About Me

Name: BrianR
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Punish Our “Enemies”?


On Monday, 25 October, the President of this country (Obama) was interviewed on Univision, the Spanish language TV network. During the course of that interview he was asked about his inaction on the issue of amnesty for illegal aliens.

Obama launched into a rambling discourse about the political opposition he was facing, and it included this little gem (read the entire interview Here):

“And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, we're gonna punish our enemies and we're gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us…”.

What’s that? “Our enemies”? What does he mean by that? Is he talking about Latinos saying that, and that those who oppose amnesty are the “enemies” of Latinos? Is he trying to sow racial discord and animus?

Or does he lump himself in there with the Latinos and mean that those against amnesty are common enemies of Latinos and him? In which case I have to wonder about all the campaign promises about “post-partisanship” and “cooperation” and “bringing people together” and being the “Great Uniter”.

I have never in my 61 years heard a President call his political opponents “enemies” other than in the Watergate tapes. For a guy who’s always complaining about the rancorous tone of public debate – especially talk radio – this is arrogant and hypocritical beyond belief. In this country, one has political opponents, not “enemies”.

We do indeed have “enemies”, such as Islamic fanatics like bin Laden. That’s an “enemy”.  But for loyal Americans who disagree on policy to be called “enemies” by the President of the United States is an absolute insult of the worst order. It’s also a symptom of a very, very dangerous mindset in American politics. Don’t forget that this is the same administration whose Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, called American veterans potential “right-wing extremists” and “security threats”.

That also raises the question of where the mainstream press is on addressing this comment. If this had been said by Christine O’Donnell or Sarah Palin, I have absolutely no doubt they’d be drooling at the mouth like rabid dogs. The howls of sanctimonious outrage would be all over the TV talk shows and newspaper editorial pages. Don’t forget the brouhaha when Rush Limbaugh said he hoped Obama’s policies would fail, a completely benign statement by comparison.

Instead… the silence is deafening.
 
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (80) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Legalize Weed? California’s Proposition 19

 
On the California ballot next month is Proposition 19, which would legalize the cultivation, possession, sale, and use of marijuana, as well as impose taxation on its sales.

I’ve read the arguments in favor of the idea: it’s not a “gateway” drug; it’s no worse than alcohol; legalization would get the gangs out of the marijuana trade; there’s no constitutional foundation for the war on drugs. Frankly, I don’t find any of these arguments persuasive.

The science is split on whether or not it’s a “gateway” drug. It may not be worse than alcohol, but we already have plenty of problems with alcohol; do we want to add to them? I see nothing in the Constitution that forbids laws against illicit drugs, especially at the state level.

As to the premise that legalization will magically make the illegal drug trade in weed go away: who came up with that loony idea?

Are the drug gangs who make tons of money suddenly going to just shrug their shoulders and walk away? Why would they do that? They make a boatload of money tax free.

No, no more than legal gun stores have ended street trade in illegal guns. All they'll do is cut their prices to be more competitive, and that's easy to do as illegal weed is cheaper than dirt to grow.

Meanwhile, the legal weed sold in stores with profit margins and taxation just won't be able to beat the price.

And that doesn't even begin to address the conflict with federal drug laws. Nor does it in any way address the issue of rampant marijuana use by underage kids. How is that issue going to be “solved” by legalizing weed?

The whole idea's ridiculous.

What’s especially ironic is that in this state I’m treated like a criminal if I want to enjoy a cigarette with my drink in a bar. Talk about cognitive dissonance.
 
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (188) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »