his actions betray him

A while ago, I wrote both my Senators in an attempt to convince him to vote against Eric Holder back when he was being nominated to be our next Attorney General. As you all know, Mr. Holder was confirmed as our current Attorney General (and has already started spouting all manner of idiocy), but, worse, both of my Senators voted for him. Today, I received a response from one of them explaining why (or at least rationalizing why):

Dear [NAME],

Thank you for taking the time to contact my office to share your concerns about the nomination of Eric Holder for Attorney General of the United States. Your input is important to me and I appreciate the time you took to share your thoughts.

I recognize the importance of ensuring that a highly qualified and knowledgeable person serves as our Attorney General. As a general rule, I believe in allowing discretion to the President to choose the people he wants to fill his Cabinet. However, I had significant concerns with Mr. Holder’s nomination for Attorney General due to his record as Deputy Attorney General and his past analysis of the 2nd Amendment. After carefully reviewing the testimony from Mr. Holder’s confirmation hearing in the Senate Judiciary Committee, while I may disagree with some of Mr. Holder’s views, there was nothing that would disqualify him from this position.

You should know that I fully support the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision striking down the District of Columbia’s handgun ban because I strongly believe in protecting our constitutional rights. This decision is exceptionally significant because for the first time in our nation’s history, the Supreme Court has affirmed that gun ownership is an individual right protected by the Constitution.

The right to own firearms for shooting, hunting, and self-protection is important to me as a Tennessean and as an American. I believe in safeguarding the rights of law-abiding American citizens. I will be a consistent voice for the second amendment, and I will fight attempts to weaken those rights that are granted in the Constitution.

Please take note of the attached “Policy Points” document to learn more about the steps I have taken to protect our 2nd Amendment rights.

Thank you again for your letter. I hope you will continue to share your thoughts with me.

Sincerely,
Bob Corker

So, first off, this is a form letter, in case you did not already notice – checking with one of the forums I frequent, it seems as though anyone who emailed Senator Corker about Mr. Holder received this email today. This is, in and of itself, no real biggie – after all, Senators are busy folks, but I just wanted to make that clear.
That formality dispensed with, what an unadulterated load of hogwash. Eric Holder’s history is well-documented – the only thing he holds in less regard than the Constitution as a whole is the Second Amendment in specific. He recommended the pardoning of known and convicted terrorists. He held to the erroneous and disproven “collective interpretation” of the Second Amendment during the course of District of Columbia v. Heller, and signed a document supporting D.C.’s total handgun ban. He wants to reinstate an “assault weapon ban” (which basically boils down to a ban on whatever firearms he might choose), in addition to closing the non-existent “gun-show loophole” (which would bar family members from passing firearms from generation to generation, in addition to private sales). He supports banning “cop-killer bullets”, even though actual armor-piercing rounds have already been regulated since the 1980s, and anything larger than a .22 would probably qualify. The list just goes on, and on, and on, and on…
And my Senator expects me to believe that there was nothing “disqualifying him from this position”? Furthermore, my Senator expects me to believe that he wants to “safeguard the rights of law-abiding American citizens”?
For God’s sake, Senator Corker does not even know where those gorramed rights originate – the Second Amendment grants nothing!
*headdesk*
I wonder when was the last time Senator Corker actually looked at the Constitution, even a small portion of it…