The National Rifle Association became a target of the elderly, and possibly senile, member of a 1960s rock band: Graham Nash. Although a very talented singer/songwriter and one of the members of the self-titled group Crosby, Stills, and Nash, Mr. Nash recently mistook the modern world for the self-indulgent, immature 1960s and opened his mouth, letting loose a typical, time-honored liberal rant. In a move that was part of a tour promoting CSN's new live album, the 70-year-old former drug-addled hippie, made the ridiculous prediction that in less than 100 years, the NRA will "be seen as major criminals."
Perhaps Mr. Nash should stick to singing his old '60s favorites, the ones that people most only hear in commercials, and leave the issue of guns to those who actually know something about it. However, lack of knowledge about a subject has never stopped a liberal from commenting with the confidence of a learned master, and Mr. Nash has certainly lived up to this expectation. And like many old hippies, the singer concentrates much too much on "feelings," and not enough on important aspects like the law or the Constitution.
Demonstrating his distinct lack of knowledge about the legislative practices of the United States, the British-born singer complained about Republican Presidential candidate, Mitt Romney's, comment that there was no need "to change the gun laws because of Colorado." And in a display of liberal "understanding" Mr. Nash went on to use the age-old ruse of dragging Mitt Romney's children into the argument by claiming "If those were his kids it would be in the Constitution by now."
First of all, bringing the children of a political opponent into a public argument not only demonstrates the lowest form of political dishonor, but also a distinct lack of class. Only a crass, ignorant person would stoop so low as to bring in the innocent family members of their political opponents. And it is highly likely that Mr. Nash would never dare to include the family of a liberal politician, like President Obama, in an interview rant. So not only is Mr. Nash crass, but a hypocrite as well.
Secondly, if Mr. Nash actually read the US Constitution, instead of simply using it to score emotional points, he would know the procedure for adding new amendments. Mitt Romney, even if, or when, he is elected President, can only provide a limited amount of influence over the process of adding to the Constitution. The current occupant of the White House may be accused of acting like a dictator, issuing Executive Orders and arbitrarily imposing new regulations, but not even the historic President Barack Hussein Obama can dictate that new amendments be added to the Constitution.
Crosby Stills and Nash have a number of very good songs, many of which are political, but if the last few years has taught America anything it is that the spirit of the 1960s should be left in the past with the myriad of other failures of the liberals. It should not be resurrected in the form of Presidential policy, it should not return as a form of social or political discord, and those associated with the chaos and destruction of that dishonorable period of American history should simply go away.
Mr. Nash is wrong in his prediction about the American people. They will never come to think of the National Rifle Association as criminals. And the reason is simple: When the NRA protects the rights of Americans to own guns, they protect the right to be free. And as long as Americans own firearms, they can never be forced to think and behave as the anti-gun liberals would demand they do. Guns maintain freedom and no one will ever call a group that maintains freedom a bunch of "criminals." "Patriots" maybe, but never criminals.