Posts Tagged ‘free speech’

It’s Not the Marketing, Democrats, It’s the Product. SOCIALISM STINKS!

November 4, 2010
New, Improved Socialism!!

NEW! IMPROVED! BUY NOW, OR JUMP IN MASS GRAVE!

Those of us above a certain age remember when TV ads trumpeted a “new, improved” cereal or dish detergent. All the proof we had of newness or improvement was the package, which had new, snazzy colors and maybe a cool, new shape. Sure enough, the words, “NEW!” and “IMPROVED!” are there, right on the label.

Of course the new product often came with a new, improved, higher price.

When we opened the new, improved package, we often found the same, old product inside, or an old product with irrelevant tweaks and tunes that left us with same ole’ same ole’. The marketing department obviously ran the show in these enterprises, and the product research and development department was AWOL or irrelevant.

It doesn’t matter whose picture you put on the box – Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot — socialism is a failed product that has been repackaged countless times over the last 150 years. It has never worked, and despite a death toll of well over a hundred million innocent people in a seemingly endless series of ruthless and bloody “marketing campaigns,” it keeps coming back.

The latest attempt at socialism, advanced by Democrats and RINOs, is a hideous parade of defective products:  Obamacare, Government Motors, Cap and Tax, and union pension bailouts, to name but a few. President Obama, in a post-mid-term election presser intended to explain away the blunt rejection of the same old product with his latest packaging, stubbornly refused to understand the meaning of the election results.

The problem, he said, was with the message. It was just bad marketing.

As the Gipper famously said, “There you go, again.”

No, Dear Leader, the problem isn’t the marketing. The product – socialism — stinks, has always stunk, and always will stink. No amount of marketing, packaging, promotion, rebates, coupons or discounts will sell socialism, because it is an inherently defective product.

Socialist regimes always have to threaten their customers with death or imprisonment to get them to buy it, and they inevitably have to carry out those threats, if their regimes last long enough.

Whether or not it is imported from China, socialism is easily broken into sharp-edged, poisonous choking hazards, and ultimately, it is a threat to health, safety and, especially, to freedom.

It’s not new, it’s not improved, and we aren’t buying.

Advertisements

Weak Tea — The Pledge to America

September 24, 2010

I have just waded through the Pledge to America, as it appears at the Human Events Website (watermarked as a DRAFT)

It is 21 pages long in PDF format. I copied and pasted the text into my ancient version of Microsoft Word, and found the following when I clicked on “Properties”:

"Pledge" stats, according to MS Word

"Pledge" stats, according to MS Word

Twenty-six pages; 214 paragraphs; 7854 words… why does it have to be so big? If I may use a bit of a Tea Party metaphor, it reads like weak tea. I’m not happy to make this assessment, because a Congressman I respect immensely, Mike Pence, stood in front of a hardware store and spoke for the group in the introduction of the Pledge.

Brief disclosure: I know Mike Pence from his talk show days, when I was a frequent caller, and even got an autographed caricature of Mike, endorsed with the description, “Favorite caller to the Mike Pence Show.” Once, I even made a nervous, inept, in-studio guest appearance on his show, concerning the loss of a loved one to a drunk driver. He bought my lunch afterward, and we had a good conversation.

I have disagreed with Mike on specific issues since he first went to Congress, but I still believe he is, as he described himself described himself on his radio show, a “Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order.” He is a consummate gentleman, besides all that, and I will bet his colleagues, supporters and opponents, have found him to be so. End of Disclosure

Now, it’s time to get to the point. Why did it take so many pages to say what needs to be said? One paragraph from the introduction to the document said 99% of what needed to be said on the subject:

“We pledge to honor the Constitution as constructed by its framers and honor the original intent of those precepts that have been consistently ignored – particularly the Tenth Amendment, which grants that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.”

Wow, what an eloquent, unqualified, statement – solid and substantial as granite; as sufficient and self-sustaining as anything to come out of the mouths of Republicans in decades.

Any details that followed that statement of principle could have been specific goals for its implementation. I suggest the following:

We resolve to stop and reverse, with every means available to us, the measures of the federal government that violate this principle. We will speak and vote at every opportunity, to repeal laws that violate the Constitution, and we will vote and speak against any and all new legislation that violates the Constitution.

In addition to abolition and repeal, we will also speak for and vote to remove current funding and to oppose new funding for the acts and agencies of the federal government that violate the Constitution.

Because federal judicial fiat has been used so often to thwart or ignore the Constitution, we will offer and aggressively pursue articles of impeachment against any federal judge who advances such anti-Constitutional measures or decisions.

We offer these promises in the full knowledge that embedded special interests and the vast inertia of the expanding juggernaut of federal authority will oppose us at every turn.

We understand that we may fall out of favor with the media, the powerful, bureaucratic establishment and the entrenched, political leadership on all sides in Washington and in the states.

We have no fear of their disapproval, because they are wrong, and they have done their part to make the federal government so large and grasping over the last decades.

We trust in our Creator to stand with us to defend the inalienable rights He granted our ancestors and our posterity.

We trust in the citizens of the United States of America to support us as long as we abide by the Constitution, and to send us home if we break these pledges.

Ten sentences.

Nine paragraphs.

That’s all I really need to see in a statement of purpose.

The arithmetic, the legislative agenda, the economic and employment statistics, the alphabet soup of federal agencies… all of that is important, but it is subordinate to the principles. It does not belong in this document.

Mike – ahem, Congressman Pence – please appeal to your colleagues to distill and reduce the pledge to these essentials, and to make it clear that the details that follow will adhere to these principles.

If the Republicans are to have a future in this country; if, indeed, the legislative branch is not to become an irrelevant, impotent venue for meaningless Kabuki theater, like the Supreme Soviet of old, while the courts, the White House and the bureaucrats complete the destruction of this Constitutional Republic, this pledge and your adherence to it, is our only hope short of armed revolution.

Tennessee’s Eighth, and Conservative Ideals versus the Republican Establishment

February 14, 2010

More on Tennessee’s Eighth

I got some reactions from Donn Janes on my earlier essay on history and current events in the Tennessee Eighth Congressional District. His comments add great value to the discussion, so I thought I’d produce an addendum trying to take them into account.

The most important item is that I need to correct a crucial factual error. I described Donn Janes as one of “two Republicans [who] have stepped up…” to fill the seat to be left vacant by Tanner’s retirement.

Oops. Fundamental error… Janes is running as an independent, having explicitly divorced himself from the Republican Party and its many betrayals of Conservative standards and ideals. I registered as an Independent in Dickson County when we moved here, after decades as a Republican in Indiana, for the same reason. I should have been a lot more aware of the difference.

As if to scold me immediately for neglecting the best arguments for the parting of ways between Establishment Republicans and constitutional conservatives that has taken root in the last few years, I found a column by Alan Keyes posted Friday, February 12, in World Net Daily that distills the grounds for divorce. Some excerpts are reproduced here, but I strongly recommend the original article for the patient, scholarly and thorough dissertation that Alan Keyes, as usual, produces.

“In the days when my awareness of the U.S. political scene was just budding there were politicians in the Republican Party who openly identified themselves as liberals. For this sort of fact Wikipedia is as reliable a witness as any other:

“‘In the 1930s ‘Me-too-Republicans’ described those who ran on a platform of agreeing with the Democratic Party, or proclaiming only minor or moderating differences. A prime example is presidential candidate Thomas E. Dewey, who did not oppose New Deal programs altogether, but merely campaigned on the promise that Republicans would run them more efficiently and less corruptly. …’

“’From 1936 to 1976 the more centrist of the Republican Party frequently won the national nomination with candidates such as Alf Landon, Wendell Willkie, Thomas E. Dewey, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford. Indeed, other terms for liberal Republicans include Nixonian and Rockefeller Republican.’

“If this take on the GOP presidential candidates of the 20th century is accurate (and I think it is) it confirms the notion that, for all their posturing in opposition to the Democrats on particular issues, the controlling powers of the Republican Party have no quarrel in principle with the New Deal worldview. On grounds that are at once aesthetic, practical and self-interested, they decry the excessive Democratic tendency toward openly populist egalitarianism. Yet, impelled by a self-adulating sense of noblesse oblige, they tacitly concede that the Democrats’ “liberal” agenda represents the higher ground of moral sophistication. What the liberal GOP elites reject is their frequent lack of sophistication in carrying out that agenda.

“In this respect, I suspect that the preferred candidate of the GOP elites in the 2008 election was … Barack Obama. He had all the outward appearances of cool sophistication, purposefully controlled moral passion and seeming respect for the ironically unselfish elite ambition benevolently to secure a position of unchallenged control over every aspect of human life. He seemed so moderate.”

Ouch. A better rebuke for my neglectful lumping of a conservative independent and a nominal Republican together was never delivered. Thank you, Doctor Keyes.

Stephen Fincher certainly impressed me in our telephone conversation as a conservative at heart, using the Republican establishment framework to get to power. That was a subjective impression, however, with no corroborating evidence.

As I said, Mike Pence’s interest in Fincher made me interested in him. However – always, the however – as I mentioned before, Mike and I are not in lockstep on several issues of importance.

I have not forgotten Mike’s embrace of a very McCain-like form of “immigration reform.” It was a rotten idea when McCain championed it, and it was no better with Mike Pence out in front of it.

I also do not agree with Mike’s tendency to go along with “anti-terror” legislation that has the effect of making America less of a fortress than a prison. If we want a safer country, let’s put the bars on the outside, not on the inside.

I have always harbored the irrational hope that  Mike was immune to the effect of cumulative exposure to the insidious, Inside-the-Beltway atmosphere he has been subjected to since January, 2001. Rationally, I have to admit that no one is completely immune to those effects – even Mike Pence.

I doubt that he has succumbed to the wiles of special interest like the United Autoworkers Union or the Sierra Club, but I can’t rule out that he may have been co-opted by an equally-powerful influence in his environment – the Republican establishment.

I described before, my phone conversation with Stephen Fincher. It would be reassuring to see the conservative, constitutionalist views I heard from him then, explicitly laid out on his Website. I would be especially impressed to see him step away from the farm policies that are the oldest vestige of socialism in American government, and that have done as much damage to the free market in agriculture as government involvement in health care has done, and will continue to do, to the free market for that industry.

My favorite civics text is by Libertarian P. J. O’Rourke: PARLIAMENT OF WHORES — a Lone Humorist Attempts to Explain the Entire U.S. Government. The author of this caustic, penetrating and hysterically funny appraisal of our “system” of government yields up the following observation concerning American “farm policy:”

“Farm policy, although it’s complex, can be explained. What it can’t be is believed. No cheating spouse, no teen with a wrecked family car, no mayor of Washington, D.C., videotaped in flagrant has ever come up with anything as farfetched as U.S. farm policy.”

If Stephen Fincher can convincingly break free of the web of obligation and obfuscation of current farm policy, emblematic as it is of what is wrong with the U.S. government, I, self-appointed mayor of Lower Danley Road, northeastern suburb of the unincorporated area of Bellsburg, Tennessee, will give him a serious, second look. As a farmer in a farming community, Stephen Fincher would be showing his allegiance to principle over economic and political self-interest by disavowing government farm policy, and the integrity required to take that step would be very impressive. As cordial and genuine a gentleman as Stephen Fincher is, I’ll have to wait to believe that when I see it in print.

The problem right now in Tennessee’s Eighth is the same problem we have had all over America as a result of going along with the Republican Establishment. The elephantine elite are distinguishable from Democrats/Progressives/Socialists/Economic Fascists only in style; not in substance. We who have followed this herd have swept up enough elephant dung to keep the compost heap going indefinitely. We don’t need any more.

Or, as Alan Keyes summarizes, in the piece cited above:

“People are now rising in opposition to the all-too-conclusive evidence of the Obama faction’s repugnant extremism. But they urgently need to ponder the fact that the phony moderation of the GOP leadership elites did more than anything else to put Obama where he is. Unless we look beyond the false alternatives they offer, we will only enable equally false election victories that will not put an end to the destruction of American liberty Obama represents.”

With apologies to Stephen Fincher, if I had to vote in the Tennessee primary today, I’d vote for Donn Janes.

YOU’RE TOO STUPID!

October 14, 2009

For decades, the government has been telling you that you’re stupid. Are you too stupid to get tired of that?

You are too stupid to buy a car you can afford, and one that gives you and your family a chance of surviving a collision, rather than one that will crush like a paper bag because it had to lose weight to meet CAFE standards.

You are too stupid to manage your own health care. You need the government to choose your doctor, and to determine if, what, when and how you will receive medical care; and whether you and your loved ones will die because their care is too expensive, or rationed to those in a more favored political class.

You are too stupid to decide for yourself what the truth is, so government will decide who gets to use “public” airwaves to tell you what to think.

You are too stupid to buy a toilet that flushes the first time, a light bulb that doesn’t contain poisons you need a HAZMAT team to dispose of, or to set your thermostat to a comfortable temperature, just because you are the one paying the utility bills.

You are too stupid to distinguish honest expression of news and opinion appearing on the Internet from scams and lies, so government will move in, as in China, and allocate Internet access to the sources that get bureaucratic blessings.

You are too stupid to know how stupid racism is – especially of you are white, or non-white but conservative – so you need government to impose racist standards on hiring, college admissions and just about everything else.

You are too stupid to be responsible for your children’s education. You don’t have an education school degree, so you are not qualified to provide your children with moral education, let alone to home-school them. Government will provide them with all the knowledge and wisdom they need, thank you very much. And government will encourage your children to bring their wisdom home and lecture you  for not buying a hybrid deathtrap car and for running too much hot water, and for not standing whenever Barack Obama appears on TV.

You are too stupid to examine the actual positions of political candidates and decide for yourself, based on those positions, which are more qualified for office. Instead, you need government to restrict the right to run for office to members of one or the other establishment political party. “Independents” and “third parties” should get every possible obstacle thrown in their way, because you are too stupid to see their names on the ballot. The burden of choice would overload your stunted intellect, and you would be incapable of making the right decision.

You are FAR too stupid to own a firearm, because firearms, all by themselves, cause crime and suicide. You are incapable of learning which end of the gun the round comes out of, or how the unload a weapon and make it safe, or how to distinguish a home invader seconds away from crashing through your front door from your mother-in-law getting a midnight snack.

Some of us are at the end of our patience with genuinely stupid, selfish, socialist, statist do-gooders telling us we are the stupid ones.

Are you?

President for Life Barack Obama’s Post-Constitutional World

January 16, 2009

 

 

“His Excellency, President for Life, Field Marshal Al Hadji Doctor Idi Amin Dada, VC,  DSO, MC, Conqueror of the British Empire in Africa in General and Uganda in Particular”.  (Wikipedia)Idi Amin, Courtesy of Wikipedia

I’ll miss the Constitution.

Ron Paul and the rest of the feathers out at the tip of the right wing have been telling us for years it was going to happen, and we who paid attention knew something bad was happening, but we had jobs, and lives, and TV series to worry about, and it went on around us while we expressed concern, but not alarm.

I should now be alarmed, but it may be too late.  Darn.

The left runs Washington, and state and local governments hardly matter, as long as they are in substantial compliance with the federal standards that apply to just about everything.  Our fearless leaders in Washington dug the open-pit trap the economy fell into, and now they step up to the microphone with “solutions” that involve handing the economy a shovel.  Of course, the underlying purpose is power.

The consolidation of power has always been the agenda of “leaders” of both parties, and of most of their agents in government.

“Global Warming” (on this January night when the temperature will probably drop past zero, F, here in sunny Tennessee), is now also known as “Global Climate Change,” because that covers about everything the climate is likely to do, and anything it may do is cause for consolidating power in government.  By any name, it is nothing but a pretext for grabbing power.  Not just electric power, or nuclear power; political power.

If the government can say who will be able to generate the “pollutant” Carbon Dioxide, the government can say who will use electricity, or natural gas, or oil, or coal — who will generate or use energy.  When you get down to it, that gives the government the power do decide who breathes, but that will come later.

If you remember your elementary school science — that is, if you studied it before it consisted of learning how to recycle aluminum cans and put on a condom — everything is made of energy.  Matter is energy, if you divide it up small enough.  Everything we are, and everything we do, involves the conversion of energy from one form to another.

A drop of gasoline (chemical energy) explodes in an engine cylinder (heat energy) and moves the family car along (mechanical energy).  Crowd some Uranium atoms a little close for comfort, and they give off energy, which can be used as heat to turn a turbine, and run a generator.  Of course, that only happens on a large scale in France, Iran, and other countries in which the Left thinks it is OK to allow nuclear energy to be used for “peaceful” purposes.  Not in America.

Once you have a stranglehold on the generation and use of energy, you have a stranglehold on people.  Let’s just suppose that, on this sub-zero night over a large swath of the United States, the feds decide to provide a little object lesson about how the Constitution is no longer a limit on government power.  It would be a little brazen for President for Life Obama to instruct everyone to hold his or her breath for a few minutes, just to get an idea of what it would be like to be prohibited from emitting the bad pollutant CO2.  Might be a little hard to enforce, too,  at this early stage in the Administration.

No, let’s just “accidentally” turn off the power to some states that didn’t go “blue” in the last election, but they’re going “blue” now, from sub-zero temperatures.  Not for long; just for a few hours — say,  overnight.  The first time, anyway.  Maybe, they will offer some half-hearted explanation about a squirrel getting into the transformer, and the dang computers shut everything down, dumb computers, or Christian fundamentalist  terrorists, or something.  But don’t try too hard to be convincing, because the point is to make a subtle threat.

See?  If you don’t play by the new rules, will the Constitution keep you warm?  (Maybe you could burn your copy of the Bill of Rights on the kitchen table.  That’ll last a minute or two.)  Yes, your wood stove may tide you over for a few days without power, but a passing car carrying a government official might just see smoke coming from the chimney.  A DEA helicopter might be scanning in the infrared for indoor hydroponic pot farms, and see the heat coming from your fire.  Whoa, we can’t have that, can we? Spewing CO2 out into the publicly-owned air, melting glaciers and drowning polar bears? Tsk.

You’ll have to put that fire out, and schedule an appointment for the environmental impact study on your wood stove. What? Didn’t know you needed one? Well, it’s a new rule, and the standards are pretty stringent. In fact, Obama plans to apply the same environmental impact standards to your wood stove that he promised he would use to drive the coal-fired generating plants into bankruptcy. He just signed an executive order, putting the new standards into effect as soon as he takes the oath of office, where he tries not to roll his eyes when he swears to “uphold the Constitution.”

And, don’t expect to make a big, dramatic stand, holding off the EPA SWAT team with your firearms. That won’t last long, either. The UN wants us to get rid of them, for world peace. The EPA SWAT team will be armed to the teeth, but civilians need to be disarmed, because they just can’t be trusted with such dangerous instruments. First thing you know, people will be trying to band together and prevent the government from doing something that is for our own good. We are too dumb to understand that, sometimes, unpleasant things must be done to individuals for the good of the majority. People will just hurt themselves, if they have guns.  And, after all, the darn things do emit CO2 when firing.

Suppose not enough of us get the point the first few times the power goes off?  The weather might decide to give us a break (at least during Barack’s first term), and quit trying to kill us for a while.  Think we’re home free?  Well, how much food do you have stored away? Sure, you can boil stream water on the wood stove, until they come for that, but how long can you go without food? Do you have any idea how much energy is consumed to plant, grow, process and distribute food? How long will you last if that energy is cut off? Tractors and trucks burn petroleum products; canneries and processing plants use energy, stores have to have refrigeration and lights…

Forget Hoodia and Oprah’s latest diet scheme.  Try the Stalin Diet! Tens of millions reduced their energy needs to next to nothing in Russia, that way. Yes, there was energy consumed in decomposition, but that can be dealt with. That’s what mass graves are for!  The survivors and their neighbors in the politically favored areas of the late Soviet Union were quite impressed, and strongly persuaded that the government was right.

People who grow their own food use energy, too.  Remember that Roto-tiller? It’s a gas hog! Are you keeping a cupboard full of winter squash, carrots, canned goods and dried foods that will last for months? That might be considered hoarding, you know. People in “public housing” (and eventually, if the “emergency” goes on long enough, “refugee camps”) might eat pretty well on the food you are selfishly keeping for your own family. Remember, a few may have to suffer for the good of the many. Once they leave with your firearms, expect the truck to come back for your “hoarded” food.

What the hell, you’ll probably be moving into big “public housing” complexes anyway.  Concentrated housing is more energy-efficient, you see, and makes better use of land, according to UN standards.  Yes, the complexes may  be surrounded by tall, chain-link fences with razor wire and bright lights, and guard towers, but that’s just for your safety.  Can’t have people smuggling in guns or fattening foods, can we?  Goodness, no.  Outside of the concentration ca– I mean, the public housing complexes, will be plenty of government-mandated green spaces, of course.  The UN is big on green spaces, and so are the planning commissions in California, and the rest of the country.  You’ll be able to glance out at the green spaces through the chain-link fence, on your way from your apartment block to your government-mandated job.

All employment, see, will be government-controlled, because, when you control energy, you control industry and business, and well, who knows better where you should be spending your time than your government?  Heck, you live in public housing, you eat public food, and drink public water, why shouldn’t you be happy to work in the public sector?  Who better to determine where your skills will do the most public good, than the public employment service?

When you control the energy, of course, you control the health care.  Yes, that means “public” health care. Be ready for the same level of service in “public” health care that you are used to in “public” restrooms.  Maybe your public service job will be in the Kevorkian Pavilion of the Tom Daschel Health Care Resource Reallocation Center, where babies and baby boomers go to die.

Yes, as there always is in government health care, there will be temporary shortages of medicines, medical devices and health care professional services.  After all, why would anyone become a health care professional, to make the same money as a sniper in a guard tower, or a low-emissions crematorium attendant, according to the government pay schedule?  Some of us will be required to step up, and make sacrifices, for the good of the many.  Is that diabetes medication costing more, lately? Is that cardiac bypass going to put the clinic over budget for January? Euthanasia is so much cheaper, and unborn children are just “lumps of tissue,” right? Nip that cost item in the bud. Save energy!

Wow, I can’t wait to live in President for Life Barack Obama’s Brave, New, Post-Constitutional  World.  Of course, I probably won’t be around long. I already feel guilty about being white, a natural-born citizen (unlike Obama) , middle-aged, and a CO2 emitter. It’s only a matter of time before I have to step up, get in the game, do my part.

Hey, did the lights just flicker? I hope the power stays on long enough to see tonight’s crucial episode of my favorite TV show.

Mike Pence (R – Ind.) Supports Free Speech (March, 2002)

October 17, 2008

[Author’s Note: I once had the privilege of living in the congressional district of Mike Pence (R-Indiana), one of the few genuine conservatives in the House of Representatives. I wrote this letter to the editor of my local paper in March, 2002, after several letters appeared criticizing Mike for not supporting what would become “McCain-Feingold,” one of the most notorious attempts to smother free speech in American history. It was one of many efforts to “reach across the aisle” and be “bipartisan” that McCain now (2008) boasts about. ]

To the Editor,

There has been considerable criticism of Rep. Mike Pence in the Star Press recently. It seems many people think he should have supported the Shays-Meehan Campaign Finance “Reform” bill.  Rep. Pence’s position is based in Constitutional principles. If this bill had a name that really reflects its intent, it would be the “Incumbent Protection Bill.” While parts of the bill are likely to be struck down by the Supreme Court, unless the justices are sleepwalking, other provisions will probably escape scrutiny until they really begin to backfire, as “reform” laws almost always do.

The first part of this bill to get the Court’s attention will be a ban against political advertising that mentions a candidate’s name less than 60 days from a general election, or 30 days before a primary election. If there is a clearer example of a violation of the First Amendment’s protections of freedom of speech, I haven’t seen it. This bill isn’t “reform,” it’s fraud. No, I’m not a lawyer, but I do read English, and an online law dictionary (http://dictionary.law.com/) has the following definition for the type of fraud that best fits this particular scam:

“Fraud in the inducement: n.-the use of deceit or trick to cause someone to act to his/her disadvantage… The heart of this type of fraud is misleading the other party as to the facts upon which he/she will base his/her decision to act…”

This bill is a good example. Its sponsors claim this bill bans “soft money” (donations from organizations, such as corporations or labor unions), but, the bill shifts the collection of soft money from the national party organizations to the states. The bill is peppered with loopholes, like the one exempting Indian tribes (who might back a candidate likely to help them get, or keep, a casino license on reservation land) from the soft money ban. Are we cynical if we suspect this exception was pushed by an incumbent with reservations in his district?

If members of Congress really wanted to prevent itself from being bought by special interests, they would stop taking their money, and stop making Congress a lifetime job. What lobbyist in his right mind is going to dump millions on a legislator who will be out of office and succeeded by some young Turk before the lobbyist’s favorite legislation can be shepherded through Congress?

In short, if the elected phonies and buffoons making the loudest noise about Shays-Meehan and its evil Senate twin, McCain-Feingold, really wanted to be free of the influence of special interest groups, they’d resign, and go get real jobs in the private sector. All this bill will do is make it even tougher for challengers to dislodge the current crop of parasites from office. If Mike Pence were not a man of principle, if he had thrown his copy of the Constitution in the trash like many of his colleagues, I’m sure he would have supported the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Bill. The reason he hasn’t is that it doesn’t deserve his support, our ours, either. Thanks, Mike, for upholding the Constitution.

Tom Cox