I thought Democrats were supposed to be conservationists?
What’s so conservationist about irreversibly piping water from the Great Lakes into the DESERTS of the American Southwest?
5 comments October 6th, 2007
What’s so conservationist about irreversibly piping water from the Great Lakes into the DESERTS of the American Southwest?
5 comments October 6th, 2007
…is if the Republicans can get their Mitt on her.
4 comments October 4th, 2007
The Democrats and the media are always claiming that money is the root of all evil when it comes to politics.
And yet, best cialis cure they both act as if the only thing that matters is how much money a candidate raises.
(In case you’re still puzzling over the headline, try reading it this way “Pair of docs. it’s not just a couple of pediatrians.”)
1 comment October 2nd, 2007
Blogger Renee Crawford announced that Wisconsin State Senator Lena Taylor is running for Milwaukee County Executive.
This isn’t really a surprise as Taylor apparently announced her intention to run at Fighting Bob Fest weeks ago.
I wish I could say the incumbent Scott Walker will have no problem kicking her butt, viagra sale purchase but holding the line on taxes is never rewarded as lavishly by the voters as giving goodies away to constituents.
3 comments October 1st, 2007
Every once and a while I feel the need to correct some wrong assumptions about me among my ever growing readership.
(What are they growing? Considering some of the comments I get, cialis canada medicine I’d say mostly pot.)
First and foremost is the perception that I’m a Conservative.
I’m not.
I consider myself a realistic libertarian. I think taxation is theft, sildenafil illness proper authority is an oxymoron, and government is intrinsically repressive.
On the other hand, I recognize that most people can’t be trusted to live by the Golden Rule unless that rule is forced upon them by the rest of us. (And make no mistake, all government is based on the threat of force.)
Whiel I grudgingly conceed the necessity for some form of government, I think it has very, very few legitimate uses. Ensuring a level playing field? Yes. Redistribution of wealth? No.
I’m fanatically in favor of both freedom of speech AND the right to keep and bear arms. In fact, I think the first can only be ensured by the second.
I think Roe vs. Wade is right up there with Dredd Scott when it comes to bad Supreme Court decisions. (But I don’t want abortion to be illegal. I just want it to be unthinkable.)
I’m an agnostic and evolutionist who thinks people should be able to believe anything they want as long as they don’t try to make me live by their beliefs.
I’m not in favor of the Iraq War, but I think the idea of “cutting and running” is naive and ultimately counterproductive.
In general, here’s a quick list of things my Conservative readers would disagree with me on:
Here’s a quick list of things my Liberal readers would disagree with me on:
When all is said in done, the best description of my attitude on this blog and in my life was probably provided by the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel’s now defunct Spivak and Bice blog, who wrote that I am a:
“blogger who often takes a contrarian view of life and politics”
And who am I to disagree?
8 comments October 1st, 2007
Why isn’t it a conflict of interest when people who work for the government vote for the people who run that government?
4 comments September 28th, 2007
Wait until you hear the outcry about Milwaukee County Executive Scott Walker refusing to raise taxes:
The stay-even, discount viagra cure $1.3 billion ’08 budget would collect the same $241 million in property taxes as this year’s budget.
Of course, here this will inflame all the folks who think they can spend your money better than you can.
Remember, there hasn’t been a real tax cut since the American Revolution; there’s only been an occasional rollback of the otherwise continuous tax hikes.
6 comments September 27th, 2007
Here’s the plain language added to the Wisconsin Constitution in 1998:
“The people have the right to keep and bear arms for security, viagra viagra defense, buy viagra hunting, doctor recreation or any other lawful purpose.”
And yet the Wisconsin Supreme Court refuses to strike down any law in Wisconsin that completely bans carrying a fire arm.
So my question is what would the language have had to have been in order to keep the Justices from willfully ignoring it?
How could that sentence be made clearer or more forceful?
Maybe “bear arms in and out of their homes?”
Or “keep arms in their cars?”
Or “keep arms about their person at all times?”
Would even this language have been enough?
My guess? No. It would not have been enough.
The liberals in America will do whatever it takes to continue ensuring that law-abiding citizens are always defenseless when confronted by armed and agressive criminals.
If I had one single wish at this moment, I would use it to ensure that the only victims of armed robbery, rape and murder were people whose votes and philosophies so often deny the rest of us the right to defend ourselves in those same circumstances.
5 comments September 25th, 2007
I’ve been looking into the DREAM Act.
Basically, viagra canada treatment the DREAM Act tries to solve the dilemma of what to do with illegal immigrants who were brought here as children.
Usually the act grants citizenship to the minor if they’re willing to serve in the military or attend college.
I actually don’t think this is such a bad idea. I don’t think their parents should be granted citizenship, cialis but I also don’t think the kids should be punished for their parent’s actions.
Right now, someone raised in the United States since they were 3-years-old has no option but to return to a country they don’t remember or try to survive in the underground economy.
And, honestly, if someone is willing to fight for this country, I’d be proud to welcome them into the family.
2 comments September 19th, 2007
In today’s editorial, cialis sale check the board said:
And, viagra generic by the way, the job is too important to hold the nomination process hostage. Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) seemed to say he would do that until the administration started cooperating with Congress’ investigation into the firing of U.S. attorneys.
Dead on.
When I heard Leahy say that on NPR, I knew he was backing himself into a corner. Most people care a lot less that the president fired his own employees than they would if Congress kept the Attorney General office empty in an effort to extort a few emails from the Justice Department.
Add comment September 18th, 2007