“Miller’s mailer muddies the waters, because increasing gun ownership regulations is not the same thing as scrapping the Second Amendment entirely,” Politfact claims in a Thursday hit piece on the Alaska Senate campaign, where conservative Joe Miller is trying mightily to upset the establishment in next Tuesday’s primary election. “The ad is wrong when it suggests 20 million voters can repeal part of the Constitution’s Bill of Rights. We rate it False.”
The ad does not say the Second Amendment will be repealed, which is what the thrust of the Politifact stretch attempts to indict Miller on. Nowhere does he claim the Constitution will be amended to repeal the Second Amendment. Indeed, as anyone with a basic understanding of unalienable rights and settled law could tell the “Authorized Journalists,” assuming they’d listen and care, “The very text of the Second Amendment implicitly recognizes the pre-existence of the right and declares only that it 'shall not be infringed' ... This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.”
What Miller says is “"If 20 million illegals vote, you can kiss the Second Amendment goodbye." That's clear to any informed gun owners and pro-immigration sanity activist, and is demonstrated by all credible observations, not to mention the eagerness of the Obama administration to make it so. The “pathway to citizenship” being enabled by a Democrat/Republican establishment alliance will result in an electorate with the votes to fundamentally alter what legislatures will enact and courts will uphold in the name of “compelling state interests,” effectively neutering and gutting the right.
If bearing arms can be restricted as in New Jersey, and if arms that can be kept can be banned using a wrong-headed interpretation of the “in common use at the time” qualifier, what's left will be so far removed from “shall not be infringed,” and so anemic, that for all intents and purposes, it will be of no significance. After all, what good is a right if government can get away with whatever infringements they want? And what good will past Supreme Court gains be if the balance there swings heavily to the left?
That a Florida-based paper should pick now, with the election days away, and with Miller gaining steam to become an Alaska threat the establishment must eliminate, is hardly surprising. Having been endorsed by Gun Owners of America, Sarah Palin, radio talker Mark Levin and others, a candidate who speaks plainly about impeachment for border subversion is not one opponents wish to see elevated and amplified. And aside from the Democrat party, the Obama administration and an overwhelmingly “progressive” media that would rather smother such a voice, the Karl Rove/Chamber of Commerce wing of the Republican party is doing everything it can to crush true conservatives who understand that amnesty will eviscerate (legally-recognized) gun rights.
So it figures that Politifact would seek opinions from the “libertarian” Cato Institute among others. And it figures Cato would have a horse in that race, having joined with gun-grabber-supporting NRA director Grover Norquist in attacking the Heritage Foundation when it dared wander off the establishment “immigration reform” reservation.
That in turn makes it fair to ask where NRA is on the Alaska race, and why they continue to avoid the impact of illegal immigration/amnesty on gun rights using the “single issue” excuse, especially after they’ve already established precedent by opposing tangential issue threats, such as McCain/Feingold “campaign finance reform.” Per the Political Victory Fund website, Democrat Mark Begich is still rated at A-, despite Begich testing the waters to throw gun owners under the bus after Newtown, despite his voting for confirming Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, and despite NRA pledging those votes would be scored.
On the Republican side, NRA gives Miller an “A,” along with primary contender and current Lieutenant Governor Mead Treadwell, and gives an “AQ” (they filled out the questionnaire correctly) to John Jaramillo and Alaska Attorney General Dan Sullivan, the current “favorite” in the race. Immigration watchdog group Numbers USA shows Miller has a perfect score, shows a blank for Treadwell next to each question, and does not list Jaramillo or Sullivan. The group gives Begich an “F.” (Note the website at this writing incorrectly lists the election as “August 26.”)
With the stakes involved and with the turning tide, Politifact trying to stem and divert it follows a pattern of putting the “Politi” part before the facts. MediaTrackers assigned them a “Pants on Fire” score for partisan bias, an observation also noted by Human Events. There is even a website devoted to documenting and chronicling “PolitiFact, the fact checker that makes stuff up.” A truism observed often in this column is that for “progressives,” every day is Opposite Day. Just because they use words that produce visceral reactions, like “truth” and “fact” does not mean they promote either -- it only means those are words they manipulate readers into associating them with.
What Politifact has done, albeit unintentionally, is admitted that Miller is soaring over the target and they’re going to throw everything they can at him to knock him down. And where have we seen “legitimate news media” do that on this very topic before? So naturally, Prozi snarkmeisters at sites like Wonkette are primed and more than happy to pile on in full-blown Alinsky Rule 5 ridicule mode.
Funny people, these ”moderate” Republican types would rather team up with while they’re busy sabotaging and purging conservatives. It does bring Carroll Quigley’s observation on the party system to mind again, though.
As for the Alaska primary in two days, a large part of whether Miller can maintain his last-minute momentum and beat the odds is up to gun owners who understand what he and Gun Owners of America are saying, that all credible documentation shows amnesty will lead to Democrat majorities that will essentially gut what the law recognizes as “gun rights.”
“This is the last chance for the Tea Party to make a primary showing other than by accident as it did in Virginia,” a friend who does not live in Alaska but nonetheless supports Miller wrote recently in a limited distribution email. “Is everyone doing what they can to help win it?”
That includes helping the Miller campaign, with activism and with financial support. With a Senate seat hanging in the balance, this affects more than just Alaska gun owners. Every American who believes in the right to keep and bear arms has a clear and compelling interest in spreading the word on this, and doing it now.
To find out more, read my earlier take on the Miller campaign to see how he answered both the NRA and Numbers USA questionnaires.
UPDATE: Andrea Shea King will discuss the Miller campaign tonight at 8 p.m. Eastern, starting moments from this posting. Click here to listen.
If you're a regular Gun Rights Examiner reader and believe it provides news and perspectives you won't find in the mainstream press, please subscribe to this column and help spread the word by sharing links, promoting it on social media like Facebook (David Codrea) and Twitter (@dcodrea), and telling your like-minded friends about it. And for more commentary, be sure to visit "The War on Guns: Notes from the Resistance."
The seat of government is a mighty curious place to set up a Constitution-free zone. “On-Again, Off-Again” is my latest GUNS Magazine “Rights Watch” column, noting the bizarre turns taken to date in the Palmer case.
My latest JPFO Alert, “"Progressive" philosopher upholds Opposite Day truism” notes they don't call it a Piled Higher and Deeper diploma for nothing.
What good is a right if government can get away with whatever infringements they want? “Court Upholding Ban on Militia-Suitable Firearms Ignores Key Second Amendment Purpose” is my latest offering on The Shooters Log.