Click this banner to learn more

Connect to The Advocate

John A. Thomas: Editorial 9-21-12

I am hesitant to write this short retort to Ms Alexander’s editorial of September 15, 2012, as I agree with her, “I will fight no more”. But alas, I must state plainly to her and to all that it is Ms Alexander who “wins the day”. After all, it is only right that when one who holds a diametrically opposite opinion from the one you are championing takes the day in a discussion, it is the duty of the vanquished is to admit defeat and publically recognize her superior position as supported by her stated facts.

As is often the case, those whose positions appear as plainly indefensible as did Ms Alexander’s to those with a firm understanding of the subject matter in dispute, she artfully gets beyond the relevant points of evidence raised in opposition to her statements and quickly thrust dagger of finality through the heart of what seemed to be fairly unassailable facts of history. Instead of concerning herself with the evidence presented, instead of choosing to take a few hours to consider the many thousands of words written by our Founders specifically put forth by them to reinforce their fear of governmental tyranny and the need of the citizenry to be every vigilant in protecting themselves from that natural state of government, Ms Alexander makes a very succinct dismissal of that evidence by simply ignoring it. Rather than showing that the evidence I presented was in fact in error or taken out of context, she instead relies on the very sound principles found, and I quote from MS Alexander’s “final word” … “I simply quoted Article II, Section 8 of our Constitution.”

I concede victory to Ms Alexander for I have no other choice. For you see when I consult each of the copies of the Constitution of the United States in my possession, I am unable to locate “Article II, Section 8.” It was obviously omitted from them by the shoddy publisher. I shall contact the publishers regarding their omission of such an important piece of our history and governing document.

Given that I attempt to be reasonable when I engage in debate, it is impossible for me to continue the debate when the source of what Ms Alexander states is so obviously such a clear answer. Unfortunately, that “answer” is beyond my reach for it does not exist in my copies of the Constitution of The United States. Could it be that like Justice Ginsburg, Ms Alexander has consulted “foreign law” to deal with what is contained in ours? I will not hazard to make such a guess. I then considered that it may be possible that Ms Alexander meant to use, Article I, Section 8 in her rebuttal but knowing her that she seems very confident in her presentation in the intent of the Founders, how could I consider that she intended to state that only Congress has the authority to arm the citizens of our nation? I immediately discounted any possibility of her making that simplistic mistake.

I want to take this opportunity to thank Ms Alexander for not only enlightening me on a heretofore unknown Section of our Constitution, but also for her showing so clearly that it is best that one perhaps conduct more research prior to stating their opinions, insuring as much as possible that they are reasonably certain that they have studied the actual document used in their attempt to end a debate. So that I do not short change Ms Alexander by not including a single quote in my reply, I’ll leave her with one from Mark Twain …

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

Thank you, Ms Alexander for proving Mr. Twain’s point.


John A. Thomas

Kingston Springs

One Response to John A. Thomas: Editorial 9-21-12

  1. Homer R. Dodson

    October 1, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    I appreciate writers like John Thomas who do their homework to the benefit of all of us. Thakns John. Hope you will write more.

Leave a Reply