|
Dear Resa,
I just read your piece on
medical care. I loved it. Your statements of ideas and examples were clear,
and helped your readers to see the situation rationally. Walter Williams could
scarcely have done better.
Ayn Rand said that when a
person sees a situation clearly and rationally, he will always favor the side of
the argument that supports individual's rights.
Guess why our pictures of
the Iraqi and North Korean situations are so fuzzy?
Supposedly, we are going
after those regimes because they are disobeying the United Nations. Our
gun-owners should focus on that fact.
Early in Bush's term, the
United Nations had a conference in New York about the "proliferation" of "light
weapons" (ordinary rifles and pistols). Supposedly, these guns were threatening
peace everywhere and had to be stopped! (Tone of rabid panic intentional.)
Bush had his ambassador to
the conference state that the United States would refuse to abide by any
resolution or convention that would affect the rights of American citizens to
keep and bear arms. Consequently, the conference ended in abject
disappointment. Its successor may convene either in this year or in the next.
This incident supports at
least one of two possible conclusions. The first is that Bush chooses which
United Nations initiatives to support, and willfully disregards "the will of the
world" if he does not want to obey it. The second, drawn from Bush's policies
toward Iraq
and North Korea,
is that if, at some time in the future, he decides to support the disarmament of
American civilians, he will do so because he realizes that "we cannot stand
against the world."
Rats. I would like to type
more, but my right forearm is telling me, in Bill Clinton's memorable phrase,
"your time is up."
Anyway, again, you did a
nice job.
Thanks.
Sincerely,
Gordon
|