Your State Legislature At Work

Watch this become politicized - TN Republicans DEMAND that dogs be allowed in the chambers! Democrats vote to fund a study of the effect of dogs in public places. Republicans nominate a dog in the primaries.

The Gay Agenda Claims Another Victim

Courageous Assistant Attorney General Andrew Shirvell has has been forced to take a leave of absense and will be facing disciplinary action just for exercising his free speech! You may recall he had a blog which criticized the Gay Student Body President of University of Michigan, Chris Armstrong. Isn't it the JOB of government to single out college students and wreck their lives?

The national buzz around the blog began when Shirvell appeared on Cooper's show on Tuesday evening.

"This is a political campaign. This is nothing personal against Chris," Shirvell told Cooper.

Shirvell's blog also features a photo of Armstrong with a swastika painted on a rainbow flag and the word "resign" scrawled on his face.

"Chris Armstrong is a radical homosexual activist who got elected partly funded by the Gay and Lesbian Victory Fund to promote a very deeply radical agenda at the University of Michigan," Shirvell said on CNN.

See? SEE? Armstrong never would have been elected if HOMOSEXUALS hadn't contributed MONEY to his campaign! Who says THEY have a right to participate? Where is THAT in the constitution?

You could question the judgement of a man in his 30's meddling in college politics, I suppose, or devoting his off-hours time to a blog called "Chris Anderson Watch" (not currently online) instead of anything else, but that's his perogative, right? Well, yes it is.

"He does satisfactory work and, off hours, he's free to engage under both our civil service rules, Michigan Supreme Court rulings and the United States Supreme Court rule," (Attorney General Mike) Cox said.

Cox did, however, call Shirvell's actions "offensive."

"He's clearly a bully. Absolutely. And is he using the Internet to be a bully? Yes," Cox said. "But is that protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution? Yes."

So what is he really guilty of, aside from rabid anti-gay hysteria? Nothing! And probably he has a little crush on Chris Anderson, but that ain't no crime. So hopefully when he returns from his voluntary leave he'll get his reprimand for making the AG's office look bad and keep his job, though more likely he'll be moved to a less prominent department. Maybe Assistant Postmaster General could be made available? Those people have a rep for mental stability.

It's Wrong to Not Let Business Step On You

Congratulations, conservatives! Your drive over the years to ensure a more business-friendly Supreme Court has resulted in Jeffery Skilling getting a little break. How can American business thrive if they have to throw away one of the best tools in their arsenal - faking scarcity to drive up price? What's next, not allowing collusion? Having to tell the truth to investors about profits? Come on!

Meanwhile, why oh why are we making BP pay for that oil spill? Getting them to agree to put up money for reparations is exactly like what Hitler did. And notice BP wasn't forced by any laws to set up that escrow fund - they volunteered! How DARE we even ASK an oil company to PAY for DAMAGE?

And credit card companies - why should they have to limit their rates? All that does it give loan sharks an unfair competitive advantage. Until the banks and loan sharks can operate exactly the same way, this is a socialist nation.

How I long for 1911, the year the Triangle Shirtwaist factory was in business. 99 years ago, we didn't have all these regulations and people were better for it. Why do I have to pay taxes just to drive up the price of my meats and food to meet so-called "safety" regulations - that stuff is a lot cheaper in Mexico and Somalia and they don't have any health problems! Tell you what, if this doesn't change soon, I'm moving to Costa Rica like Rush Limbaugh did and starting a life there.

Nobody Wants A Free-Market Solution For Everything

Over at WAMK, we've been knocking around the whole "why are we in Iraq" question. For some reason they all insist it's to fight terrorism, even though we didn't go in for that reason and the only reason any terrorists are there now is because they know where to find us. Maybe the real reason is this, courtesy Republican congressman Chris Shays: we're there because we can't afford to let any other country control the oil. H/T to Crooks and Liars for hosting the video.

Isn't that fascinating? Whether true or not, this notion illustrates that no matter how much you believe in free-market capitalism, you think the government has to step in somewhere. In this example, we are afraid to allow foreign interests to control the price of our oil. Well, why not? If the price goes up, won't the market compensate by forcing us to find alternative energy sources, or restructure society so we use less oil? What's the matter, McCapitalist? Chicken? So rather than allow the market to correct itself, Rep. Shays is willing to endorse an expensive government entitlement that involves trillions of dollars and untold American lives.

This is an economic example, but most Republicans part ways with deregulation at the point where morals enter it. It's government meddling, for example, that suppresses prostitution. I mean, what's wrong with that deal? A man and a woman (or a man and a man, or rarely a woman and a woman) enter into a business deal which involves sex. They both agree to the terms up front. Why is this against the law? Or maybe it's a drug deal instead. And sure sometimes people are killed by the drugs, but so what? You want a nanny state?

Lead-based toys? If people stop buying them, the problem solves itself. Child labor? How is it the Government's business to protect children? It's the business of parents! Besides, some kids like to sew. The FDA is the biggest thwarter of free-market solutions ever, after the FBI. Crime itself is an efficient free-market solution to a host of conditions.

Even libertarians I've talked to say that they're okay with public roads.

So ultimately, your tolerance for government interference is a question of degrees, not absolutes. And everyone wants the government to control SOMETHING. The only disagreement is where and how much.