Liberals intent on their own self-destruction
Re: "GOP insists on driving away moderate voters," From Readers, June 15
Matthew Beck fears becoming "a laughingstock to the rest of the educated, civilized (i.e., liberal) world" if he were to consider the "Neanderthal-level of social ideology" (such as the rejection of evolutionary theory) considered by many Republicans.
He is quite right, of course. Anyone who doubts Darwinist evolutionary theory need only consider today's "educated and civilized" liberals who busily insist upon extinguishing their next generation through contraception and abortion.Any species so self-destructive is obviously unfit to survive.
While I object to financing their demise, why would I want to discourage them? As Sun Tzu reminds us, the opportunity of defeating the enemy is provided by the enemy himself.
Who's laughing now?
Executive order leaves out legal immigrants
President Obama justifies his executive order by saying that young illegal immigrants will make "significant contributions to society."
I have friends who came here legally while under the age of 16 who'll get deported if they can't find H-1 visa sponsors (which aren't cheap). Is Obama simply going to toss them work visas too?
What about international university students who must return to their homes after they graduate, whom we know are trained with skills we could use. Are they also going to get free visas simply because "it's right?"
Or is President Obama going to look them in the eye and say,"Your first mistake was to come here legally?"
As far as I'm concerned, illegal is illegal. A president can't pick and choose which laws to enforce. You'd think a constitutional lawyer would know this.
Democrats should reclaim the Founding Fathers
Conservative Republicans frequently talk about our Founding Fathers, getting most of what they said and intended wrong by 180 degrees. Liberal Democrats don't talk at allabout them, but act in ways very consistent with the founders' beliefs.
One of the most interesting canards emanating from the right is that the founders created checks and balances in the Constitution in order to make it verydifficult for the federal government to get anythingdone.This interpretationstems from their belief that any government program or action is inherently harmful and subversive of liberty and prosperity -- and that the best amount of federal government is none at all.
In point of fact, the founders wanted a government of immense power, vigor and efficiency.The checks and balances were imposed to restrain the insane ideas they knew would emanate from the "people's House of Representatives," and to restrain the corruption they knew afflicted most politicians.
By "enlarging the sphere" of government, they believed that the many factions and interests at the national level would all cancel each other out, and thus force government by compromise. This is something modern-day conservatives consider tantamount to treason.
It is high time that Democrats begin to citetheFounding Fathers as being in perfect accord with the philosophy and actions of the Democratic Party.Or have we completely lost the art of debunking nonsense from the right?