The first shot hits the target...

But many more to follow...

Unless you live in a cave, you heard that the Supreme Court has upheld the Heller decision striking down the D.C. gun ban and affirming an individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment.

That's good!

But many, many legal questions remain unanswered - and the 5-4 decision shows how tenuous this victory is.

I don't have time at the moment to go into detail, but expect a much more thorough post soon that not only explains the remaining issues but also demonstrates how vital it is that we elect a President this November who will appoint strict constructionist - not liberal activist - jurists.

More soon...

Comments

[HMIL]

Gully!!!!! You're back! (for how long??)

I'm so glad to see you. Be sure to let us know how you and the GullyBabe are!

[Max]

Whoopie.

While I'm glad to see that a majority saw fit to uphold our 2nd Amendment, I'm less than impressed by their ruling to override state rights in regard to application of the death penalty for child rapists.

This scotus is clearly nothing to write home about.

[Rivrdog]

Almost 65 years old, and having keenly watched elections since 1960, I'm here to tell you that you are putting your hope in the wrong man.

McCain values his "maverick" status too much, loves to brag on his work with "other side" too much to list him as a must-elect specifically for the purpose of selecting conservative, Original-Intent justices to the SCOTUS.

Personally, I doubt that he would select the most conservative strict constructionists. He would be far more enamored of the possibility of compromise with the lefties, who will bluster and fillibuster and place holds on every one he sends down the line who isn't on THEIR list.

We need to press McCain on this issue, which, I agree, is the most important issue facing us in our election. As I see it, we presently have a far-less-than-even chance of seeing a conservative justice mount the SCOTUS bench. McCain isn't going to appoint one, and if he did, that justice would never be confirmed. McCain will never play hardball with the (D)onks, threatening to veto every single piece of legislation coming out of their lefty Congress, and that is the ONLY thing that has a remote chance of moving a conservative selection out for actual debate and an up or down vote.

Nope, the lefties have their blood up, and even if we pile enough dung on Obama to keep him from getting elected, they have their second-best chance with their soul-mate McCain.

Yeah, I'll probably hold MY nose and vote for the guy, but I do not expect it to save my guns or my Constitution. If I want to do that, I'll have to be prepared to take those guns to the streets, and so will all of you.

[Gullyborg]

Rivrdog,

I agree McCain is a lackluster Republican. He will probably put O'Connor type judges on the federal bench.

But remember:

O'Connor was "right" about 80% of the time. Compare that to, say Ginsburg, who is WRONG at least 80% of the time.

Who would you rather have putting justices on the Supreme Court with life-tenure terms resulting in 30+ years of opinions? McCain, or OBAMA?

Here is the fact:

Justice John Paul Stevens, a very liberal justice, is almost 90 years old. He will not remain in office through another Presidential term. The next President WILL replace him.

Replacing him with a Sandra Day O'Connor means the court would then have 4 solid conservatives, two swing votes, and three leftists. That means much better odds of getting good decisions than today's 4-1-4 breakdown.

But that's not THE fact.

After Stevens, do you know who has been on the SCOTUS bench the longest?

ANTONIN SCALIA.

Scalia has already served over 20 years. He wil almost certainly ride out the next 4 years if Obama is elected. But what if Obama is then RE-elected? Will Scalia have the health and the will to serve over 8 more years hoping for a better President to replace him?

And what if he has a sudden health problem?

Do you want Obama to have the chance to replace the most conservative justice in history with Lawrence Tribe? Or Hillary Clinton?

But here is the BIGGEST fact:

Which justice do you think is the least physically able to remain on the job? The ancient Stevens? Actually, it is Ginsburg. Yep, the wicked witch herself. The single most radical justice in history (sorry, she would want me to say in herstory) is expected to retire soon because of her general poor health.

If Obama has the chance to replace her, he will make sure her replacement is every bit as radical. Expect the first openly gay justice. It's for diversity, you know.

If McCain replaces her - even with someone as bad as Souter - it would be an improvement.

Speaking of Souter, buzz around DC is that he is also ready to retire.

And if we get into second terms, Kennedy is likely to retire in the next 8 years as well.

So the next President could actually put 5 justices on the court.

If that President is McCain, we might have 5 swing votes - but we will still have Roberts, Thomas and Alito facing the lone Breyer on the left. With 5 swing votes, we'd only need 2 to combine with the 3 conservatives.

If the next President is Obama, we will have 6 solidly committed Marxists on the court. Alito and Thomas will be completely neutralized. The only thing Roberts will be able to do as Chief Justice will be to decide which of the 6 gets to write which bad opinion.

DO YOU WANT THAT? BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT YOU WILL GET IF YOU DON'T BACK MCCAIN!

So back McCain. Yes, keep his feet hot by constantly pressuring him to be more conservative. But for the love of God and All that is Holy, GET MCCAIN ELECTED FIRST, then worry about riding his ass.

[Gullyborg]

Max,

You are right that SCOTUS is in bad shape. The rape case is one bad example. Look back a few years to Kelo and see how bad it REALLY is.

But see the comment above. We are teetering on the precipice of disaster. We "won" in Heller only because ONE JUSTICE decided to swing right... this time.

If Obama wins, then within a few years, the rape case and Kelo will be looked back upon as far-right wing/libertarian decisions compared to what will come.

Want that? THEN BACK MCCAIN. At least we can put off the damage. At best, he sneaks in one or two justices among the 5 who are actually pretty good.

In an ideal world, McCain's successor to the White House will be someone like Bobby Jindal, and he gets to replace Breyer with another Scalia.

Four extremely good justices and five swing votes with some conservative tendencies... not only is that pretty good, it is also probably the best we will EVER see.

So let's not f@&% it up over sour grapes with McCain.

[Gullyborg]

HMIL,

Yes, I should have some more time to blog - at least for the short term.

GB and I are doing fine. You?

[OregonGuy]

Stupid thought this...

but what is the emotional reaction of the candidate to this?

http://tinyurl.com/5uq8vo

McCain is going to allow his baby to die? Would you?

[independent thinker]

McCain will ABSOLUTELY allow his baby to die IF he is elected President.

Remember, BCFR wasn't about changing the laws for the better. It was about changing the laws to get McCain elected President. Once he is President, the law is no longer relevant.

Now, if he loses, you can expect him to fight tooth and nail in the Senate to keep his baby alive for his "legacy." Like comprehensive immigration reform.

But if he becomes President, he can focus on legacy building by ending the Iraq War in victory and balancing the budget by cutting spending. If he does just those two things AND NOTHING ELSE as Commander in Chief, he will go down in history as an Andrew Jackson-like mythical demigod of politics and leadership.

I have a lot more faith in President McCain conveniently forgetting most of the hogwash he is spouting to piss off conservatives once he is elected. He won't GET elected simply by pandering to the base. He needs to win over moderates, independents, and some liberals if he wants to win. Hence, he is out there talking global warming.

Of course, I could be wrong. I was wrong about GWB...

But better a wishy washy RINO than a hard core socialist like Barack Hussein Obama!

[Daniel]

5-4 or not, it was a good decision and sets a precedent that we have a personal right in the 2nd Amendment It's great news and it is indeed cause for celebration that for once the Supremes didn't curtail liberty but preserved it, at least for another day.