You want "third rail"... try this...

I'll get to Soc-Sec, but first, I wanted to share this little tidbit.

As I have said recently, the US Supreme Court has heard the oral arguments for the case called DC v Heller, which concerns DC's flat out ban on the possession of a functioning firearm within the District limits for anyone NOT an active-duty law enforcement officer.

This is history unfolding before our eyes, people... at no time in our nation's history has the Court faced a case that would test the meaning and intentions of the Second Amendment of the Bill of Rights (at least not where both sides of the case were heard). 47 briefs in support of the Circuit Court determination that the DC gun ban was un-Constitutional were filed with the court, and 20 against it.

Obviously, I haven't finished them ALL yet... but I will. The one I did just read was the amicus brief filed by 31 States and their respective AGs in defense of the individual right to keep and bear arms (called the "amici States", and available for reading HERE).

It's long... 75+ pages (I printed mine at work... hehe)... but only about 7 pages in, one of the biggest sections of the brief begins with a REBUTTAL of the official position of the Bush Administration's position in the arguments.

That's right, the Administration has recommended that the case be referred BACK t the lower Court (the same Court that determined the ban un-Constitutional, mind you) for FURTHER REVIEW of its findings! What does that tell YOU?

It tells ME that the Bush White House is hoping for a different outcome of the case when the 2nd Circuit Court hears the case again... and that means that the White House WANTS the ban left in place. What other possible conclusion can I draw from the evidence? Bush WANTS the ban declared "Constitutional" and must feel that the Second Amendment is a collective right protection, and NOT an individual right guaranty. At best, he must feel the District of Columbia, and by extension ANY municipality or State, has the RIGHT to supersede the Second Amendment whenever it feels the need.

This isn't opinion, people... read the brief. George W. Bush appointed this guy AG, and HE determined the course of the USAG brief to the Supreme Court... no one else. I haven't heard Bush refuting the position, or distancing himself from yet another example of BAD APPOINTMENTS in his Cabinet... so I conclude that he, too, feels the ban is "okay".

I'm not listening to any more CRAP about how McCain "waffles" between liberal and conservative positions at will... not when Bush is far more guilty of it as President of the United States AND claims to be a Texan!