Monday, October 25, 2010

Liberal Hypocrisy & The Specter of Shadowy "Outside" Groups

The New York Times has issued an alert: Shadowy "outside" pro-Republican groups are crushing poor Democrats with dirty, anonymous money. The vast right-wing conspiracy strikes again!

In their paranoid little piece, the Times refers to "outside groups" nine times. I wonder what they find so repugnant about the flow of money and power across congressional lines?

Liberals and so-called moderates in Washington cheerfully impose their will on the rest of the country without regard for the constraints of the Constitution. They treat the Bill of Rights as a quaint list of mere suggestions (particularly the 10th Amendment, which seems to be viewed as an embarrassing anachronism by most of the self-appointed elitists who run the imperial federal government in D.C.)

Power mongers in Washington have taken it upon themselves to regulate every detail of American life. From what you eat, to how you get your health care, to how you illuminate your home, Congress and POTUS have a plan.

About a year ago, CNS news asked Madame Speaker Nancy Pelosi about the limits of her power: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”

Pelosi: “Are you serious? Are you serious?” “Yes, yes I am.”

Pelosi then shook her head before taking a question from another reporter. Her press spokesman, Nadeam Elshami, then told that asking the speaker of the House where the Constitution authorized Congress to mandated that individual Americans buy health insurance as not a “serious question.”

“You can put this on the record,” said Elshami. “That is not a serious question. That is not a serious question.”
So malignant statist busybodies like Pete Stark (D-CA) have concluded as recently as this summer that "The federal government, yes, can do most anything in this country."

Pete and Nancy have made it clear that they're quite comfortable with the idea of exerting their influence on people outside of their own congressional districts, but I don't remember the New York Times fretting much about that.

Along the same lines, liberal Republicans like Olympia Snowe are greatly inconvenienced by conservatives who inisist on meddling with her right to meddle:
What works in South Carolina and Delaware may not work in Maine. We all have different views. We're independent," Snowe responded, "I can't go back to the people of my state and say, excuse me, I have to be one hundred percent ideologically pure because someone has dictated that from another state. It just wouldn't wash," she said.
The irony of this attitude is hilarious.
Statists don't want you interfering with their lives or their machinations, e.g., if you reach across state lines to crush one of their statist cronies, they and their friends in the Democrat-Dominated Dinosaur media are quick to complain:
“As you know, they have been dumping tens of millions of dollars of secret money into these campaigns,” Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, said in an interview. “I would say the outside groups have shuffled the deck in a number of these races.”
Sounds scary, right?

As the New York Times agonizes over the voluntary transfer of money across congressional lines, I laugh at the hypocrisy.


Gorges Smythe said...

Is that anything like Obama's arab oil money, or George Soros' American political spending?

Anonymous said...

I'd like to think that a landslide victory in November will put an end to this hypocrisy. I know. I'm dreaming.

Nice post, Klik.