen. Obama does not have a firm understanding of the meaning of our Constitution and this recent decision by the Supreme Court further reinforces how naive he is. He simply is untrustworthy with picking replacements for the Supreme Court. If he does not have a basic understanding of what our Constitution says, then how can he pick people who will understand it?

For me the choice is as clear and logical as the decision that was issued today. Our founding documents are to be read and applied, not reinterpreted and distorted. We need someone at the helm of our nation and making decisions that will support the very constitution that they have sworn to uphold. We need Sen. John McCain for President.

comments powered by Disqus