Liberty Postings

I am not sure how conservatives who on one day advocate small government and personal liberty can the next day support this terrifying new law in Arizona.  A police officer can now stop someone and ask to see his immigration papers simply because he looks like he isn’t in this country legally?  Wow.  That’s not subjective at all, now is it?

Officer Smith walks by two men speaking Spanish on the street and decides, “Well, they must have come across this border without permission.  I’m going to have a little talk with these fellows!”

What if a member of law enforcement is waiting in line at the post office and happens to notice the woman in front of him is sending a package to Venezuela.  Wait a second!  What business does a legitimate resident of America have sending anything to a foreign nation?  Let’s see some papers!!

Come to think of it, I’ve been teaching my young daughter some of the Russian I remember from my seven semesters of the language in college.  I better be careful not to speak too loudly if I’m walking down the streets of Tucson!  Wait … nevermind.  Let’s be honest.  Russian really isn’t a language that concerns the supporters of this legislation.

People who applaud the ridiculous law having been making statements such as, “I have to show ID every time I want to get on a plane.  I get in trouble if I’m pulled over for speeding and I don’t have my driver’s license on me.  We just want the illegals to be held to the same standard!”

Wrong.  This law has nothing to do with making sure that people are licensed to operate a vehicle or that you are who you say you are when you board a confined metal tube and travel several miles into the air.

Do you always make sure you always have your driver’s license on you when you take the dog for a walk in the evening?  You are the passenger in a car that is making a quick trip to the grocery store.  Do you make sure all of your papers are in order first?  If you have brown skin and you live in Arizona, you better start.  You know, just in case you do something that illegals would do.

I do not like illegal immigration.  I want to punish businesses that hire workers without first confirming their immigration status.  I believe that if someone is arrested for criminal activity and THEN it is determined that he is in the country illegally, he should be removed from the United States.  I am not in favor of a wall for environmental reasons and, more importantly for me, because I think it flies in the face of our founding principles.  However, when it comes to securing our border physically, I am all for getting as many border patrol agents and drones out there as possible!  But, to make assumptions about a person’s right to be in our country based on the way he looks or acts is un-American and freedom-loving people from coast to coast should be outraged with what Arizona has done.

I think that John Edwards is one of the most disgusting public figures making headlines today, and he certainly has a lot of competition for that title!  I actually have a reaction of physical illness each time that I see a photo of him.  The question is, which of his decisions is the most “scumbag-iest” of them all?

Could it be the choice he made to cheat on his terminally ill wife?  Sure, that definitely qualifies, but it’s not that original.  Plenty of politicians have displayed a lack of loyalty to their sick or disabled spouses.  Yawn.

How about the allegation that he asked his aide to claim paternity of the child he sired while having an affair?  This has potential to win the prize, as it has the “two-for-one” quality.  Not only does he deny his own child, but he attempts to paint his mistress as a plaything who got passed around the campaign staff.  Now we’re talking.

While those first two scumbag moves are definitely quality contenders, Edwards’ actions this week make the others pale in comparison.

First, he admits to being the doting daddy to the almost two-year-old girl, who he hopes will someday understand his decision to publicly deny his association with her until it became necessary to admit that his roaming sperm contributed to her existence.

Then, as quickly as possible, he takes off to the devastated country of Haiti “to help people.”  Pay no attention to the admission of fatherhood I made just a few hours ago.  Look at me unloading water while maintaining a perfectly coiffed hairdo!

Disgusting.  Edwards is now using a tragedy that claimed thousands of lives to distract us from his admission of fathering a child during his affair (oh, and possibly stealing dirty diapers as part of a crazy “switch the DNA” scheme).

“Hi, everyone.  Just down here in Haiti trying to help some of these yucky poor people!  No ulterior motive here!  Did you get a picture?  Did you take it from my good side?”

I am just floored that he is taking advantage of earthquake victims in a pathetic attempt to improve his image.  He is an egomaniac whose world seems to revolve around what is best for him at that particular moment.

Scumbag.

Glenn Beck said something on his radio station that made me giggle a bit this morning.  He was discussing why Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her underlings are resistant to having the C-Span cameras cover the health care debate.  Beck argues that the liberals learned their lesson after President Wilson’s failed attempt to take the League of Nations to the American people and they won’t make the same mistake again.  Really, Mr. Beck?  I wouldn’t give our Congressmen the credit to create such historical parallels.  Do you think the following conversation actually happened?

Rep. Steny Hoyer:  You know, Nancy, I think we should let the general public watch us debate this health care stuff.  After all, we are supposed to be advocates of the “transparent” administration that President Obama promised as a candidate.

Speaker Pelosi:  First of all, Steny, don’t call me Nancy.  I have earned the title of “Speaker,” and I expect to be addressed properly.  Second, don’t you remember what happened to President Woodrow Wilson more than 80 years ago when he traveled the country to share his plans for the League of Nations?  The man had a stroke, Steny!  He was a vegetable for the rest of his term!

Rep. Hoyer:  I didn’t think about that, Nancy … uh, I mean Mrs. Speaker, Your Highness.  I don’t want to have a stroke!  That would be bad!  Let’s forget about those silly cameras.  Our constituents are too busy watching football playoffs anyway.

Honestly, I don’t think the “Wilson had a stroke” conversation ever happened.  Instead, we are simply watching another politician who never had any intention of keeping his word.  Candidate Barack Obama told people what they wanted to hear, and they bought it.  And, I believe he laughed all the way to the Oval Office.

The fact that President Obama and the Democratic Congress want to create such transformational legislation as health care “reform” from behind closed doors is very telling.  If your plans are so wonderful for the American people, shouldn’t you want as many of us to hear about them as possible?

Here is the video going around that shares the eight times during which candidate Barack Obama pledged to have the health care debate in public and on camera:

I know that President Obama is just doing what nearly every other politician does when he wants to be elected … he is lying.  However, let’s stop making him out to be this great wonder who is going to change the political landscape.  He is simply one more guy who thinks he knows best and who will use the voters as his pawns in reaching his goals and grabbing as much power as possible.

What are two of the most popular phrases you will see on the website or television commercial of any conversative candidate?  Time’s up!  The answer is “limited government” and “family values.”  These two pieces of political red meat are necessary ingredients for any respectable Tea Party or speech at the next Republican National Convention.  However, can these two ideas actually exist in the same platform? 

Proponents of “family values” support actions that would increase the size of government, such as defining marriage, censoring explicit material, developing abstinence-only education, and being the watchdog for “morality and decency” (now there’s a vague term for you).  So-called Value Voters want the government to serve as an instrument for promoting a more “Christian” nation.  They only want the government to be limited when that approach fits their lifestyle (aka — taxes or “making law from the bench”).  However, if the elected officials in power happen to agree with their theology, then let’s start writing some bills!!

Yes, we certainly need some government.  Having all of us on the same currency and making sure a highway doesn’t abruptly end at the Tennessee/Kentucky border is pretty handy.  I’m also a fan of laws that frown on murder or any kind of injury to another person (be it physical or financial).  However, I find it a bit hypocritical when the same people  scream, “Keep the government away from my money!” or the famous Reagan quote that ”government is the problem,” and then use the next breath to encourage legislation that discriminates or imposes a particular ideology. 

Family Values + Limited Government = Serious Inconsistencies

I have never been what would be considered a social conservative.  I believe in a consistent philosophy of limited government, whereas many social conservatives want to impose government for their own moral agenda.  Telling the government to back off when it comes to our financial freedom but then using this same government to restrict personal freedom doesn’t cut it with me.  Besides, all too often, the elected officials who proudly carry the banner of Social Conservatives turn out to be hypocrites (up for a weekend tryst in Argentina, anyone?)

Our latest example of a “do as I vote, not as I do” conservative comes from California.  Republican Assemblyman Mike Duvall was caught on a hot mike bragging about his sexual exploits.  As it turns out, he enjoys inflicting corporal punishment on much younger women as foreplay.  “I like spanking her.”  Come on!  What emotionally developed 54-year-old man makes this kind of statement to a colleague in public?  Did he utter a little Beavis and Butthead laugh as a follow-up?  I have no doubt that he argued forcefully against the efforts by CA Assemblywoman Sally Lieber two years ago to ban spanking in their state. It would have ruined his mojo.

Duvall received a 100% rating from the Capitol Resource Institute, a conservative advocacy group that tracks the pro-family votes of elected officials.  Nice.

Here’s a suggestion to all of the politicians out there.  Get off your moral high horse and stop using your office to pass judgment on others.  It lessens … although never eliminates … your opportunity to end up looking like a complete fool.