Posted by Brutus | Posted in Conservative Corner | Posted on 22-05-2009
A nice quick recap
A nice quick recap
When Patrick Henry gave his famous “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” speech in 1775, the audience sat in stunned silence. Like Sam Adams, Mr. Henry was a little too radical for many in those conventions. Mr. Henry was prescient enough to recognize what was on the horizon. Today, we sit in a similar position.
Instead of King George, we have King Obama. Just as the old king made decrees and violated the rights of liberty and property, so too, Barack Obama rules by decree and fiat. He has set himself up as the chief executive of everything in America, going so far as to rewrite contract law by word of mouth.
Whereas the British king had the House of Commons, we have Democrats. The radical leftists in Congress rubber stamp everything King Obama decrees. They labor to enslave the American People under their laws and taxation.
And in place of Tories (loyalists to the Crown on American soil), we have Republicans–more so RINOs. Men like John McCain and morons like Meghan McCain, and countless other sympathizers of the Crown in DC have no interest in preserving our freedoms. They are only interested in preserving their power and using us to secure their wealth and control.
Is slavery more palatable because it has a -R after the master’s name? God forbid!
Our government has systematically abandoned the Constitution for the past 80 years. There are no longer checks and balances between the branches. Neither are the principles of federalism recognized. The states have been reduced to agents of a national (instead of federal) government. And We, the People, have been reduced to slaves with the sole purpose of paying for the whimsical government’s initiatives and capricious plans for wealth redistribution.
Just as the Tories did not help these United States win independence from the despotic government in Britain, our modern Tories will not assist in securing the blessings of Liberty for Americans. The coming revolution will be bloodless. It will require the mobilization of minute men armed with knowledge instead of muskets. Reason dictates that ballots, not bullets, decide the revolution. The only casualties will be the careers of lifelong traitors to the Constitution like John Murtha and Lindsey Graham.
We’ve had our tea parties. We’ve redressed our grievances to a deaf ear in DC. And now the King’s men have fired upon the Patriots with weapons of mass taxation. The war for American independence has started anew.
Three Californian surgeons were playing golf together and discussing
surgeries they had performed.
One of them said, “I’m the best surgeon in California . In my
favorite case, a concert pianist lost seven fingers in an accident, I
reattached them, and 8 months later he performed a private concert
for the Queen of England.”
The second surgeon said, “That’s nothing. A young man lost an arm and
both legs in an accident, I reattached them and two years
later he won a gold medal in track and field events at the Olympics.”
The third surgeon said, “You guys are amateurs. Several years ago a woman
was high on cocaine and marijuana and she rode a horse head-on into a
train traveling 80 miles an hour. All I had left to work with was the
woman’s hair and the horse’s ass. I was able to put them together and now she’s
Speaker of the House.”
The MSM is loving the idea of a disjointed GOP and promoting the idea every chance with useful tools like Meghan McCain, Lindsey Graham and Jeb Bush. Is the party fractured? Sure. But why?
Ms. McCain says the GOP needs to be saved from people trying to move the party to the extreme right. Personally, I think she should join her mentor Arlen Specter on the other side of the aisle.
The problem with so many republicans and rinos like Meghan, Jeb, and Lindsey is that the choice they offer is one between the democratic socialists (which used to be the democrat party) and democrats (under the label republicans). Both of these groups are big government, big spending, totalitarianists…which makes them far left. The only option they give us is the letter after the despot’s name. Is slavery any more palatable simply because your master calls himself a republican? Of course not.
Meghan McCain is right in that there are those of us who want to move the party far to the right. I am one of them. On the right is the exact opposite of what the moronic rinos want. There is a small central government tempered by constitutional checks and balances. In a word, there is Liberty.
Contrary to how the democratic socialists and democrats (rinos) want to spin it, the far right is not about jackboots and gestapo tactics. At its most extreme, the right is anarchy–the complete absense of government. The US Constitution puts us very close to that, enumerating only 17 areas where the Congress can intrude on the rights of the sovereign states and sovereign citizens. While these darlings of the leftwing media lie, saying we radicals are anti-homosexual, etc. nothing could be further from the truth.
Most far rightwingers I know (myself included) don’t care where a man puts his manhood. Nor do we care if a person is black, Hispanic, Asian, male or female. The federal government should not make any legislation that considers race, ethnicity, gender, or sexual identity. The federal government is not a body designed for social engineering. The Defense of Marriage Act, federal amendments defining marriage, &tc. are unconstitutional, just as hate crimes and affirmative action laws are.
The idea of a “big tent” party doesn’t mean shifting our values to become like Barack Obama, where we promise everything to every vocal group on the left. Republicanism, by nature, is a big tent because limiting the authority of the federal government to the enumerated powers means every person–straight, gay, black, white, male, female–will be left alone to choose the path that seems right to himself or herself.
It’s been a long day and I’m in an ornery mood, so I’m going to post a couple of quick posts.
North Carolina just banned smoking in the state in all restaurants, bars, and public places. That’s the state’s prerogative, I suppose, but there’s something very wrong with the idea.
One must ask–why is it okay to go to a bar, get liquored up, hop in the car with a stranger, and head to his or her house where you’ll catch a (hopefully treatable, non-fatal) STD and pass that along to other unsuspecting people, but not okay to smoke in a bar? Is second-hand smoking that much worse than second-hand drinking (which would be the victim of a drunk driver)? The EPA–which is NOT a credible source on much of anything–claims about 3,400 people each year die from lung cancer due to second-hand smoke. According to the CDC, there were over 13,500 alcohol-related traffic fatalities in 2007.
So, with second-hand drinking causing about four times as many deaths each year, why is drinking still legal?
Democrats and anti-smoking zealots say they must save everyone from the dangers of smokers. Why? If I carry my butt to a bar or restaurant where smoking is permitted, I know I will suck in second-hand smoke. I also know I’ll leave smelling like a chimney. I purposely put myself in that position. In some sense, I am looking for that. Otherwise, I would stay away from smoking establishments. However, when I get on the road, I am trusting everyone else will be as sober as I am. I do not set out saying, “Hmm, I think I’ll go pull in front of a drunk driver.”
Now that I’ve finished those parts, let me get to the solution.
Since our government is founded upon the principles of “no taxation without representation,” communities and states that pass smoking bans in all public places should not be allowed to lay any taxes upon cigarettes other than the general sales tax or they should do like dry counties. Dry counties do not sell alcohol, and therefore do not collect any taxes on the people they refuse to represent. The government cannot have it both ways. It cannot say, “I will take away everyone’s right to choose (don’t get me started on abortion deaths every year), and I will infringe upon the rights of property by denying bar owners the right to decide what to do with their property, but I will also steal all the money I can get from you filthy, smelly, pieces of nicotine-stained doo-doo in the process.”
I admit it. I am a radical.
Yesterday, as I was looking over logs for this site, I noticed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has already been here multiple times this month. It made me wonder why. Did they not like my piece about DHS’s recent proclamation that basically everyone who opposes Obama and socialism is an extremist?
I admit it. I am an extremist. No, I’m not about to go blow up any federal buildings or abortion clinics. I’m not going to shoot a politician or rob a bank. My radical extremism remains within the bounds of decency and law. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said about the federal government.
Unlike the government, which should be our example, I do not extort money from states. Nor do I rob people at gunpoint with the threat of locking them away forever if they do not pay me. And unlike the government, I do not take bribes or sell my vote to the highest bidder. Nor do I have any companies like PMA, by which I can launder money through a relative. I do not steal from law-abiding citizens so I can give money to the FDIC and secure multi-million dollar contracts for my spouse. And I do not believe Americans can be locked away without due process and habeas corpus–especially not sixteen-year-old kids. And unlike the government, I do not believe thoughts and unpopular opinions are crimes. The person who kills me should get the same sentence as a Klansman who kills a homosexual or African-American. In that respect, too, I depart from the government. Yes, I am radical enough to believe that all people–straight, gay, black, white, male, and female–are created equal and are worthy of the same exact protections under the law. Nothing more. Nothing less.
I am a radical because I believe, next to the Bible, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are the most important documents ever written. I have faith in them as strong as my faith in the redemptive powers of Christ’s blood. I am an extremist because I believe we should go to the extreme end of this country’s founding and abide by the laws and principles established in the Constitution. That is, I believe the States are sovereign and that we have a Federal government instead of a national one. More than that, I object to the government’s practice of using police-state tactics and groups like the FBI and DHS to spy on Americans who have done nothing wrong.
And I am a radical extremist because I do not believe there is a middle ground. Things are right or wrong. Wet or dry. As the Bible says, “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” A little socialism here and a little unconstitutional law there destroys the entire Constitution and reduces us to servants and subjects of the government. As most extremists know, it was supposed to be the other way around. Thomas Jefferson once said, “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.”
According to FoxNews
MINNEAPOLIS — A Minnesota judge is expected to decide whether a family can refuse chemotherapy for a 13-year-boy’s cancer and treat him with natural medicine, even though doctors say it’s effectively a death sentence.
With chemotherapy, Daniel Hauser has a 90 percent chance of surviving his Hodgkin’s lymphoma, according to his cancer doctor. And without it?
“It is almost certain that he will die,” said Dr. Bruce Bostrom, a pediatric oncologist at Children’s Hospital and Clinics of Minnesota. Bostrom, who diagnosed the disease, is an ally of the legal effort in southwestern Minnesota’s Brown County to make Hauser submit to chemotherapy even though he and his parents believe it’s potentially more harmful than the cancer itself.
I think many parents would say the judge should force the parents into giving chemo to the kid. I disagree. This suit is bigger than the child. This is a case that asks, “Do children belong to the government or are parents responsible for them?” If the government can step in and overrule a parent’s decision on treatment, then the government is the parent and the “parents” are simply babysitters or surrogates for the government.
It’s amazing that doctors can slice and dice a baby while he or she is in the womb and that’s okay. Some doctors can even scramble the brains of a viable baby. But, try to treat a life threatening disease without a doctor and it’s a crime. There’s something very hypocritical there. More than that, many states allow minors to have abortions without parental consent or knowledge. If a child is old enough to decide it wants to kill another human, isn’t that child also old enough to decide what medicines go into his or her body?
Another question raised by this case is, “Who has more power, the government or a person’s religion?” If the government steps in, it makes a decision against religion in favor of another religion where doctors proclaim themselves gods and nurses serve as their priests and priestesses.
Ultimately, the cynic in me says this boils down to money. The doctor and hospital stand to make more money if they can force the child into a treatment that will cost about $1,000,000.
In order to pay for his socialist agenda, Barack Obama needs to raise taxes. Tim “the Tax Evader” Geithner has come up with some unique taxes, including the following:
No Child’s Behind Left Untaxed Tax
Since babies have a tendency to poot, toot, and burp, all tax deductions for these carbon dioxide factories will go down the crapper. An unnamed source cites Al Gore as asking, “Why should babies not be punished for destroying the earth?”
At first blush, this may appear to tax vegetables, but it will actually be a tax on couples who produce a baby. Besides using more oxygen and expelling more CO2 during copulation, parents are building pollution factories. Therefore, they must pay for their crimes against humanity and polar bears.
All Mexican cuisine will have a progressive tax with beans floating the most obnoxious burden to the consumer. There will, however, be a tax deduction for people who can prove they took Beano. This deduction will not go into effect until after Al Gore and the SEIU gain an Obama-mandated majority share in the Beano manufacturer. If you ask me, the whole think stinks.
Democrats in Congress are trying to add taxes to cigars used in the capacity of an aide. One top democrat is reported as saying, “Cigars like these can still cause esophageal and labial cancer.” Another democrat supporting the measure raised the question, “How do we seize the evidence before it falls down some dark hole or goes up in smoke?” After much debate, Congress is considering a measure that will lower unemployment and guarantee a proper tax by hiring millions of robust monitors called “Churchills” to stand guard in the bedroom of every home.
Singular Emissions Tax
This may be called the “Wacks Tax.” Because people often breathe heavy during the throes of passion–even if the person is alone–Obama plans to put an engorged tax on all pornography and stimulating images. Not only will adult movies and magazines be subjected to this tax, but it will also be applied to the Victoria’s Secret catalogue, National Geographic, and most graphic novels.
After the ACLU filed its FOIA request for photos of torture, the following photo was leaked to the media. It’s no wonder they don’t want these getting out.
Twitter links powered by Tweet This v1.8.1, a WordPress plugin for Twitter.