Poli Sci 101
The NYT doesn’t care for rights actually enumerated in the Constitution. But rights not in the Constitution are peachy. And, apparently, they think they’re in the Constitution.
Layers of editorial oversight, indeed.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
August 30th, 2007 at 11:07 am
That editorial reads like a 4th rate screed from any blog out there.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:34 am
They’ve obviously not even read the report as they added in that clause specifically due to the 80,000 veterans Clinton disenfranchised due to PTSD.
August 30th, 2007 at 11:41 am
You know, if whoever wrote that article actually put his or her name on it (was that their doing, or the NYT’s), I would almost write another letter berating them for their inordinate stupidity.
Maybe I should just write the editorial editor…
August 30th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
As a “Veteran” I think i would have to say “WTF?”.
I’ll ignore the fact that there is more than enough counseling available for those who want it…
I’ll just say that they think there is an issue with Veterans commiting suicide, but have they looked into the underlying causes? How the Media portrays the job that they have been doing, the job that freinds have lost thier lives to do.
Do they have a clue how difficult it is to survive when your best freind bled out in some village that doesn’t even show on a map?
They talk about helping US soldiers but show videos of Enemy snipers shooting those forces.
The Propaganda Arm of Al Queda is concerned over my mental well being. Well color me amazed.
August 30th, 2007 at 1:10 pm
“that other constitutional right — to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”
Whatta dipshit! That’s in the Declaration of Independance. Well, I’ve never heard any media member ever being accused of being intelligent…
And a “suicide prevention” bill? That’ll work as well to prevent someone from punching their own ticket as gun laws do to ban crime. Another waste of time and money by our so called “lawmakers”.
August 30th, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Wow. Personally I think laws making suicide illegal are unethical at best anyways. To deny someone the right to take their own life is to claim you have a higher right to their life then the individual does.
This law stinks in more then one way, that’s for sure, just like the op-ed.
August 30th, 2007 at 3:40 pm
I thought the NYT was pro-choice.
Oh, that doesn’t apply to the choice to acquire, keep and carry the means of self-defense, or even the choice to take your own life, but only to the choice to take the life of your unborn child….even if it means stabbing the child in the back of the head with scissors and sucking the brains out as he/she “comes into the world”. Oh yes, we gotta have “reasonable, common sense” restrictions on “choice”
August 30th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
(as I commented more on here: How about the non-bias of “craven gun lobby”?