Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Some Interesting Reads

Newt Gingrich has a good op-ed piece in the Washington Post documenting why he has referred to the Obama Administration as a "secular socialist machine:"

An April 14 op-ed by Norman J. Ornstein, "The great 'socialist' smear," argued that to those "outside the partisan and ideological wars," it is "bizarre" to accuse the Obama administration of "radicalism, socialism, retreat and surrender." I was among those he cited, for having called Barack Obama "the most radical president in American history" and describing the goals of the left and its methods of operation as a "secular-socialist machine."

In fact, Ornstein has it exactly backward. It is only from the perspective of the cultural elite that the left-wing governing of the Obama-Pelosi-Reid team could be seen as moderate. . . .

Do read the entire article. As I inevitably find with Gingrich, he makes perfect sense.

The second article is by someone I have never recommended before in this blog - Pat Buchanan. I parted ideological ways with Buchanan years ago. That said, his most recent peice on the left's melodramatic response to Arizona's new immigration law is spot on. This from Mr. Buchanan:

With the support of 70 percent of its citizens, Arizona has ordered sheriffs and police to secure the border and remove illegal aliens, half a million of whom now reside there.

Arizona acted because the U.S. government has abdicated its constitutional duty to protect the states from invasion and refuses to enforce America's immigration laws.

"We in Arizona have been more than patient waiting for Washington to act," said Gov. Jan Brewer. "But decades of inaction and misguided policy have created an unacceptable situation."

We have a crisis in Arizona because we have a failed state in Washington.

What is the response of Barack Obama, who took an oath to see to it that federal laws are faithfully executed?

He is siding with the law-breakers. He is pandering to the ethnic lobbies. He is not berating a Mexican regime that aids and abets this invasion of the country of which he is commander in chief. Instead, he attacks the government of Arizona for trying to fill a gaping hole in law enforcement left by his own dereliction of duty.

He has denounced Arizona as "misguided." He has called on the Justice Department to ensure that Arizona's sheriffs and police do not violate anyone's civil rights. But he has said nothing about the rights of the people of Arizona who must deal with the costs of having hundreds of thousands of lawbreakers in their midst.

How's that for Andrew Jackson-style leadership? . . .

Do read the whole article.


suek said...

I wonder if Arizona citizens should start suing the federal government for not protecting the borders, if harm is done to them by illegals...

The murdered rancher's wife, for instance. Maybe the feds should be sued for non-compliance with its own regulations???

OBloodyHell said...

Not to suggest I have a side in the case -- Coyoteblog is taking issue with the law on both libertarian and "Arizonans are overreacting" grounds.

Since he's a resident of Arizona, as well as a pretty rational individual by his generally consistently sensible postings, I have to give his opinion some weight.

I'll let readers consider his (and his commenters' -- including me under another pseudonym*) opinions for themselves:

Probable Cause

* There's some &%$#$% blacklist out there that my main e-mail has been listed as "spam" with, and, since some blogs use that list, I can't use my typical nym to post there. Coyote is an example.

OBloodyHell said...

Oh, and also this one:

An Immigration Proposal

Again: He's in Arizona, so he's giving you an "intelligent man in the street" view which I think is worth weighting heavily.

By all means, though, poke around on his blog and see if you come to the same opinion of his viewpoints.

OBloodyHell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
GW said...

As to Coyote's post, I still don't see the problem. Racial profiling would be stopping someone simply because he looked Mexican. That is unlawful. But if there is a lawful contact - i.e., I have committed a trafic infraction or there is some other legitimate reason to be stopped by the police - then the police can ask for your name and drivers' license, etc.
As far as Coyote driving around with a broken tail light, if he did that around my way, he'd get 5 miles on day one before being stopped. But if he gets stopped, you can rest assure that the police will ask for proof of his identity.