Would it be too cynical to call it State of the (dis)Union?  I’ll be taking notes.  I’m looking forward to Governor McDonnell’s response and the post-game analysis by my fellow esteemed SA bloggers who are all a lot smarter than me.  Live blog here if you wish. I’ll bring the popcorn.

Yesterday I had the good fortune to attend the inauguration of Virginia’s 71st governor, Bob McDonnell.  All the guests were full of energy and enthusiasm as we watched him take the oath of office, along with his Lieutenant-Governor Bob Bolling and Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli.  It really felt like being at a concert of my favorite rockstar – the excitement goes beyond description. I couldn’t do it justice if I tried. There was a little something for everyone, from the flyover after the oath to the Redskins cheerleaders to the history in which Richmond is steeped.  The next four years should be good for Virginia and I pray for the Governor and his family.

Below is the full text of his Inaugural Address, courtesy of #bobmcdonnell: (more…)

I’m sure…I know there have been “worse” political decades than the 2000s (the 1870s with Grant come to mind…although reconstruction did end…the 1930s were pretty politically monotonous as well…the 1970s…Nixon, Ford, Carter…). But at least it’s fun to remember the soundbites from the 2000s:

My sister-in-law, Tami Huggins, a school teacher in Las Vegas, Nevada, has a letter coming out in the Las Vegas Sun in which she provides to Washington Post columnist, E. J. Dionne, a lesson on the purpose of the U. S. Senate. Several days ago, Dionne, who is also a professor of government at Georgetown University, published an op-ed piece in which he writes, among other things, the following:

Of course what has happened on the health care bill is enraging. It’s quite clear that substantial majorities in both houses of Congress favored either a public option or a Medicare buy-in.

In a normal democracy, such majorities would work their will, a law would pass, and champagne corks would pop. But everyone must get it through their heads that thanks to the now bizarre habits of the Senate, we are no longer a normal democracy.

Here is Tami’s response to Professor Dionne’s op-ed piece:
(more…)

In my last post decrying the shameless legislative prostitution of congressional call girls legislators Mary Landrieu and Ben Nelson I was taken to task by one of our liberal readers for my naivete regarding run of the mill legislative “log rolling.” Apparently, only a uninformed boob would object to legislators who, having previously carved out a position based on a highly publicized moral position, cave on that self same position once they are offered enough money. Wow, I thought all this “log rolling” was to be a thing of the past in the new transparent age of Obama who, after lowering sea levels and global temperatures, would bring a new tone to Washington.

While our associates on the left may have made their peace with corruption I have not. I remain disgusted at the performance of our legislature regarding healthcare reform. If this issue is as important as they say then why the artificial deadline of getting this thing done before Christmas? Why not take the necessary time to get this thing done right? Why do we have to rush this thing through?

Reelection. Thats it. These high priced whores in D.C couldn’t care less about the welfare of the nation. Its all about them and the retention of political power. Their shameless self promotion at the cost of the fiscal health of the public purse disgusts me to no end. Apparently, certain liberal readers believe such thinking is hopelessly naive. For them I offer the following clip:

Absolutely right. “When statesmen abandon their own private conscience for the sake of their public duties they lead their country by a short route to chaos.”

I think Oliver Cromwell’s rebuke of the House of Commons is particularly applicable to our legislature today.

“It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money. Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess?

AMEN!!!!!!

Huckabee’s bad judgement has come full circle. Apparently, his judgement on clemency while governor was soooo bad that the people of Arkansas actually considered amending the state constitution in order to curtail his ill-informed promiscuous grants of clemency to violent criminals.

Huckabee must never be allowed anywhere near a Republican presidential primary, much less the presidency!

Hat tip to Ace of Spades for the heads up.

Arkansas 2 is part of what I call the Jacksonian belt, the swath of counties from southwestern Pennsylvania along the Appalachian chain and extending to Oklahoma and Texas which were largely settled by the Scots-Irish immigrants that streamed into America in the dozen years before the Revolution and their descendants. Their great hero, and the son of Scots-Irish immigrants himself, was Andrew Jackson, the victor of Horseshoe Bend and New Orleans, who set about removing Indians from much of this territory and was the founder of the Democratic party. In 2008 voters in the Jacksonian belt voted heavily against Barack Obama in both the Democratic primaries and the general election, as you can see on these national maps and by clicking on individual states to see the county-by-county returns. This map showing the counties which cast a higher percentage of votes for John McCain in 2008 than for George W. Bush in 2004 is essentially a map of the Jacksonian belt.

If Vic Snyder is in trouble, it’s a good bet that many other Democrats from the Jacksonian belt are too.

Very interesting. My Scots-Irish ancestors are smiling from heaven. More here.

When tolerance becomes a one way street it certainly leads to cultural suicide. We are on that street. Liberals cannot be trusted to defend our Republic, because their sympathies obviously lie with their perceived victim, Major Nidal Malik Hasan.

I make no apologies for these words, and anyone angered by them, please, go to Ft Hood and look into the eyes of the real victims. The tragedy at Ft Hood Texas did not have to happen. Consider now the feelings of those there and on every military installation in the world. Consider the feelings of the Warriors deployed into combat zones who now are concerned that their loved ones at home are in a combat zone.

Ft Hood suffered an Islamic jihadist attack, stop the denial, and realize a simple point.

The reality of your enemy must become your own.

More here. A must read.

Just so everyone is clear.  Rep. Bobby Bright from the 2nd Congressional District of Alabama voted for the health care bill before he voted against it.  Rep. Bright’s first vote as a member of Congress was to elect Nancy Pelosi as the Speaker of the House.  That vote was the first vote on health care reform and Rep. Bright voted for Rep. Pelosi which made the vote this weekend possible.  The fact that the Democrats had their 218 and didn’t need his vote (thus making his brave stand possible) doesn’t change that fact.

Lyrics follow:
(more…)

That’s the title of my newest book. The publisher’s web page for the book, along with its cover, just appeared online this week.

Politics for Christians will be released by InterVarsity Press in March 2010. It is not an academic monograph (like Defending Life, which was published by Cambridge in 2007), but a brief introduction to the study of politics for Christian college students. But it’s not activism oriented. It is geared toward dealing with the philosophical issues that percolate beneath the religion-politics discussions that are ubiquitous in the public square. Here’s what the publisher says about the book:
(more…)

James O’Keefe, the intrepid young pimp reporter behind the ACORN videos, could face time in the slammer, according to Maryland State Law, because “In Maryland, it’s against the law to tape a person without their prior permission.”

I can’t find any more news at the moment. There is this blog article but that’s it.   In my limited knowledge of law and politics, it seems like they’re trying to discredit O’Keefe’s work.  It’s like, “Oh, don’t take him too seriously because he broke the law too.”

EDIT: Head over to Jacksonian Lawyer for some more behind-the-scenes goodies.

Will someone explain to me how you are going to require insurance companies to accept individuals with pre-existing conditions, prohibit the companies from denying coverage once an insured becomes sick, and then cap payments by individuals which increases the insurer’s liability and expect the insurance companies to accurately account for these risks when setting premiums?  Further, does anyone think that the insurance companies aren’t going to  have to raise their rates through the roof to try and deal with these new mandates?

He says he’s going to name names – BIG names. He says it’s bigger than Watergate. We shall see. More here, here, and here.

He is now promising a news story that will send government officials to jail. I’m betting he’ll be right again. How about you? How many readers will go on record here? Place your bets suckers.

In an op-ed piece published on August 10 in USA Today, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer write that “drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.” In a speech delivered in Virginia on August 7, President Barack Obama said this: “I don’t want the folks who created the mess to do a lot of talking. I want them to get out of the way so we can clean up the mess. I don’t mind cleaning up after them, but don’t do a lot of talking.”

So, if it is un-American to drown out opposing views, as Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer correctly maintain, then does it not follow that it is un-American for the nation’s chief executive to falsely brand those who hold opposing views as “the folks who created this mess” while demanding that they remain largely silent? Is not the President trying to “drown out” opposing views, albeit passive aggressively?

(Originally posted on First Thoughts)

It was a piece of cake determining this week’s recipient of the Margaret Went Award in Journalistic Non-Excellence:  congratulations Chris Elmendorf and Ethan Lieb.  You have devised what might be the most idiotic idea in the history of ever. (more…)

Whenever freedom is lost, wherever tyranny is found, there are three accompanying factors: religious oppression, economic depression, and a culture of death.

Orwell’s 1984 provides a vivid example of this principle. Religion in Oceania has been wholly abolished, the people live in government-induced squalor, and the state routinely comes between children and their parents, and is working on preventing marriage altogether.

But there are ample historical examples as well. (more…)

In the wake of the scandals and persistent self-absorbtion of Mark Sanford and John Edwards, Mark Steyn asks this pertinent question:

Is politics some kind of affirmative-action program for sociopaths?

Good question, Mark. The answer is yes.

The way I look at politics is this: Think of Frank Capra’s classic film ‘Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.’  Recall the climax where Senator Smith (ably played by Jimmy Stewart) collapses during his filibuster.  Now, imagine that Senator Paine, instead of confessing his complicity with the Taylor machine in a fit of guilt, goes on to say “I believe Senator Smith has yielded the floor. I would now like to move for a vote on the proposed public works bill.”  The bill passes.

Senator Smith leaves Washington, disgraced. The Boy Rangers disband. Clarissa Saunders, her cynicism affirmed, rises in her profession and eventually becomes the co-anchor of CBS News.  Senator Paine, drunk on power and cheap liquor, later gets involved in a car accident with a young campaign staffer as his passenger, and leaves the scene of the crime; nevertheless, he continues to be reelected.  The end.

Too cynical?

Any thoughts on the subject?

You hate how the vacancy came about… but Haley will certainly be an able chairman.

An absolutely brillant put-down of Andrew Sullivan by Christopher Badeaux.

Poor Sully is going to have to go to the burn unit after this.

On this feast day of St. Thomas More, patron saint of politicians, it seems appropriate to mention my latest enterprise.

Southern Appeal has always been a law blog, among other things. When I came on board as a contributor, it was in spite of my lack of experience with the law. I am now endeavoring to gain a greater involvement with the law — as a legislator.

I am a candidate for the Illinois legislature. I am seeking to unseat a Republican incumbent who has voted to repeal parental notifications for minors seeking abortions, voted to increase state funding of abortion, voted to abolish conscience protections for pro-life healthcare providers, voted for state funding of embryo-destructive stem cell research, who voted to remove the requirement that abortion providers be physicians, and who voted to protect abortion providers from malpractice suits. Her largest contributor is a pro-abortion PAC, and she has repeatedly been endorsed by Planned Parenthood.

And in 2008, she ran unopposed in both the primary and the general election.

I am running against her as a regular guy with no money, no organization, and virtually no relevant experience. But at least I know what a person is.

For me to beat her may require a miracle. But as a Christian, I believe in miracles. I’m asking for your prayers, for the intercession of St. Thomas More. And if you want to help spread the word, I’d be grateful for that as well.

St. Thomas More, Patron of politicians, ora pro nobis.

Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh was recently called to testify before the Senate. Under questioning from Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the following exchange occurred:

Sen. Boxer: “Why has it been delayed?”
Brig. Gen. Walsh: “Ma’am, at the LACPR…”
Sen. Boxer: “You know, do me a favor. Could say ’senator’ instead of ‘ma’am?’”
Brig. Gen. Walsh: “Yes.”
Sen. Boxer: “It’s just a thing, I worked so hard to get that title, so I’d appreciate it. Yes, thank you.”
Brig. Gen. Walsh: “Yes, senator.”

The words “disrespectful” and “petty” immediately come to mind. First of all,  ”sir” and “ma’am” are perfectly appropriate for addressing a U.S. Senator according to military protocol. None of the other senators present had complained, all of whom had been addressed the same way.

Secondly, Ms. Boxer herself failed to address the general as “sir” or “general” in her question, which was arguably disrespectful. Furthermore, she had previously addressed Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice as “ma’am.” You can’t expect to demand specific titles when you neglect to use them yourself.

Thirdly, who is so pretentious that they make these requests to begin with? I’m an attorney. Technically, attorneys can insist on the use of the suffix “esquire” in written correspondence. They can also opt to harangue court personnel if they fail to address them as “counselor.” However, the only attorneys who make a huge fuss over these things are self-absorbed and rude.

Using proper titles is a polite thing to do. However, when a polite title is already being employed — and “sir” and “ma’am” are certainly polite — only somebody with a huge ego or a chip on their shoulder would voice any complaint.

See Brian Williams bow to President Obama.

(H/T: Illinois Review)

(Cross-posted from Thoughts of a Regular Guy.)

For all those who think “talk-radio conservatism” best represents authentic conservatism and should wield greater influence within the Republican Party, I present to you the gentleman, scholar Mark Levin.

In the midst of an excellent piece on the abortion issue, Teri O’Brien recently asked the question, “could one be a ‘centrist’ on the issue of slavery?”

The answer is, of course one could. Back in the day, U.S. Senator Stephen A. Douglas (D-IL; who was Barack Obama’s direct predecessor in the U.S. Senate), was the voice of moderation on the slavery issue. Douglas could be described as “pro-choice” on slavery, although he preferred to speak of “popular sovereignty,” by which he meant the rights of the people of the several states and territories to decide the slavery question for themselves. (more…)

A new Gallup poll shows that America has taken a sharp turn towards the pro-life position.  Other recent surveys have corroborated this.  It is hard, humanly speaking, to say what has caused this.   Ideas, anyone?  The publicity of the Notre Dame situation?

I am confident, however, that prayer is at the true heart of the change!  Let’s keep it up!  At this rate, we won’t even have to beg politicians to take notice.  They tend to simply go with the flow.  We truly need a pro-life populace; otherwise, even overturning Roe vs. Wade won’t do much good as far as reducing the number of abortions.

Captain Ed’s post on Nancy Pelosi’s hyper-partisanship serves as a useful springboard for something I’ve been meaning to address.

First, to Ed: (more…)