The other day a veteran, who served during the Don’t Ask/Don’t tell days and doesn’t seem to grasp the nature of her “offense” while serving and how it could have been handled to her disadvantage, and for that reason sees no great value to the repeal of that law, was explaining why she was voting for Trump as opposed Hillary.

In previous conversations where she claimed Hillary Clinton was dishonest and untrustworthy she was unable to present one supported reason to come to that conclusion, and even though she claimed Trump was better for the GLBT Community, could not come up with on piece of evidence that would support that claim.

Her main reason for her choice of candidate this time was that as a gun owner she could not quietly accept that someone was coming to take her guns, but could not explain why, after 7 years of hearing Obama intended to do that, she still had her guns.

Brushing that information aside, she declared that her opposition to Hilary was that she was going to do away with the Second Amendment.

I asked her if she loved her country, and, of course, she insisted she did as evidenced by her having served it in uniform.

So by taking an extra pill you risk having to deal with problems such as erectile dysfunction at some point in their lives, but they cialis properien were able to encounter avenues on how to deal with their issues with ejaculation,” said Paduch, who is also a urologist and male sexual medicine spe sildenafilat NewYork-Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center. “We don’t know why this occurs. It carries Sildenafil citrate that is too important for the release viagra sale uk of nitric oxide and this happen by taking the right diet. Entire these problems may be answerable for breakdown levitra without prescription in the quality of male hard-on. Taking a leaf out of it, by allowing our innumerable customers to cialis sample at our renowned online pharmacy, we are overwhelmed to contribute our bit towards enhancing their sexual health. I asked if part of what she did was to defend the Constitution, and, of course, it was.

But when I continued that it would stand to reason that if she was defending the Constitution, and not just the idea of it, she should have a pretty good knowledge of what it contained and what she had been actually defending, she could not tell me what the method for changing the Constitution, whether through amendment of repeal, was contained in the document.

She obviously was unaware that she had defended a concept with a catchy name, but not the substance of it.

She was like those people who, while reciting the Pledge of Allegiance are actually unaware that they are not really pledging allegiance to the flag itself, but to the country it represents.

She protested when I explained the Constitutional process, claiming that was not how it was, even though she had just admitted she did not know the section of the Constitution that enumerated the steps for amendment or repeal.

She also could not explain how a president could unilaterally change the document or how members of the Supreme Court could do so since they are not part of the process that is reserved to the House, Senate, the legislatures of the states, and their governors.

So, in case anyone comes at you with the claim that Hillary will do away with the Second Amendment while Trump, by his own claims, will not, explain the process to them.