Another reason to oppose liberal justices to the Supreme Court.

Besides for the fact that liberal justices always make the wrong decision, are usually against the foundations of the United States Constitution, do not believe in the Constitution as our Founders wrote it, believe in putting race above the law, and believe in skipping the Constitutional authority of legislation belonging to the United States Congress, there is one more reason to oppose liberal justices.

Montana!

Montana?

When Montana joined the United States of America, Montana made a contract with the United States of America that all persons in Montana would have the right to bear arms, or else they would legally be able to leave the United States of America. Dozens of Montana lawmakers threatened the United States Supreme Court with this fact when they we're debating the Heller case, inwhich they correctly ruled that all Americans have the individual right to bear arms.

Thus, Montana remained in the Union.

Consider this, 27 Montana Assemblyman, 15 Montana Senators, Montana's Secretary of State, and elected Congressman at large, all supported Montana's contract rights to leave the United States if their right to bear arms we're infringed in anyway. I wish my elected officials had the brass that these guys have.

Whenever I hear of a Supreme Court Justice that is ill, I usually am concerned with the balance of the Supreme Court, however, we should also worry about the presence of Montana in the United States as well, as Montana is a state that loves firearms and the right to bear arms. So when considering the next Supreme Court nominee, ask yourself this question, "what will Montana do?".

Old Washington Times article on the subject - http://washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/25/montanans-insist-on-gun-rights/

-- Tim K