Obama says “Typical White Person”!

Barack Obama describes his white grandmother as a “typical white person.” Can you imagine the outrage if Hillary Clinton described someone as a “typical black person” or a “typical asian person”? What if Hillary said something about Obama being a “typical black man”. Geraldine Ferraro was castigated for her comment about “if [Barack] was a white man” Where is the outrage now?

In part he said: “She is extremely proud, and the point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. She doesn’t. But she is a typical white person who, you know, if she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know, there is a reaction that has been bred into our experiences that don’t go away…”

Patrick Henry needs a bit of revision today!

My liberal cousin ends his emails with this wonderful Patrick Henry quotation:

” . . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death! – March 23, 1775″

All the while he supports policies such as these:
1. Government run health care. So much for the freedom of doctors and patients to work together on their fees and treatments. You’ll be told what health care you can have and the doctor will be told how much he or she will be paid for it. Patrick Henry would want freedom for both. (Yes, insurance needs to be reformed, but again, the answer is freedom – freedom for insurance companies and people to buy from each other instead of having the government stand between the two. And freedom to take your insurance with you if you change jobs.)
2. Minimum wages – there is no freedom to negotiate your own wage. Both the employer and employee are restricted by government. Patrick Henry would not like this.
3. Redistribution of earnings. Let us say exactly what this means instead of using double-talk: you take some money from someone who works and give it to someone who needs it, supposedly, more than you do. Instead of you owning the products of your labors by right, you own them by sufferance of the majority. Patrick Henry would not like that and neither would the Constitution.

So, Patrick Henry needs a little revision today because although Patrick wanted liberty for everyone, today’s liberals only seem to want it for approved people and approved areas:

. . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me AND EVERYONE ELSE liberty, or give me death!

The liberal version seems to be:

. . . I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me AND NO ONE ELSE unless I approve of them liberty, or give me death!

The only answer is freedom and that implies an economic system that is based on freedom. There is no debate between capitalism and statism, it is a debate between freedom and statism. And statism is any philosophy that uses the state to greatly restrict your freedom to live your life as you please.

Remember that ‘business’ does not pay taxes, they merely collect them from the consumers and pass them along to Washington. Businesses pass along any taxes to you. The rhetoric behind “tax business” is obfuscation to get more money for Washington to spend in trying to buy your vote.

Sharpton says don’t seat Florida and Michigan Delegates in 2008

“I firmly believe that changing the rules now, and seating delegates from Florida and Michigan at this point would not only violate the Democratic party’s rules of fairness, but also would be a grave injustice. …I knew the rules, abided by them, and ultimately accepted the consequences. Changing the rules in the middle of a presidential contest is patently unfair both to the candidates (including Senator Edwards) and to Democratic voters everywhere.” – Al Sharpton, February 13, 2008, part of Rev Sharpton’s letter.

Reverend Sharpton,you are exactly right,thank you for stating that. Changing the rules in the middle of the game is patently unfair. As a Florida resident I don’t like the handling of the delegates for the Democrats or Republicans, but the rules were set by both parties for 2008 and we are stuck with them now. Perhaps for 2012 the parties will revise their rules in light of these events.

The Problems with McCain – Dole defending McCain as ‘Conservative’

In a letter released on the evening of February 4, 2008, Monday, by Senator McCain’s campaign, Dole strongly defended the senator?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s conservative credentials, noting that his voting record is opposed to abortion and supportive of gun-owner rights.

Let’s hear what Senator Goldwater would likely say to some of the nonsense that Senator McCain has spouted.

This is a party – this Republican Party is a party for free men. Not for blind followers and not for conformists.”

The most critical statement is that the Republican party is the party for free men. Goldwater was and is right. The Republican party is the party for a free people. The candidate for such a party must agree with that key principle. In fact, the candidate must havea guiding principle. When the President or candidate for President does not have guiding principles, you get things such as “read my lips, no new taxes” and then “new taxes.”

1. McCain-Feingold – Goldwater would say something like “I say further that for this great legislative body to ignore the Constitution and the fundamental concepts of our governmental system is to act in a manner which could ultimately destroy the freedom of all American citizens…”. The Constitution is the bulwark of our freedoms. When it becomes common (more so) to ignore it or reinterpret the Constitution as is convenient, the Constitution becomes meaningless and freedom will quickly die. This bill did huge damage to the concept of the freedom of speech.

2. Amnesty for Illegals: “The conservative movement is founded on the simple tenet that people have the right to live life as they please, as long as they don’t hurt anyone else in the process.” Breaking the law by definition hurts people. Immigrants are welcome, sure, but either follow the rules or change them.

3. Government expansion via more programs (McCain-Lieberman on Global Warming, McCain on the reimportation of prescription drugs), including extending Social Security to illegal immigrants: “A government that is big enough to give you all you want is big enough to take it all away.”

?¢‚Ǩ¬®4. “Gang of 14” Now, my fellow Americans, the tide has been running against freedom. Our people have followed false prophets. We must, and we shall, return to proven ways – not because they are old, but because they are true.?¢‚Ǩ¬®?¢‚Ǩ¬®5. McCain attempting to extend the Constitution to terrorists or unlawful enemy-combatants. By definition the Constitution does not apply to those attacking the country and trying to destroy it. Guantanamo Bay closure.

Goldwater might respond: “Now those who seek absolute power, even though they seek it to do what they regard as good, are simply demanding the right to enforce their own version of heaven on earth, and let me remind you they are the very ones who always create the most hellish tyranny.

?¢‚Ǩ¬®

No offense to the two Senators, but getting a letter from Bob Dole defending how “conservative” you are, is not much of an endorsement. The Nixon-Ford-Bush(41)-Dole wing of the party is the establishment-country-club wing. If McCain is truly as conservative as he says, he needs to clearly and quickly address the issues that relate to freedom and the rule of law.

Remember:Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

And one final quotation from President Reagan: “I don’t know about you,” said Reagan in 1975, “but I’m impatient with those Republicans who, after the last election, rushed into print saying we must broaden the base of our party, when what they meant was to fuzz up and blur even more the differences between ourselves and our opponents.”

Will Senator McCain Run in 2012 if he wins in 2008?

Given Senator McCain’s victory in Florida yesterday, the Senator needs to answer a few questions before Super-Tuesday. Unquestionable, someone in their 70s can be President, PresidentReagan was 69 when he took office, Senator McCain will be 72 when he would take office, if he wins. Senator Clinton and Governor Romney would be 61 in January 2009. Senator Obama would be 47.1. How will he counter the age argument when it comes up in the election? How will he counter the different generation argument? Both Senator Clinton or – even more so – Senator Obama will raise it?2. Will Senator McCain run for a second term in 2012? This is an important question because in 2012 Senator McCain will be 76. President Reagan was 77 when he left office and the media played up the age angle. No matter how good his press is now, the media will abandon him once the primaries are complete and even more so in 2012. 3. Given his age, he needs to consider a younger Vice Presidential running mate. As we advocated last week, Mitt Romney or Rudy would make good choices as would J.C. Watts.We advocated that President Bush switch Vice Presidents in 2004 in order to anoint a liberty-oriented successor, and Senator McCain needs to consider this question.Mitt Romney should also consider the running mate questions because Super-Tuesday could be Mitt’s day. However, given the history of age of former Presidents Senator McCain should be considering the questions now.

J.C. Watts as the 2008 Republican Vice Presidential Candidate?

Some advice for Mitt Romney or John McCain: approach J.C. Watts as your Vice Presidential running mate for 2008. J.C. Watts is a well known Republican and well liked in the mid-West. He has relative youth (particularly compared to McCain) and is regarding as being a bright guy.Whomever the nominee is, Rudy Giuliani would also make a good running-mate. Adopt Rudy’s tax simplification plan, get Rudy out there explaining it, and the team will be on its way.Even if you don’t pick Rudy, pick his plan.

A Clinton-McCain Ticket for 2008???

If Senator John McCain loses in Florida or suffers a large defeat on Super-Tuesday, expect that Senator Hillary Clinton will offer Senator McCain the Vice President spot. He might take time to consider it and wait until the convention to announce, but Senator McCain must realize that 2012 will be too late. Will he jump at the chance to be Vice President? Will Hillary actually offer it? The two politicians are friendly and share many similar views, so it is not out of the realm of possibilities.Is the reverse likely (McCain choosing Clinton as running-mate) if by some small chance Hillary Clinton does not win the Democratic nomination? Not at all, McCain would pick Huckabee for a running-mate (or at least some high-level position) if he helps enough. If Obama or someone else wins the Democratic nomination, McCain should have enough political sense to pick a non-white-male. Stupid or not, it is the smart political calculation.

Spying Upon Ourselves

United States Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, is drafting a plan that is supposed to protect America?¢‚Ǩ‚Ñ¢s cyberspace. The plan, according to The New Yorker (January 14, 2008) is that “the government must have the ability to read all the information crossing the Internet in the United States.” Yes, you read it right, in order to protect us, we must give up all our rights to privacy. Prisoners in jail have given up their right to privacy, not voluntarily of course, as we are asked to do. Prisoners can be moved, strip searched, cavity searched, and have their mail search at the whim of their jailers. But they are safe. Oh yes, very, very safe. As will be the people of the United States with the Federal Government as our Jailer, at least that is the plan. The prisoners who are following the rules of the jail have nothing to fear, they are told. And yet they still must submit whenever they are ordered. The United States can be both free and safe. A false choice is being created in order to increase the power of the Federal Government. Do we want to be a nation of prisoners? Do we want to be a nation that must watch every word or spend months explaining what was meant by a particular sentence. When all dissent is monitored, dissent becomes impossible.

People act is if there is a difference between civil liberties and liberty. There isn’t. We will be free in all areas or will be in none. There is no difference between those who wish to limit our economic liberty that those who wish to limit or “civil” liberty. Limiting our liberty in one area necessitates its loss in all other areas. The ramifications of one small loss of liberty multiplies across all others. We will be free or not. Half-free and half-slave is a contradiction in terms and impossible in reality. Continue reading Spying Upon Ourselves

Hillary and the Law

“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?

Individual Rights and Today's Issue