Ann Coutler To Liberals: ‘We Can’t Entrust Our Liberties To Your Dirty Hands’
Ann Coulter lays out in very simple terms this week how liberals are not to be trusted with any laws, mainly because their ultimate goals are always something far, more nefarious and there is plenty of proof.
Like all Americans, Ann is horrified by the recent mass shootings, but in plain language explains why new laws proposed by liberals and Republicans alike are bad news for Americans.
And that is what Ann Coulter, by permission, offers to think about:
Leaving aside the usual suspects, who are rushing to the microphones to demand the immediate confiscation of all guns, liberals are appealing to come together in good faith, and formulate a plan to keep guns out of the hands of these monsters, using fair process and common sense.
The only problem is that no one on their side believes in good faith, fair process or common sense. Here’s the reality.
1) Legal process – The genius of our founders strictly limited the power of capricious, and often armed, government officials and created a system that made major changes difficult, but not impossible.
You want a new amendment to the constitution? Get 38 states to ratify it, two-thirds of the senate to vote for it, the president to sign it. There – you’ve changed the constitution. You oppose a law? Run for office, put a proposition on the ballot, donate to a campaign, persuade your fellow citizens – or move to a different state.
2) Common Sense — We also used to be able to assume a basic reasonableness undergirded our society, flowing across generational lines, political divides, racial differences and policy disputes. Until the 1970s, for example, federal courts mostly enforced actual legal and constitutional rights on the books. The other branches of government tended to perform their roles in good faith — or at least not in obvious bad faith.
Whether you were a Taft Republican or a JFK Democrat, you believed that we had a border, that people who were here illegally would be processed according to law, that there were two genders, that free speech was a hallmark of our nation, and that a kid could dress up as cowboy or Indian for Halloween without being branded a “racist.”
Naturally, therefore, my first instinct was to assume that our shared respect for legal process and sense of decency remained. But I now realize that’s wrong.
In 1994, nearly 60 percent of Californians voted to deny government services to illegal aliens. Proposition 187 was approved 59 percent to 41 percent, with the votes of 56 percent of African-Americans, 57 percent of Asians —and even a third of Hispanics. It won in every county of California except San Francisco. In heavily Latino Los Angeles County, Proposition 187 passed by a twelve-point margin.
No problem, we’ll take the case to a left-wing, Carter-appointed federal judge who will overturn the will of the voters! District Court Judge Mariana Pfaelzer held that the perfectly constitutional law was “unconstitutional” and, today, California taxpayers are forced to spend billions of dollars on the education, healthcare, food, housing, and prison cells for illegal immigrants.