Dukehorn: I wanted to address just one of your points here. That is the one related to gun ownership. Obviously, this is very topical given the recent Supreme Court decision, but it is also near and dear to my heart. I’m a gun owner, but for me the issue is more related to individual rights and responsibilities.

I noticed that Obama tried to skirt the issue, and then he did an adept fenceline straddle by claiming the middle ground between individual rights and the government’s “right” to regulate.

What I wanted to address was your comment about semi-automatic handguns being intrinsic to freedom. I got the sense you were being tongue-in-cheek with this, but there is an important context here.

“Fear the government that fears your guns” is a popular slogan with the NRA, but a correct one, sentiment notwithstanding. The 2nd Amendment (in my own interpretation) speaks directly to our individual right to possess a firearm, and not within membership of a militia. The Founding Fathers were all very clear in their writings on this topic and for good reason. With the specter of George III hanging over their heads, the idea of an armed and activist citizenry was a must in preventing absolutism. One can argue that times have changed, but my response is that we need to assert individual rights and civil liberties now more than ever.

This “It takes a village” mommy socialism that the lefties bring to the table is even more insulting due to the fact that it presupposes I lack the requisite intelligence to make good decisions and therefore need the government to help me by preventing me from purchasing something potentially injurious to my health. While Bush’s creeping fascism needs to be stopped, so does the hard Left’s creeping Socialism (and not the hand wringing French sort, but the rock ribbed Italian variety, circa 1935).