Saturday, February 01, 2003

DEMOCRATS TRYING TO BAN WATER GUNS? Yep you heard right. Read the story. Luckily the Libertarian party is there to the rescue.

Next on the agenda for Democrats: Banning fun.

Thursday, January 30, 2003

ATTACK ON THE RAVE ACT: Dave Kopel explains why the RAVE Act is misguided and stupid. I don't think Kopel is being completely fair though. There are many conservatives who are in favor of the Act as well.

So what's next? Does our government ban dancing completely? How about bagels with opium seeds? That's a drug addiction waiting to happen!
MEDIA BIAS WATCH: Glenn Reynolds and cohorts are taking shots at media bias and a "unilateral" France.

Wednesday, January 29, 2003

SAY IT AIN'T SO: Colin Powell, child pornography aficionado?

Despite denying such claims as a smear campaign, former UN weapons inspectors Scott Ritter was accused of a child pornography scandal in which he arranged to meet with a young girl in an Internet chat room. And since being initially extremely hawkish, we know Ritter has done a complete 180 on the issue on war with Iraq.

And we know that the usually dovish Colin Powell has done a complete 180 on Iraq as well, becoming one of the leading hawks in the administration. Could our good friend Colin be hiding something?!? Perish the thought...

Note: I'm joking. Please don't spread this to an Iraqi newspaper or something. Charles Johnson has had way too many problems with that sort of thing.
HOW DEMOCRATS ARE THE ANTI-CHOICE PARTY: This article, by David Boaz, hits the nail right on the head.

Former House Democratic leader Richard A. Gephardt acknowledged a change of heart on the abortion issue: "I came to realize that the question of choice is to be answered not by the state but by the individual."

With language like that, Gephardt could run for the Libertarian Party nomination. But what question of choice--other than abortion--does Gephardt think should be answered "not by the state but by the individual"? Like Kerry, he opposes Social Security choice, school choice, and the right of individuals to choose what drugs they will use, either for medical or recreational purposes. He voted to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry the person they choose.

Too many people these days think "choice" only refers to abortion. I'd like to hear a presidential candidate say, "I believe in a woman's right to choose. I believe in a woman's right to choose whether to have a child. I believe in a woman's right to choose any job someone will hire her for. I believe in a woman's right to choose to own a gun. I believe in a woman's right to choose the school she thinks is best for her child, public or private. I believe in a woman's right to choose what kinds of art she will spend her money on, even if she prefers Madonna or Randy Travis and Congress wants to give her money to Robert Mapplethorpe or Luciano Pavarotti. I believe in a woman's right to choose to drive a cab, even if she doesn't have a license. I believe in a woman's right to choose the employees she wants for her business, even if they don't fit some government quota. I believe in a woman's right to choose the drugs she prefers for recreation, whether she chooses Coors or cocaine. I believe in a woman's right to choose how to spend all of her hard-earned money, without giving half of it to the government."

I share the exact same view and have shared it with some liberal friends of mine in the past. While I don't consider myself to be pro-life per se, the argument by the pro-lifers certainly makes a lot of sense. Well certainly a lot more sense than saying people shouldn't be allowed to choose what school they wish to attend, where their retirement money goes, who their company should hire, how they choose to defend themselves etc. simply because a bunch of incompetent bureaucrats in Washington know what's good for them.