Saturday, July 4, 2009
Friday, July 3, 2009
Bills currently (as of the last full week of June) are making their way through the House and Senate that would create federal protection under hate crime statutes for pedophiles. It was originally intended to bring homosexuals under the 1994 act protecting different races and religions, but liberal congressmen and women have included language that protects 547 different kinds of sexual behaviors including incest and pedophilia.
That means that if Mr. Smith finds out that his son was molested by a sexual predator and he hits him with a Louisville Slugger, he will be subject to assault and battery under his state laws and federal hate crimes prosecution as well. He might spend more time in prison than the sex offender.
Republican attempts to specifically exempt incest, pedophilia, and other acts not involving two consenting adults were rebuffed by Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) and other House Democrats. Even specific child protection language was stricken from the proposed bill.
Luckily the bill could run into a filibuster conducted by Senate Republicans and conservative Democrats. As it is, the law is flawed.
Hate crimes legislation, quite honestly, is a violation of the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause. We need to stop looking into the psychology of the criminal act so much and simply punish all violent crimes to a strong extent. The identity of the victim should not be written into a statute as some kind of required factor in sentencing or prosecution. Federal hate crimes prosecutions after the fact of a state prosecution of a violent crime is an end run around the "double jeopardy" clause in the Constitution.
It is interesting that liberal Democrats have seen fit to put simple, regular homosexuality on the same legal level as pedophilia, incest, or some of the other listed behaviors such as zoophilia, and stuff you wouldn't really want to consider. I imagine that a lot of homosexuals would be deeply offended by this stunt of adding incest and pedophilia to their protection bill.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Historically, the West Virginia Republican Party has succeeded best when it has effectively sold its message. A lot of factors go into that sale, including the willingness of the opposition to live up to the image that we apply to them. Republicans in 1888 controlled nothing in West Virginia. By 1896 they wrested control of the state. Why? Because they sold their message of industrial based prosperity, asserting that the state could only do more to better people's lives if it had an economy that could pay for things such as roads and schools. The Democrats, in turn, offered no pragmatic vision.
Just my opinion here, no one else's, but I suggest that we tailor our message in this coming year to fit our national mission statement: the Declaration of Independence.
Citing this document makes it very clear that we as Republicans are drawing parallels to the past, when a government pushed its authority beyond acceptable limits.
We base our message on the three basic jobs of government as cited by Jefferson and his inspiration, George Mason. Jefferson and Mason both talked about the government's role in protecting innocent life and promoting liberty, but Mason finished the phrase with "pursuit of property." These three roles of government reflected a belief in the natural rights of each individual to live their life and make choices.
I would center the message around those three roles.
Life: The Republican Party backs the right of each innocent individual to live their lives. Each human being has the right to be born into this world and make choices about their lives. They also have the responsibility to live with the consequences of those choices without a nanny state bailout.
Liberty: The Republican Party believes that a democracy can rest upon nothing less than the belief that individuals have the capacity to make choices that reflect their own personal taste and interest. The state has no right to force its citizens to conform to its idea of education, health or welfare.
The Republican Party backs a strong interpretation of the Bill of Rights for each United States citizen. The Second Amendment does not refer to hunting. It gives each citizen the right and even the obligation to defend his property, his life, and his country against all enemies.
Every citizen should have the freedom to speak his mind without fear.
Every citizen should enjoy a reasonable right to enjoy his property without fear of seizure or overregulation.
Taxation for revenue is acceptable. Taxation for social engineering is theft and a transgression on the natural right to pursue and retain property.
Governments should never "take an inventory" of the lives of individual citizens.
Information is power so we call upon the United States Census to have a constitutional limit upon what information a person is required to give. The more the government knows, the less freedom we have.
Pursuit of Happiness/Property: The American economic system is built upon the premise that every participant can make sound economic decisions. When each person pursues their opportunities, some succeed, some fail, but we all end up prosperous. The current economic problems were started in large part by government intervention into the financial sector. We must remember that twenty five years of economic prosperity came after some Democratic congressmen and Ronald Reagan pushed to deregulate and remove the weight of burdensome and unnecessary rules from many businesses.
The Republican Party is devoted to removing all reasonable obstacles in the path of people pursuing and keeping their property. Property ownership in the hands of the people creates a valuable check on the power of government.
This is not an exhaustive list and it may need to be trimmed down to essential, but more general points. Personally I believe we should stick to issues that revolve around personal and economic freedom along with limited government. We must sell ourselves as having the right plan and vision for the economy and society. West Virginia needs less government, especially at the federal level.
Only Republicans have the right ideas going into the next election. With work, we'll get our country back.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
If it seems like congressional liberals are in a rush these days, you're right. They want to shove the national energy tax, health care socialization, and everything else down the throats of America this year. Why? It may be their last chance.
Election years produce little of controversy or value in Congress. This is the "please forget what I did last year and re-elect me" time. Roll up the pork barrel and spread it thick. Try to make people forget just how badly Congress has done on the whole since 2006 when the Democrats came to power along with Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. So try to shove all the crap in before 2009 ends and hope people forget before November of next year.
Congress has some of the lowest approval ratings in the history of polls right now. Senator Arlen Spectre (formerly R, now D, PA) has emerged as the face of Democratic fear. He tried to seize the tide of history by switching to the Democratic Party when they seemed to be in the ascendancy. Now, according to a poll conducted by Franklin and Marshall College and published by the Philadelphia Daily News, only 28% of Pennsylvanians believe he ought to be re-elected. This, remember, is a Democratic state. Only a short time ago, he posted a still anemic 40% re-electability number.
Democrats in Pennsylvania have seen their share of hard times. Like West Virginia, coal provides a substantial part of their total number of jobs and helps their state balance the budget. Proposals coming from Washington will only raise their electric bills and send them out of work, just as in West Virginia.
What will happen to Spectre? Probably his new "friends" will find some up and coming young guy to support in the primary who might have more charisma and less baggage to a fight with Pat Toomey. Just like Robert Byrd, the liberals will use him and toss him aside when they are done milking his name.
The party of the working man trying to put people out of work and raise their bills. The party of compassion tossing aside the elderly like garbage. This does not reflect the ideals of most Democrats, at least in our area. But the actions of liberal leadership have put their party at odds with the needs of their faithful.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
I hope that by now the media love affair with an unrepentant pedophile is over so it can get back to its primary business of trashing Republicans (Governor Sanford is the Devil, Michael Jackson is an angel.) Lost in all the foolishness has been the deaths of some other folks.
Farrah Fawcett: Here's a person that did very little harm to anyone, except maybe the militant feminist movement.
Ed McMahon: A much more interesting (in a positive way) cultural icon than Jackson. His partnership with Johnny Carson defined America's sense of humor for two generations.
And then there is Billy Mays. Billy Mays? Where does he fit in? Billy Mays upon his death was participating in a television show that illustrated much of what he has been doing for many years now. Mays and others located promising inventions, usually by ordinary people, evaluated them, and sold them to the public. Mighty Putty, Oxy Clean, and many other gadgets, doo dads, and supplies were hawked by this guy over the years.
At its core, what Billy Mays did was to give an assist to people trying to live the American dream, but doing it in their own way. These inventors work for years, invest uncounted amounts of time and money, and take major risks to create a usable product. The best of the bunch were taken by Mays and sold to the American public. The show refreshingly had no silly sentimental crap about making people's lives better through a new kind of GPS holder, it just encouraged people to do what they could to make everyone the most money possible while delivering a quality product.
When it boils down to it, America has always been about that. Unfortunately this week, the United States is not known for Mays, a hard working apostle of capitalism, but for a freakish, gyrating, semi man with a fascination for little boys and a penchant for ignoring contracts with major corporations.
Monday, June 29, 2009
Imagine a football, basketball, hockey, soccer, or even baseball game played for high stakes without a referee. The idea of calling your own foul would be abused and ignored until finally fights would break out.
That is the world without the presence of the United States.
Sometimes we call major and minor penalties, sometimes we throw people into the box temporarily, sometimes we toss them out of the game entirely. We get cursed and are often accused of being blind, but the game cannot continue without us.
Until January of this year the players in the great game of world affairs sullenly behaved themselves. The remaining two members of the "Axis of Evil" restrained their ambitions, waiting out the adversary they feared the most, President George W. Bush. They understood as did Bush that war is never your last resort, that the Republican president always reserved the right to act forcefully to defend his country.
Then came His Apologizency, begging the world's forgiveness for the United States "interfering." Obama never understood that American interference kept the different regional pots from boiling over. North Korea and Iran hated President Bush, but they respected him. Now with Iran and North Korea both pushing the envelope, it becomes an invitation for others in the region to act. Israel at some point will have to attack Iran. Is this the best scenario? No. But unless a revolution removes the nuclear minded mullahs, it will happen. Do we really want Japan to feel insecure enough to lash out on their own at North Korea, possibly antagonizing China? How many years until Japan reaches that point of fear, mindful that the US under Obama will not even act to protect Hawaii?
American "interference" actually created the promising situation in Iran. The ever vigilant American press exposed a Bush era covert operation to funnel $400 million into Iran to destabilize the regime. It is only now bearing fruit. Hopefully it removes a nuclear upstart from the equation. Of course that was a product of Bush's "arrogance."
I (and Bill Maher, surprisingly) would like to see a little less talk and a lot more action from Obama when it comes to national security. And I mean against North Korea, not the National Rifle Association.