Kevin L. Smith: Brannon’s rhetoric

March 17, 2014 

Regarding the March 11 news article “Brannon equates Romney, tyranny”: One thing that is very clear from the article about Greg Brannon’s assertion that a vote for Mitt Romney is a vote to “advance tyranny” is that Brannon has had the good fortune never to have lived under real tyranny.

The same might be said of his frequent recourse to the Constitution as the cure for all the wrongs he sees. Nowhere does he explain what constitutional guarantees he thinks we are being denied or really give much indication that he has a positive knowledge of the contents or history of that document.

At one point he refers to abortion, but does that mean he believes that a constitutional right to privacy either does not exist or should be limited so as to allow more state interference in the sexual and reproductive lives of residents? Would he reverse only Roe v. Wade or also Loving v. Virginia and Griswald v. Connecticut, which rest on the same foundation of individual liberty?

Unfortunately, from what he said it appears that the words “tyranny” and “Constitution” are just rhetorical tools intended to express unfocused anger and conceal a lack of thoughtfulness.

Kevin L. Smith


News & Observer is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

Commenting FAQs | Terms of Service