Keep saying that statement to yourselves. Because, apparently Cliven Bundy is a racist jackass.
Funny how the media is willing to make headlines out of this revelation. But the sight of government agents slaughtering his cattle to make room for a turtle that the government kills at its convenience was treated as a sideshow.
Priorities.
Also funny how the media is cool with a President who pals around with terrorist Bill Ayers. Or has a pastor whose sermons include such gems as "God Damn America" and the U.S. government using the AIDS epidemic as genocide against blacks.
This man got elected president. And his own press secretary admits John Stewart was his hardest interview.
So condemn Bundy, as he should be.
But don't pretend it tars pro freedom individuals until you are willing to hold the President responsible for the racist views of his supporters/
Thursday, April 24, 2014
Wednesday, April 16, 2014
A Little Bit of Rebellion
Kevin Williamson has a pretty positive take on the people staring down the Federal government in the Bundy Ranch dispute. His money line: "But not all dissidents are content to submit to what we, in the Age of Obama, still insist on quaintly calling “the rule of law.” Bundy's critics would point out that he failed to follow the rule of law.
The more fundamentally frightening thing is that the rule of law is quaint. President Obama has unilaterally abrogated his own signature law dozens of times when his policies became politically inexpedient. In order to woo Hispanics, he stops deportations and enacts his own DREAM Act by fiat. It would be like Judge Dredd ("He is the law) except for the fact Judge Dredd wouldn't have tried to appoint Mumia's lawyer to the Justice Department.
And when the Executive ignores the law, what happens? A supine Congress does nothing, thinking of the day their guy will get his turn at being emperor. The Supreme Court says citizens have no standing to challenge such political questions; unless, of course, the political question at hand gives the Court a chance to slap down quarrelsome traditional Christians.
The President brags of having a phone and pen in ignoring the people. He should not be surprised when we brag about our guns.
The more fundamentally frightening thing is that the rule of law is quaint. President Obama has unilaterally abrogated his own signature law dozens of times when his policies became politically inexpedient. In order to woo Hispanics, he stops deportations and enacts his own DREAM Act by fiat. It would be like Judge Dredd ("He is the law) except for the fact Judge Dredd wouldn't have tried to appoint Mumia's lawyer to the Justice Department.
And when the Executive ignores the law, what happens? A supine Congress does nothing, thinking of the day their guy will get his turn at being emperor. The Supreme Court says citizens have no standing to challenge such political questions; unless, of course, the political question at hand gives the Court a chance to slap down quarrelsome traditional Christians.
The President brags of having a phone and pen in ignoring the people. He should not be surprised when we brag about our guns.
Wednesday, April 9, 2014
Captain America and conservatism - SPOILER ALERT -
Armond White at National Review Online condemns the Captain America: Winter Soldier as a piece of leftist propaganda.
He is wrong. Or at least I hope he is.
If not, then conservatism means supporting an unaccountable government that declares itself to have the power to target anyone who might be a threat and eliminate them without even a by your leave. This would, as the movie indicates, include Americans on American soil.
The basic plot of the movie is that SHIELD, a security agency dedicated to protecting the world from superhuman and extraterrestrial threats, is preparing to launch a trio of massive hover ships with the capability of killing anyone on earth. The idea is to kill threats before they happen.
Hmmm. Who does this sound like? Perhaps a certain President who has claimed this power for himself, as well as getting to ignore pesky things like Congress when it's convenient.
He has a pen. And a phone. And, if Armond White had his way, he would also have three unassailable airships which could target any critic, foreign or domestic.
This is not the notion of the imperial president. It is a god king. Perhaps White sees 300: Rise of an Empire as Heyek on celluloid?
According to White more proof of the film's subversive leanings is that "[a]s Rogers [Captain America] takes his daily superhuman run around the basin of Washington, D.C., he introduces himself to another morning runner (and us) with the repeated look-out phrase 'On your left . . .'"
Yes. That is definitive.
The movie also sins in that Nick Fury and the heroes upload SHIELD's secrets to the internet.
Again, conservatism means that when a government agency acts illegally, and is also thoroughly infiltrated by fascist's bent on world domination, we keep it quiet.
What a monster the IRS Inspector General must have been to reveal targeting of conservatives!
The security state caucus of the conservative movement is a terrifying thing. Rather than a small, accountable government, they want Leviathan on steroids.
It is not conservatism.
He is wrong. Or at least I hope he is.
If not, then conservatism means supporting an unaccountable government that declares itself to have the power to target anyone who might be a threat and eliminate them without even a by your leave. This would, as the movie indicates, include Americans on American soil.
The basic plot of the movie is that SHIELD, a security agency dedicated to protecting the world from superhuman and extraterrestrial threats, is preparing to launch a trio of massive hover ships with the capability of killing anyone on earth. The idea is to kill threats before they happen.
Hmmm. Who does this sound like? Perhaps a certain President who has claimed this power for himself, as well as getting to ignore pesky things like Congress when it's convenient.
He has a pen. And a phone. And, if Armond White had his way, he would also have three unassailable airships which could target any critic, foreign or domestic.
This is not the notion of the imperial president. It is a god king. Perhaps White sees 300: Rise of an Empire as Heyek on celluloid?
According to White more proof of the film's subversive leanings is that "[a]s Rogers [Captain America] takes his daily superhuman run around the basin of Washington, D.C., he introduces himself to another morning runner (and us) with the repeated look-out phrase 'On your left . . .'"
Yes. That is definitive.
The movie also sins in that Nick Fury and the heroes upload SHIELD's secrets to the internet.
Again, conservatism means that when a government agency acts illegally, and is also thoroughly infiltrated by fascist's bent on world domination, we keep it quiet.
What a monster the IRS Inspector General must have been to reveal targeting of conservatives!
The security state caucus of the conservative movement is a terrifying thing. Rather than a small, accountable government, they want Leviathan on steroids.
It is not conservatism.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Fort Hood shooting
My prayers go out to the victims at Fort Hood and their families tonight.
Foaming mouth brigade on both sides, shut your damn mouths and let people grieve tonight.
Foaming mouth brigade on both sides, shut your damn mouths and let people grieve tonight.
Free speech upheld
The First Amendment states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
Unfortunately, a significant portion of our political class, from both sides of the aisle, thing "shall make no law" means that the right to petition the government means doing so within limits the government - conveniently - sets.
The Supreme Court says differently. Today aggregate spending limits got struck down, just as the Court expanded freedom in Citizens United.
I can get liberals freaking out about this. They think choice only counts when it comes to killing babies or other "rights" found using a magic decoder ring to interpret the Constitution. When it comes to the actual text of the document - say gun rights or political speech - then all of a sudden, the magic decoder ring reads text away.
But then again, John McCain is also sad that the Court read the First Amendment to read what the First Amendment says, rather than what he wants it so say. Still, this shouldn't be surprising. He also thinks the Constitution should tell the damn kids to stay off the lawn.
It's not surprising that those in political power want theirs and don't want others to make a statement. It's not surprising that those in political power abdicate their Constitutional responsibility and ptotect our rights. George W. Bush jumped the shark for me when he signed McCain-Feingold while acknowledging it was unconstitutional.
What was refreshing was a decision restoring our liberty. While it saddens me that our Republic has degenerated to the point that we must be thankful for the crumbs of freedom we get from the Court, I'll take what we can get for now.
Unfortunately, a significant portion of our political class, from both sides of the aisle, thing "shall make no law" means that the right to petition the government means doing so within limits the government - conveniently - sets.
The Supreme Court says differently. Today aggregate spending limits got struck down, just as the Court expanded freedom in Citizens United.
I can get liberals freaking out about this. They think choice only counts when it comes to killing babies or other "rights" found using a magic decoder ring to interpret the Constitution. When it comes to the actual text of the document - say gun rights or political speech - then all of a sudden, the magic decoder ring reads text away.
But then again, John McCain is also sad that the Court read the First Amendment to read what the First Amendment says, rather than what he wants it so say. Still, this shouldn't be surprising. He also thinks the Constitution should tell the damn kids to stay off the lawn.
It's not surprising that those in political power want theirs and don't want others to make a statement. It's not surprising that those in political power abdicate their Constitutional responsibility and ptotect our rights. George W. Bush jumped the shark for me when he signed McCain-Feingold while acknowledging it was unconstitutional.
What was refreshing was a decision restoring our liberty. While it saddens me that our Republic has degenerated to the point that we must be thankful for the crumbs of freedom we get from the Court, I'll take what we can get for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)