Morning Briefing
For April 23, 2013
1. The Other Side of the Coin
Yesterday I made clear my thinking that those in the center-right coalition who are pushing the Gang of 8 plan are coordinating attacks on conservatives that are deeply harmful, inappropriate, and often off base.
But I would be remiss if I did not devote a single post as well to the opposite side of the coin — those who oppose the Gang of Eight plan.
In particular, the personal attacks by some conservative pundits on Marco Rubio personally. He has chosen take up a deeply divisive issue and there are some on the right who have long crossed the line in their attacks on his person and character.
There are some fair attacks. When Marco Rubio ran against Charlie Crist, he used against Crist the Heritage study he now seeks distance from. That’s fair. It is fair that much of the present plan is similar to that which he campaigned against.
People are allowed to change their mind. . . . please click here for the rest of the post →
2. Is Citizenship A New Tactic In The War On Terror?
Is citizenship now a tactic? Earlier today I asked foreign policy expert Stephen Yates whether or not he believes that terrorists are now using American citizenship as a tactic to thwart surveillance and investigation on the basis of their newfound civil liberties (audio below).
It’s a legitimate question. We know Tamerlane Tsarnev claimed to not have any American friends, is suspected of killing the only one he made, and judging by his own social media accounts was incredibly hostile towards America. His younger brother was the same.
The 9/11 terror attacks began as an immigration problem. I’ve said this for years. Terrorists in our country on expired visas were stopped by police for traffic reasons weeks before the attack. The Boston bombings, by looking at the suspects, was also an immigration problem. I know upstanding individuals with no criminal record or associations who have waited 12 years, paid five figures, and hired attorneys to get the same citizenship status awarded in a shorter time to Dzhokhar Tsarnaev – citizenship our government was in the process of considering for Tamerlane Tsarnaev, despite his FBI interrogation and tip from Russian government. . . . please click here for the rest of the post →
3. Government without objective
Big Government programs never seem to have any definite objectives. There are no victory conditions, no exit strategies, no test a program could fail that would result in its termination. This is one of the many reasons it is obscene for socialists to appropriate the language of business and “investment” to peddle their schemes. Investment is voluntary, and every investor envisions some level of failure that would prompt him to pull the plug on a bad investment. By contrast, government programs go on forever, we’re told it’s impossible to pass terminal judgment against them, and we are not allowed to withdraw our support.
It’s also foolish to use the language of “war” to describe these programs, although the Left loves to do so, because “the moral equivalent of war” fosters an atmosphere of crisis and obedience. Normal cost-benefit calculations are suspended when you’re fighting a war, and the high command must be obeyed without question. A republic of free people can handle these conditions during an actual war, because wars end. On the other hand, “wars” on social issues go on forever, and it is considered rude to ask about victory, retreat, or defeat. . . . please click here for the rest of the post →
| >> Today's Sponsor |
No comments:
Post a Comment