Monthly Archives: May 2010

Why Borders Don’t Matter

Why Borders Don’t Matter… to some at least.

While Wikipedia is by no means an unbiased and impartial source, I find it’s frequently a good starting place when looking for information. Especially if one isn’t trying to write academic our journalistic quality articles. In this case, I think it can provide an important insight into why the political left recoils from enforcing the Southern United States Border like a vampire recoils from Holy Water:

“Pure communism” in the Marxian sense refers to a classless, stateless and oppression-free society where decisions on what to produce and what policies to pursue are made democratically, allowing every member of society to participate in the decision-making process in both the political and economic spheres of life


Stateless communism, also known as pure communism, is the post-capitalist stage of society which Karl Marx predicted would inevitably result from the development of the productive forces. Stateless communism is closely related and connected to world communism.

Strictly speaking, pure communism is a stage of social development where material and productive forces are advanced to a degree where actual freedom (freedom from necessity, and thus from wage labor and alienation from work) for every person is possible.[citation needed] The state apparatus becomes redundant because classes cease to exist.[1]

* Anarchists and Marxists both agree on the long-term desirability of a stateless society, but disagree on how such a society will emerge and on what strategy, if any, is to be used for achieving stateless communism.

No borders is straight out of the founding doctrines of  Marxism (the unholy trinity of Marxist political philosophy being Communism, Socialism, and Fascism).

There they go again…

ABC News needs some better editors.  In a story about Laura Bush’s views on abortion and homesexual marriage, they had this to say…

Bush’s comments sparked reaction – and criticism – from both sides of the aisle. Liberal groups said she should have spoken out sooner when she had the White House as a bully pulpit. Conservatives defended the merits of their arguments despite, being seemingly unable to convince the wife of one of their movement’s most prominent figureheads.

President George W. Bush… figurehead?  I hope that somebody at ABC news is embarrassed.

But, then again, why am I surprised, these are the same people who can’t even bother to look at Wikipedia (nevermind bother to actually do research for a story) to articulate the difference between the semi-automatic weapons regulated by the so called “assault weapons ban” and the fully automatic rifles which they proclaim reign fire down upon Mexico.

A Rare Disagreement with Coulter

I have a quibble with Ann Coulter’s column this evening.  She wrote:

We are at war. The Supreme Court has no right to stick its fat, unelected nose into the commander in chief’s constitutional war powers, particularly in a war against savages whose only reason for not nuking us yet is that they don’t have the technology.

While I certainly agree that the only reason that the crazy jihadist Muslims haven’t set off a nuclear bomb yet is that the technology has thus far eluded them.  I would quibble that we are not at war.  Not in any sense of the term.  We are not taking the threats against us seriously, example one the abject refusal of the Federal Government to do anything at all about the crime and chaos on the southern border.

But, seeing as how we are Not. At. War. the President has no war powers whatsoever.

There are right and legal ways to do things.  We are supposed to be a nation of laws.  It is important to do things the right and legal way.  Which, of course, was Ann Coulter’s larger point.  The Supreme Court has taken upon itself the powers rightfully delegated to the Congress  (so has the Executive Branch).   It was this sort of behavior that got the Republicans cast from the halls of power in 2006, and apparently got Bob Bennett thrown out of the halls of power in 2010.

Related Reading:  We Are Not At War.

I was right!

Well, it’s been 5 years, but WRAL is reporting that I was right.

Me, 5 Years Ago:

It seems very painfully obvious to me that what little money the government gets to keep will be used for more pork barrel politicking (The money will “go” for education, but that doesn’t mean that the education money is going to stay where it is).

WRAL Today

When state lawmakers passed the lottery in 2005, they promised that the money would not replace tax dollars meant for education, but analysis of the numbers shows that is exactly what has been happening.

“I don’t think we’ve ever seen the lottery as a game changer. We’ve seen it as: this is a nice addition to our portfolio,” said Wake County Debt Manager Nicole Kreiser.

Kreiser says Wake County’s annual construction allotment, about $10 million this year, covers less than half of the cost of an elementary school. Lottery money helped build the new Herbert Akins Elementary in Fuquay-Varina.

The problem, she says, is that state leaders pulled back corporate tax receipts that were also going to build schools.

“It’s essentially gone and we’ve been left with the lottery, so that may be a supplant issue,” Kreiser said.

It’s the same issue for lottery money directed to reduce class size. About $100 million pays for approximately 2,000 teachers. That allotment helps maintain student-to-teacher ratios in kindergarten through third grade based on state statute, but not reduce class size. Plus, budget cuts elsewhere are increasing class sizes in higher grades.

Now, the question is, what do we do about it?

At least there are still some Conservatives somewhere.

There are at least some Conservatives willing to hold their officials accountable for their treason.

Senator Bob Bennett of Utah couldn’t get enough of his own party’s delegates at the Utah GOP convention to get past the second round of balloting for his re-election bid.  After coming in third in the first two rounds, Bennett was automatically eliminated for the third round of voting.  Earlier, he had pleaded with delegates to give him a second chance after coming under fire for supporting the TARP bailouts:

It’s a shame that North Carolina Republicans don’t share the sentiment.  See:  Richard Burr.