Dr. Leo Sandy (aka “the nutty professor”), I guess, had a problem with my rebuttal in the Laconia Daily Sun and decided to try to lambast me (his full Letter after the jump):
U.S. Public Law 107-243 is as invalid as the Jim Crow laws of the south used to be because both are based on false premises. History is full of bad laws that were changed only after being broken. I’m sure the Saudis who attacked the World Trade Center had their own versions of these laws as well, and their cause was equally unjustified.
Mr. Murphy is engaging in concrete, black/white, either/or, dualistic thinking that is one of the greatest obstacle to world peace. Absolute sovereignty and total world government are both abhorrent structures as far as I’m concerned.
He seems to have a problem when things are the way he wishes (really, a Congressional Law is “Jim Crow”….so of course, I answered!
I see that Dr. Leo must own a farm in order to cobble up his straw man arguments. Given what his writings have shown over the years, one marker has been well established even as he tries to have it both ways in his latest letter – he does not care for America as it is structured now and he has made it quite clear that he believes that America’s interests should be subordinated to the UN as the one world government. He’s having a cognitive dissonance moment here, for sovereignty is like pregnancy – you can’t just be a little bit of either. It is a black or white situation; either you are sovereign or you are not pregnant. Being the former doesn’t mean that you cannot cooperate with other sovereign nations but that lack of “total sovereignty”, as he puts it, by definition means no sovereignty as there is always the possibility of being overruled. It IS that “little bit of sovereignty” that Prof. Sandy seemingly requires to be happy so that America would be unable to do anything without the UN (or his) stamp of approval in advancing or protecting our interests. That state of being is nothing less than subordination and make no mistake that no nation, UN member or not, has ever surrendered its sovereignty to that corrupt body.
I also note
…that he continuously brings up Jim Crow to buttress his arguments. I know that Leftists often accuse Conservatives of being “unconscious racists” or have “latent racism”, but if this is the best he can bring to the fore with just another version of “Halliburton!!”, “he might be a problem” (with all due respect of paraphrasing Jeff Foxworthy poorly). Especially in terms his classroom. I do wonder why he believes that he is responsible for his students – who mostly are of are of majority age. Or, do we see the patronizing side of the Left in his words, that everyone is simply to be treated as a child? If I was auditing his class, I certainly would have a problem in accepting he was responsible for me.
I also see his lack of attention to what I pointed out – ignoring of the fact that his University said he cannot turn his class into an online one. Often, professors believe that they are the Kings of the Classroom – rather small fiefdoms. I guess that is why all academic politics loom large as the stakes are so low. Tell me, amongst your bluster, how can you realistically keep all guns out of your classroom? You literally have no legal remedy for what you disdain, right (except quit)?
Dr. Leo’s Letter (P 4,5)
To the editor,
This letter is in reference to Skip Murphy’s letter on Jan. 31. Mr. Murphy provides a perfect description of a rogue state – one that makes its own rules for behaving in the world in total disregard of the international community. Isn’t this what Iran and North Korea are doing? This is surely not good company to be in. I recommend that Mr. Murphy read “Rogue State” by investigative reporter William Blum, who chronicles the violation by the U.S. of other countries’ sovereignty over several decades.
U.S. Public Law 107-243 is as invalid as the Jim Crow laws of the south used to be because both are based on false premises. History is full of bad laws that were changed only after being broken. I’m sure the Saudis who attacked the World Trade Center had their own versions of these laws as well, and their cause was equally unjustified.
Mr. Murphy is engaging in concrete, black/white, either/or, dualistic thinking that is one of the greatest obstacle to world peace. Absolute sovereignty and total world government are both abhorrent structures as far as I’m concerned. If all countries minded their own business, then there would be no need for international oversight, and sovereignty would never come into question. To cooperate with the international community does not mean a loss of sovereignty, and any country’s sovereignty does not give it the right to interfere with other countries’ sovereignty as the U.S. has done over and over. I’m sure that Mr. Murphy believes that having 900 bases around the world gives the U.S. the right to do anything it wants in the world. It may give us the ability but not the right.
Also, I would like to inform Mr. Murphy that there will be no guns allowed in my class, come hell or high water. Just as the Jim Crow laws of the south needed breaking so too should any law that places students for whom I am personally responsible at risk. Maybe the answer to such gun mania is a good dose of Viagra.
Leo R. Sandy
New Hampton
