I love the way that condescending liberals argue that we conservatives are being inconsistent in matters of principle; why, for instance, don't many of us accept the Roe v Wade abortion decision? Isn't it settled law? What what Citizens United v FCC? Doesn't that give companies the power to bury any candidate they don't like? Isn't in the public interest to maintain a wall between legislators and companies? The gun decisions also raised eyebrows as being a departure from the past; Senator Durbin (D-IL) rails against "activist" conservative judges.
Of course, we would not be fooled by, say, a bare majority of progressive jurists overturn 400 years of the definition of marriage in Massachusetts, and then hear progressives scream, "Stare decisis! Stare decisis!" or accept Obama arguing only incremental budget cuts from a bloated federal budget for fear of unforeseen consequences on the economy.
I am not going to fully elaborate on my position on conservatism in this post, but I do want to bust a few myths. One could argue Reagan's cuts in taxes or his mass termination of striking air traffic controllers were radical in nature. But in fact going from little or no income tax to up to 90% within just a few years was a radical change which was a drag on the private economy. Major cuts in spending and taxes promote economic growth in the private sector and leave government to focus on lean core distinctive competencies instead of an increasingly unsustainable, convoluted empire: the ultimate conservative goal is to preserve our traditional liberties and efficient, prudent governance of the common good. The issues of self-defense and for limited corporate speech rights in the political process are based on traditional liberties; liberties have certain boundaries--we can't tell a judge just what we think of him, and we have no right to make false, economically damaging statements about another person. We conservatives have our own solutions to cronyism: term limits and/or or non-consecutive terms.
Alice Lives in Obama's Wonderland
I've had my differences with both sides on the illegal immigration debate: I think when people sneak across the border versus use a properly validated passport, they know they are doing something wrong. They have no more reason to believe they have an intrinsic right to stay in America than if, say, someone breaks into a friend's house and lives in the attic undetected--they certainly haven't earned the right to the friend's refrigerator or the right to stay indefinitely because they've gone undetected a certain period of time.
On the other hand, I'm very turned off by the negative, hostile, personal reaction of the anti-immigrant forces; you would think that Republicans would know better in the aftermath Pete Wilson's final California campaign, when the GOP have been all but shut out from statewide office. You would think after seeing McCain, who exhibited great political courage for trying to come to a compromise solution in 2007, almost denied the GOP nomination the following year and then badly lose the Latino vote to Barack Obama, whom essentially helped kill the 2007 bill by supporting poison pill amendments, they would know better.
But the Obama Administration just continues to dig itself even deeper. Should we be surprised that the spokeswoman for Eric Holder, who, like all "competent" lawyers, decided to venture a professional opinion on a law he never personally read, would say the following?
There is a big difference between a state or locality saying they are not going to use their resources to enforce a federal law, as so-called sanctuary cities have done, and a state passing its own immigration policy that actively interferes with federal law. That's what Arizona did in this case.Ms. Schmaler doesn't seem to understand the meaning of the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, which clearly requires local authorities to share information on illegal immigrants they are holding. If and when a local or state authority refuses to cooperate, it is aiding and abetting criminal activity and interfering with the ability of ICE to do its job. Protecting illegal alien criminals from deportation forces the American taxpayer to subsidize their expenses. But to suggest that Arizona's immigration law "actively interferes with federal law"? As someone who opposes the law on other grounds, I think that Schmaler has been eating too many mind-bending mushrooms. Arizona is actively helping the Feds, whom after all have already let more than 11 million unauthorized people enter the country. She doesn't seem to understand at least a few of the 11 million illegal immigrants commit crimes and are arrested by police. How does she think the Feds find out about them? You mean to tell me that they were just on the verge of catching the bad guys when the Arizona deputies got to him first? Arizona is HELPING the Feds apprehend criminals; it's not like they are freeing illegal aliens from the grasp of ICE or the Border Patrol. They are more than willing for ICE or the Border Patrol get there first.
Political Cartoon
Eric Allie tweaks Obama's seeming confusion over why businesses aren't hiring more workers. The business permit manual under this administration is over 2000 pages long, and businessmen are confused: they thought the President just issued a 6-month moratorium on any new jobs, based on unacceptable business risk. A few brief suggestions: First, I don't understand why the "no right-turn sign" is labeled "no left-turn"; actually, this administration is all left-turn only, no moving straight ahead or right turn. Second, I was expecting to see a toll booth. At every block. Finally, I expected to see a Department of Labor car pulling the business over and demanding to see its payroll papers. Then the Border Patrol; they got a tip that the business may be smuggling jobs out of the country. The IRS car is next in line....
Quote of the Day
To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate beauty, to find the best in others; to leave the world a little better; whether by a healthy child, a garden patch or a redeemed social condition; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is the meaning of success.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Musical Interlude: Chart Hits of 1994
Celine Dion, "The Power of Love"
Elton John, "Can You Feel the Love Tonight"
Meat Loaf, "Rock 'n Roll Dreams Come True"
Melissa Etheridge, "Come to My Window"
Mariah Carey, "Hero"
