Pol·i·tics: the art or science of government or governing, especially the governing of a political entity, such as a nation, and the administration and control of its internal and external affairs. Posts in this category pertain to local and national politics.

Conservatism, Rule of Law, and Life

Filed in Politics, Science, Social IssuesTags: Judiciary, Sanctity of Life

Instapundit argues the point that Conservatism holds the process and rule of law above all else:

But I do think that process, and the Constitution, matter. Trampling the Constitution in an earnest desire to do good in high-profile cases has been a hallmark of a certain sort of liberalism, and it's the sort of thing that I thought conservatives eschewed. If I were in charge of making the decision, I might well put the tube back and turn Terri Schiavo over to her family. But I'm not, and the Florida courts are, and they seem to have done a conscientious job. Maybe they came to the right decision, and maybe they didn't. But respecting their role in the system, and not rushing to overturn all the rules because we don't like the outcome, seems to me to be part of being a member of civilized society rather than a mob. As I say, I thought conservatives knew this.

But I respectfully disagree. Equally important to Conservatism - especially the Christian Conservatism I espouse - is the sanctity of life. The Right To Life is among the God-endowed rights given to all men, and was considered so important by our Founding Fathers as to be enumerated in the Declaration of Independence (which was, coincidentally, a formal declaration to overthrow the rule of law that had become tyrranical and one that denied those certain, inalienable rights). Even murderers convicted and sentenced to die get decades of appeals before their death is carried out. Terry Schiavo - an innocent woman guilty only of lacking the ability to speak for and defend herself - gets only as long as it takes her to starve (a cruel and unusual punishment by any standards) before her de facto death sentence is carried out.

When the legal process returns such a blatantly incorrect result - especially in matters of life and death - it is fully consistent with Conservatism to work to overturn that result.

The Coming War on Blogs

Filed in PoliticsTags: Blogging, Media Bias

Apparently the blogosphere isn't mainstream enough for John Kerry:

The Democratic Party will likely assist the MSM in their attack on blogs, not because most blogs are pro-Republican but because blogs are not as consistently liberal as the MSM. John Kerry, for example, is calling for the government to do something to protect the MSM. As he said in a recent speech:

The mainstream media, over the course of the last year, did a pretty good job of discerning. But there's a subculture and a sub-media that talks and keeps things going for entertainment purposes rather than for the flow of information. And that has a profound impact and undermines what we call the mainstream media of the country. And so the decision-making ability of the American electorate has been profoundly impacted as a consequence of that. The question is, what are we going to do about it?

The Republicans will, I hope, realize that on average their interests are served by protecting blogs. But the Democrats and the MSM will still use the courts and regulatory agencies to attack bloggers, and if the Democrats ever retake the Presidency and Congress expect 'media reform' to become a top priority.
The truly funny thing is, Monsigneur Kerry still doesn't understand why he lost the largest-participated Presidential election in US history. It has nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction or whether or not Saddam was connected to 9/11. It has everything to do with his fundamental lack of connection with and understanding of real (read: red state) America and the lack of trust real America has in Kerry. Kerry's use of exit poll statistics to explain his defeat demonstrates both his fundamental short-comings as well as the inherent bias of the mainstream media:

There has been," he said, "a profound and negative change in the relationship of America's media with the American people. . . . If 77 percent of the people who voted for George Bush on Election Day believed weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq--as they did--and 77 percent of the people who voted for him believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11--as they did--then something has happened in the way in which we are talking to each other and who is arbitrating the truth in American politics. . . . When fear is dominating the discussion and when there are false choices presented and there is no arbitrator, we have a problem.

First, the question of whether or not WMD were found in Iraq has been answered unequivocally, "yes". Perhaps not in the number and scope as some expected, but WMD (primarily, chemical weapons) were found nonetheless. Just because JF'nK's Mainstream Meida misled, buried the truth, and outright lied doesn't mean that we have to believe them. Herein lies the true need for independent voices and the fundamental importance of the First Amendment. "Truth" should be arbitrated by one source, and one source alone: the individual; not John Kerry, not the MSM, not one's teachers/professors/parents/friends. When we allow others to "arbitrate" the presentation of information and to determine the veracity of that information, then we have taken the first step to tyranny. Fortunately, the Blogosphere has become the 21st-century version of that independent voice and outlet of information.

Second, the question of whether or not Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11 is a perfect example of misleading by the MSM. The REAL question - whether or not Saddam Hussein had ties to al Qaeda - has been proven, again, unequivocally true. THIS question is the only one that matters with respect to the Bush Doctrine. Hussein was himself a terrorist, and aided and harbored international terrorists. To us in the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, that truth is all that matters. Whether or not Saddam had ties to the particular al Qaeda cell that carried out the 9/11 atrocity is irrelevant. (For those just catching up with the times: we're not still after that particular cell; they're all DEAD.) So, the reports that Saddam had no connection to the 9/11 cell are irrelevant. However, the MSM have taken those reports, and used them to imply that no connection at all existed between Saddam and al Qaeda. Fortunately, again, the Blogosphere acted (along with talk radio - the other bane of liberals' existence) as that independent voice and outlet of information.

The truly ironic thing is, the Blogosphere is still primarily underground. As Kerry pointed out, 80% of Americans still get their news from television (for my less-astute readers, television is part of the "Mainstream Media"). Kerry lost the election by three and a half MILLION popular votes. Not even the bloggers believe they had that kind of impact. The Electoral Vote was on the verge of a crushing landslide. The conservatives have consolidated the Midwest and the South, and are on the verge of a breakthrough in the Rust Belt and Upper Midwest. This electoral shift is due to the liberals (that is, the rag-tag conglomeration of extremists that now control the Democrat Party) being fundamentally out-of-synch with Mainstream America. Until Kerry and his Merry Band of Liberals figure out this truth, it won't matter what they try to do to the Blogosphere; they will continue their electoral spiral downward.

But in the meantime, just call me Poor Richard.

Starved For Justice

Filed in Politics, Science, Social IssuesTags: Judiciary, Sanctity of Life

Oh, how I love Ann Coulter:

Just once, we need an elected official to stand up to a clearly incorrect ruling by a court. Any incorrect ruling will do, but my vote is for a state court that has ordered a disabled woman to be starved to death at the request of her adulterous husband.

Our Federal Judiciary has become the Fiat Judiciary.
Can someone - anyone - explain to me why federal judges get lifetime appointments? Can someone explain why We The People get to vote our confidence in judges at the state level, but not at the federal level (except, perhaps, the appellate courts, if I remember correctly)? I think I'm going to look into that question, and pose it to Senator Talent.
If Terry Schiavo is allowed to die, her husband should be charged with murder, and Judge Greer should be impeached for incompetence, arrogance, and sticking the middle finger at the US Congress by ignoring a Congressional subpoena.
How the party that rejoices at sucking a living, breathing, unborn child from a womb with a vacuum, and allowing a living, breathing, handicapped woman to die of starvation and dehydration can claim to be the party of compassion and humanity, I will never understand.