People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it. Welcome to From On High.

Tuesday, March 02, 2010

Point, Counterpoint

The Roanoke Times:

"Democrats will lose credibility if they do not punish Rangel."

Lose credibility?  That's not possible:

"71% Give Congress Poor Rating."

The only way is up from down there, fellas.

Caught Between a Rock & a Hard Place

The New York Times editorial page this morning - this is sweet - comes out in opposition to Chicago's draconian gun control laws.  And it ain't April Fools Day:
The Second Amendment’s Reach

Two years ago, the Supreme Court struck down parts of the District of Columbia’s gun-control law. On Tuesday, the court will consider whether that decision should apply everywhere in the country, not just in the federal territory of the nation’s capital.

McDonald v. Chicago is a challenge to a law that makes it extremely difficult to own a handgun within Chicago’s city limits. The challengers rely on the court’s 5-to-4 ruling in 2008, which recognized an individual right under the Second Amendment to carry guns for self-defense.

We disagreed strongly with the 2008 decision, which took an expansive and aggressive view of the right to bear arms. But there is an even broader issue at stake in the new case: The Supreme Court’s muddled history in applying the Constitution to states and cities. It should make clear that all of the protections of the Bill of Rights apply everywhere. [link]
In actuality, the editorial ends by tying itself in knots.  After advising the members of the Supreme Court that they "should make clear that all of the protections of the Bill of Rights apply everywhere," the editorial ends with a call for elected representatives to be able to "adopt carefully drawn laws that protect them against other people’s guns."  In other words, the Bill of Rights should apply everywhere except where the New York Times editorial board feels it shouldn't.  Or something.

You might wonder why the Times would come out on the same side of this case as the despised NRA.  Think Mississippi.  Think civil rights law.  Voting rights.  The United States government, with Supreme Court acquiescence, has stepped all over the rights of states (particularly in the once-segregated South) to make and enforce their own laws since the 60's.  The liberals don't want that to end.  There's the "bigger picture" aspect to McDonald v. Chicago to consider.  Thus the strange bedfellows.

In the end, though, it still feels good.  The New York Times supports gun rights for all.  Pinch me.

- - -

The Washington Post, on the other hand, doesn't give a damn about the Bill of Rights.  It calls for continued rationing of the 2nd Amendment here in Virginia.  They'd better hope that what goes around doesn't come around.

So Much For Another Climate Hypothesis

Does anything that the true believers in the global warming congregation hold forth actually stand up to scrutiny?  One begins to wonder. Here's the latest error (fraud?) in judgment:
IPCC “science” on hurricanes no longer settled, either
By Ed Morrissey

In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, anthropogenic global warming (AGW) activists insisted that the stronger storm systems resulted from the build-up of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, making hurricanes increasingly more severe.  These claims made their way into the UN’s IPCC report and have been a staple of AGW arguments for immediate and drastic action to limit energy production as part of the “settled science” attempt to shut down debate.  Unfortunately for the hysterics, new peer-reviewed research published in Nature Geoscience concludes that hurricane strength has little to do with global warming. [link]
Earthquakes.  Not hurricanes.  Expect, after Chile and Haiti, for the warming doomsayers to switch to earthquakes.

It never was an exact science, you see...

Moonbattery On Display

A mainstream columnist sees Republicans possibly caving on ObamaCare because a number of them supported a Congressional jobs bill.

And I think he's serious.

Of course he's also brain dead.


Set aside defense.  And education.  And the environment.

Last year "for the first time since the Great Depression, Americans took more aid from the government than they paid in taxes."

Food stamps.  Unemployment compensation.  AFDC. Social Security.  On and on.

If this is a trend, we're in big trouble.