Anti-Gun Harold Koh Headed for Confirmation Vote
From Foreign Policy:
Koh is a self-described "trans-nationalist" radical who believes in global gun control.
A cloture vote on the nomination of Harold Koh will be held this morning at 11 a.m. ET, The Cable has learned. Koh, the dean of Yale Law School, was tapped to become the State Department's legal advisor nearly four months ago, but has faced criticism from conservatives for an alleged "transnational" approach to the law. According to reporter Dave Wiegel of the Washington Independent, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said through a spokesman that he is confident he has the 60 votes needed to overcome conservative opposition to Koh's nomination.
Given President Obama's track record of participating in schemes to undermine Second Amendment scholarship, and his disdain for those "bitter clingers" who believe in the Constitution, it is unsurprising that Koh would be nominated to the position at the State Department. What is surprising is that Senators that desire to retain their seats would consider confirming such a radical so hostile to basic Constitutional rights. Call your Senator this morning and express your disdain, while you still have a chance.
Koh's positions treat our constitutional law as if it were a mere local ordinance on the greater world stage. This is of particular concern to gun owners at a time when the U.S. Congress is under pressure from President Obama to ratify an international gun control treaty with countries in the western hemisphere. That treaty, known by its Spanish acronym CIFTA, would likely serve as a forerunner to a more extensive United Nations initiative, the "Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects." The Bush administration, under the leadership of UN Ambassador John Bolton, rejected the small arms treaty. Bolton plainly told the world that the United States will not accept a gun control document that violates our Constitutional right to bear arms. Harold Koh commented that Bolton was being "needlessly provocative." In a paper entitled "A world drowning in guns," Koh maintains that a civil society cannot exist with broad gun ownership: "Guns kill civil society," he said.
Posted by: Confederate Yankee at 10:22 AM
Comments
1
Well Koh can stick it cause he aint getting mine.and the same goes for Obamalamadingdong too!
Posted by: 1903A3 at June 24, 2009 12:37 PM (E8ZSe)
2
"Guns kill civil society."
So I presume what he means is that the US has never had a civil society?
Beyond the vague hopefulness of a "world without guns," gun banners never actually explain why they demand a disarmed populace. They never say what, precisely, makes them fear their fellow citizens so much.
The Hutus slaughtered 800,000 Tutsis in 100 days with mostly clubs and machetes, putting them at the top of the 20th Century genocidal stakes for sheer efficiency. Nobody, not the Khmer Rouge, not the ChiComs, not the Soviets, not even the Nazis with their vauted Teutonic organization came anywhere near that rate of mass murder achieved by a gaggle of nearly neolithic tribesmen without firearms.
So again, what exactly makes bedwetters like Koh so hysterically adamant that I and citizens like me are such a grave threat to life on Earth?
So I presume what he means is that the US has never had a civil society?
Beyond the vague hopefulness of a "world without guns," gun banners never actually explain why they demand a disarmed populace. They never say what, precisely, makes them fear their fellow citizens so much.
The Hutus slaughtered 800,000 Tutsis in 100 days with mostly clubs and machetes, putting them at the top of the 20th Century genocidal stakes for sheer efficiency. Nobody, not the Khmer Rouge, not the ChiComs, not the Soviets, not even the Nazis with their vauted Teutonic organization came anywhere near that rate of mass murder achieved by a gaggle of nearly neolithic tribesmen without firearms.
So again, what exactly makes bedwetters like Koh so hysterically adamant that I and citizens like me are such a grave threat to life on Earth?
Posted by: Steve Skubinna at June 24, 2009 02:18 PM (Vcyz0)
3
Most Folks in DC crying Wolf. Are running around with their pants unzipped like a bunch of 3 yr olds.
Morons most of them.
Morons most of them.
Posted by: BILL at June 24, 2009 03:25 PM (Pj1nl)
4
Where in the world did all these morons come from. Timmy Boy, holder Boy, koh, Ayers, and on and on and on.
Posted by: bill at June 24, 2009 03:29 PM (Pj1nl)
5
Bill, they came from our institutions of higher education. Radical communists under the guise of liberal infiltrated our educational system. Makes one wish for the days when the House Committee on UnAmerican activities held sway. No one ever asks any more. Are you now or have you ever been a member of the communist party. Barack Hussein Obama would have to answer yes to that question.
Posted by: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III at June 24, 2009 07:18 PM (iu8vn)
6
Well, i called Harry Reid and John Ensign and told their staff that I'm against him getting confirmed. Most politicians have their staff basically mark either yes or no for every issue from their callers, if there are enough no's than there is a chance they will vote against the issue. It's not much, but at this point in time, it's all we have. I would encourage everyone to call and just tell them you're against it. Do something about it.
Posted by: Scott at June 25, 2009 10:44 AM (0snxn)
7
On another front, it is only lately that the Lib anti-gunners have come to accept the obvious fact that if they want to install dissarmament here they shall have to ammend the Constitution. "Shall not be infringed..." is the most demotive language in the Bill of Rights. It does not admit of casual modification. If they want to do it legally this is their only recourse and it is daunting to say the least. If they want to do it by force majeur they are going to have to disolve the military and law enforcement community and elect another. In any event, the right to Keep and Bear Arms is one of those inalienable thingies; not to be seized, nor bartered nor even frittered away. To hell with whatever these grabbers want. If you want my gear you will get it, ammo first.
Posted by: megapotamus at June 25, 2009 03:39 PM (zkBnt)
8
I am alarmed by all of the things the current Administration is doing to take away my rights as a US Citizen. Of course they will want to take all of our Guns and Ammo away as soon as possible. They fear an armed population.
Look at Iran. If only 2 in 10 were armed with a rifle or hand gun, they would be free by now. Are we going to let them do the same to us here in the US???? Will it take Obamathugs killing some of us to get us moving?
Sadly most likely so.
Look at Iran. If only 2 in 10 were armed with a rifle or hand gun, they would be free by now. Are we going to let them do the same to us here in the US???? Will it take Obamathugs killing some of us to get us moving?
Sadly most likely so.
Posted by: Marc Boyd at June 25, 2009 05:12 PM (Zoziv)
9
Meg
I wish that were so, but all it takes a few more Sotomayor's and Ginsbergs to rewrite the Constitution. Little appears to protect us against a Court willing to define law however they wish.
I wish that were so, but all it takes a few more Sotomayor's and Ginsbergs to rewrite the Constitution. Little appears to protect us against a Court willing to define law however they wish.
Posted by: iconoclast at June 26, 2009 01:44 AM (O8ebz)
10
"Congress is under pressure from President Obama to ratify an international gun control treaty with countries in the western hemisphere. That treaty, known by its Spanish acronym CIFTA, would likely serve as a forerunner to a more extensive United Nations initiative, the "Program of Action to Prevent, Combat and Eradicate the Illicit Trade in Small Arms and Light Weapons in all its Aspects.""
Hey, I'm ALL FOR eradicating illicit trade in firearms. There's no place in civil society for illegal trade in firearms. But "international bodies" are morons: If they tried to eradicate rape "in all its aspects," they'd wind up outlawing sex!
Hey, I'm ALL FOR eradicating illicit trade in firearms. There's no place in civil society for illegal trade in firearms. But "international bodies" are morons: If they tried to eradicate rape "in all its aspects," they'd wind up outlawing sex!
Posted by: DoorHold at June 28, 2009 02:09 PM (M7V2r)
11
What this putz really means is you can't keep an obedient flock if the sheep are armed and can resist.
Posted by: RC at June 30, 2009 12:48 PM (fGQQq)
Processing 0.02, elapsed 0.0158 seconds.
18 queries taking 0.0133 seconds, 19 records returned.
Page size 11 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.