“No woman is illegal,” Clinton said, to cheers. (http://www.lvrj.com/news/13702902.html)
From someone sworn (as a United States Senator) to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the United States, this is disgraceful. Yet again Hillary Clinton shows her disdain for the laws that she expects everyone else to obey.
A pragmatist is someone who would have compromised with King George. Do we really want pragmatists guarding our liberty?
Nothing reflects the result of hyperpartisanship more than the current immigration debate, which has become so toxic that anytime a practical proposal is put forward, it is shot down before it can even be weighed on its merits. New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer, November 14, 2007
One wonders what Gov. Spitzer would have said about Patrick Henry saying “give me liberty, or give me death!”Governor Spitzer, it is not hyperpartisanship to defend freedom, liberty and the rule of law. The steps to immigration are well spelled out. Immigrants are great. Illegal immigration is breaking the law by definition.Anyone who decries so-called “hyperpartisanship” wishes to confuse the issue, marginalize people in order to increase their own power, and decrease the liberty of the people of the United States. The “hyperpartisans” are those who are willing to trade your liberty for their power. Compromise over freedom only has one result – loss of liberty. When the choice is freedom or anything else, freedom by definition will lose in any compromise. And once lost, freedom is much more difficult to regain. Gov. Spitzer, there are at least three steps:1. Border security.2. Encourage freedom and the rule of law elsewhere to make life better for the citizens of the countries there.3. Then deal with the problem here.It is not Hyperpartisanship to point that out. It is not “hyperpartisanship” to state the freedom should not be compromised on. It is not “hyperpartisanship” to defend liberty.
Where is the middle ground between good and evil? Where is the middle ground between freedom and tyranny? Where is the middle ground between liberty and slavery? There can be no compromise between you and your destroyers unless you willingly accept your own destruction. Without liberty your life is not your own, it belongs to those who enslave you. Enslavement for a good cause is still enslavement.
There is no ground for compromise between people who want to take your freedom from you. Partisanship is not saying “no” to enslavement. The evil here is not those standing up for liberty, the evil is those attempting to take it.
“And [Buffett] has said, and I think a lot of us who have been fortunate are willing to pay a little bit more to make sure that a senior citizen who is struggling to deal with rising property taxes or rising heating bills, that they’ve got the coverage that they need.” Barack Obama, November 11, 2007 (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2007/11/11/obama-i-deserve-a-tax-increase/)
Barack, just as we said to Warren Buffett – if you really believe what you say about paying more in taxes, why haven’t you been doing so? No one is stopping you. So, why haven’t you paid more for the past 2 or 10 years? Why aren’t you starting to pay more today? The Social (In)Security System would love it. The hypocrisy continues.Just remember that Congress’ retirement does NOT come from Social Security, Senator Obama. What does Congress know that they don’t want the rest of us to know?
With all the grousing about the AMT (Alternative Minimum Tax) and the plans to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìdo something?¢‚Ǩ¬ù about it, the following factors must be considered. Charles Rangel, Democratic Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s plan is to raise taxes (don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t worry, you won?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t be left out) elsewhere to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìpay for?¢‚Ǩ¬ù reducing the AMT. First, Charles, you don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t have to borrow money to ?¢‚Ǩ?ìpay for?¢‚Ǩ¬ù a tax cut. You borrow money to spend. Everything else is just dissembling and an attempt to confuse people. Power-hungry politicians love to use words like that Continue reading AMT, Republicans and Socialist Charles Rangel
Michael Moore, please call your office ?¢‚Ǩ‚Äú or the church. In a stunning move, the very liberal Episcopal Church unintentionally repudiates Michael Moore?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s manipulative movie Sicko.
As is typical for the Episcopal Church, the Church again injected politics into the pulpit, at least this time, it was something that people could -and should- do to help.
The statement begins: ?¢‚Ǩ?ìImagine waking in the middle of the night with a raging fever and sore throat. Or even worse, your child wakes up feverish and covered in chicken pox. Now, imagine there is no aspirin, Tylenol, or Benadryl in your home because these products are simply not available for purchase in your country. For our brothers and sisters in Cuba, this is everyday life.?¢‚Ǩ¬ù Continue reading Sicko Michael Moore and the truth about Cuba
Echoing his comments in June, Warren Buffett is complaining about tax rates as being too low. The relevant question is: has he done anything about it or is he just being a hypocrite, again?
Let?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s see what Buffett has actually done instead of said: Buffett is giving away is fortune (http://money.cnn.com/2006/06/25/magazines/fortune/charity1.fortune/). Good for him, great choice, it is nice that he has the right and freedom to do as he sees fit with the money he has earned. Too bad Buffett doesn’t think that others should have that same freedom.
What precisely is Buffett doing? He is giving his fortune to tax-exempt foundations. So, if you REALLY want to pay more taxes, Warren, why do this? Continue reading Buffett says taxes are too low, but doesn’t pay more himself
“I may have gotten a thin copy, but I had a hard time finding it in my copy of the Constitution.” Judge David Sentelle questioning the “right” for terminally ill patients to get life saving medicines. (March 1, U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. For more, see Reason.)
It seems like Judge Sentelle is the one who missed the entire Constitution. The proper question to be asking is, if one reads the Constitution, is where the power to regulate whether terminal patients can get medicine that could save their lives in the first place? Judge Sentelle apparently missed the concept of enumerated powers in the Constitution. Judge Sentelle, please return to law school and pay attention this time.
I have a million ideas. The country can’t afford them all. – Senator Hillary Clinton, October 11, 2007 (Boston.com)
Hey Senator Clinton, thank you for letting us know you have a million ideas. I have a million ideas too, the key difference is that I am not using force to make everyone else pay for them. I raise money voluntarily to implement my ideas. I’m not trying to get my ideas enacted at the point of a gun.
Instead of being able to strive for their own ideas, the citizens of the United States will be voting on whether to force others to support Senator Hillary Clinton’s ideas. In reality it is a million ideas on how to spend the hours of each person’s life implementing the Presidential candidate’s ideas.
It’s not charity if it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s at the point of a gun and it’s not charity if it?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s someone else’s money.
Volunteering to spend someone else’s time and money to support your ideas doesn’t make you a saint.
That is completely anit-freedom and anti-liberty and completely the opposite of the morals and principles the United States was founded upon. It is totalitarianism, socialism, communism, and facism all rolled into one.
Power-hungry and abusive police arrest and taser a student asking John Kerry speech:
Look at those little Napoleon police. Pathetic officers.
Capt. Jeff Holcomb of the University Police Department and the officers involved should be fired.
see
http://www.gainesvillesun.com/article/20070918/NEWS/709180325/1007/NEWS
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3ec_1190097717&p=1
One might call it ironic that the McCain campaign is faltering due to lack of funds. Ironic because he has helped to silence his own speech rights while limiting everyone else?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s. Instead of being free to donate and disclose to a candidate who shares your views, you are greatly limited. McCain suffers from that problem.
It might be that people think he has nothing worthwhile to say and won?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t donate. Or it might be that they don?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t know what he has to say since they haven?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t been able to hear it to decide if they wish to donate. Either way McCain loses his chance to influence the political process because he has limited everyone else’s opportunity too. Certainly McCain?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s (theoretical) base knows many of his positions and disagrees with his anti-freedom views, however there could have been more people who agreed with him, but won?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t hear his message. He can thank himself and Senator Feingold for that.
That is the nature of free speech. You are free to speak when you want, but it costs money to get your speech out there in front of many people. That means convincing people you have something worth saying and can express it. McCain has ensured that he can?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢t do that, and who knows how many other candidates he has shut out of the marketplace of ideas.