| Opinion/The Review

Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

'Aghast' then & now

Email Newsletters

Sign up for one of our email newsletters.

Daily Photo Galleries

Letter to the Editor
Thursday, Jan. 2, 2014, 8:55 p.m.

‘Aghast' then & now

A judge said Constitution author James Madison “would be aghast” over government's national-security overreach. Well, maybe slave-owning Madison “would be aghast” that blacks are no longer slaves; are counted as full persons, not three-fifths of persons, as stated in the Constitution; and can vote.

Maybe Madison “would be aghast” that the current lawfully elected president of the United States is black. Maybe Madison “would be aghast” that women can vote and can be elected president.

Maybe Madison “would be aghast” that instead of citizens owning muzzle-loading guns so they can be in a militia to repel foreign invasions (e.g., British Redcoats), citizens can now own dozens of rapid-firing semiautomatic guns capable of, and actually used in, the killing of dozens of their fellow U.S citizens, including small children, in the blink of an eye, and don't have to join a militia to do it.

Twenty-first-century America is nothing like 1789 America. So, this supposedly intelligent judge's remark on what Bill-of-Rights-writing slave owner Madison “would be aghast” at was ridiculous and totally irrelevant to the realities of living in the 21st-century, terrorism-threatened United States of America.

Stephen Siskind


Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.



Show commenting policy

Most-Read Letters

  1. Wolf missing the mark
  2. Climate crossroads
  3. Dems ignoring constituents
  4. Where credit’s due
  5. ‘Santa’ Sanders amiss on college
  6. Payday laws are sufficient
  7. Haunting of Hillary
  8. Grateful for support
  9. Bank mergers beneficial
  10. Scent of jihad
  11. Vetting the refugees