gototopgototop
" America wasn't founded so that we could all be better. America was founded so we could all be anything we damned well pleased. "
—P. J. O'Rourke


keithbeach2

…that measures its sanity by the percentage of its people who know they are free. People with unshakeable clarity that their most fundamental rights — to think for themselves and speak their minds without fear of jail, to form voluntary associations of their choosing, to enjoy the fruits of their labor, to acquire private property and protect it at gunpoint if necessary — are not given by government, or society, or any person.

A nation whose vitality and resilience depend on individuals who consider those rights intrinsic to their very being: the spiritual equivalent of DNA. Such that when any aspect of the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness is assaulted — they feel it like a punch in the gut. Patriotism gets personal. Conversations begin around the office water cooler, over back yard fences, at diners, gas stations and softball fields. In this way diverse people find out they’ve got something crucial in common. Born free and mean to stay that way.

America’s Founders were that kind of people. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and James Madison risked the gallows when they declared government has no power except those voluntarily granted it by the people. When they insisted that the fundamental duty of government is to secure (read: safeguard) our inherent and “unalienable” natural rights. They brought forth a republic with the Constitution of the United States as supreme law of the land. No better instrument has been devised for protecting personal liberty by establishing a limited and defined role for government.

Now this great achievement is threatened by a worldview that contradicts the principles of America’s Founding at every turn. By an ideology that promotes the psychology of victimization and rage against imaginary villains, infantile claims to entitlement and compensation, primitive feelings of envy and inferiority. Marxist in fact though seldom in name, this movement demands guaranteed rewards regardless of talent, skill, motivation or effort. This militant crusade vows to meet the needs of “The People” from cradle to grave, betting that a majority can be seduced to support candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury.

Fortunately the politics of perennial preschool is free — or seems so — only at first. Tuition day eventually comes. The same government that offers to absolve us from responsibility for our lives gets to determine what we can own, eat and drive; how we manage our businesses; how much of our money we can keep; the number of guns — if any — they will let us own; what we are allowed to say.  Even what we are permitted to think (thanks to the advent of “hate crimes”).

Good news: more and more Americans are figuring out that annexing the core functions of adulthood to the state involves unacceptable trade-offs. A recent CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey found that 56 percent of Americans believe that the government has become so powerful it constitutes an immediate threat to the freedom and rights of citizens. When only 21 percent of Americans say that Washington operates with the consent of the governed, we face an alarming crisis.

And a remarkable opportunity.

The Founders knew it was up to each successive generation to keep the Spirit of 1776 alive. “Don’t blow it.” That’s what I imagine the 56 signers of the Declaration Of Independence telling us. Their mission was to create a government where the primacy of constitutional authority is basic to liberty, opportunity, prosperity and the social contract. Where personal responsibility, voluntary cooperation, fiscal integrity and abiding respect for life all are crucial to the foundation of culture.

A society where the first requisite of a good citizen, in Theodore Roosevelt’s words, “is that he shall be able and willing to pull his own weight.” A country that supports America’s national interest in advancing freedom and opposing tyranny in the world, and prudently considers what we can and should do to that end.

That’s also the mission of Sane Nation. Welcome.

Immigration

Headline Of The Week

Keith Thompson Friday, 30 April 2010 11:17
"Illegal immigrants plan to leave over Ariz. law" (Associated Press)

Um, wasn't that the point?"

Arizona Opponents Play Racial Profiling Card

Keith Thompson Tuesday, 27 April 2010 11:43

Surprise — not. The mayor of San Francisco (Sanctuary City = welcome mat magnet for illegal immigrants) doesn't like Arizona's get-tough approach to dealing with foreign nationals illegally present in the United States:

"What happened in Arizona is ... un-American," the mayor said. "The idea that people, based on their race or ethnicity, can be pulled over or stopped and someone asks for their papers reminds me of something I read ... happening overseas."

The new law makes no such provision. Mayor Gavin Newsom knows, or should know, the law explicitly forbids any form of racial/ethnic profiling. Arizona police are simply authorized to ascertain the immigration status of anyone they reasonably suspect is in the state illegally. So: who might qualify as a reasonable suspect, and on what grounds? Try individuals gathered in Home Depot parking lots, or at gas stations or other locations known to be frequented by persons — regardless of race or ethnicity — seeking work as day laborers. If such persons flee approaching uniformed police officers, would it not be a safe guess that they might be candidates for reasonable suspicion? Persons who run at the mere sight of a cop might have blond hair and blue eyes and hail from Stockholm, or maybe, just perhaps, they crossed the U.S. border under cover of darkness from Mexico. Simply stated, the Arizona law asserts concurrent jurisdiction by making being in the country illegally an offense, as it is already an offense at the federal level.

Meanwhile, San Francisco City Supervisor David Campos, a proud open-borders advocate, declares: "There are consequences when you target a whole people." He's right about that, but not for the reasons he thinks. The "whole people" being targeted are people present in the United States illegally. If congressional Democrats are keen to champion their cause in the November elections — along with Obamacare, Cap and Trade, middle class tax increases, and the stunning growth of federal spending — allow me to quote Mr. Obama: "Bring it."

Arizona Gets Serious About Illegal Immigration

Keith Thompson Wednesday, 14 April 2010 13:28

If the Feds refuse to stem the flow of illegal immigration — and clearly Obama's not trying — it's inevitable the states most affected will do what they can. The Wall Street Journal:

Arizona lawmakers on Tuesday passed one of the toughest pieces of immigration-enforcement legislation in the country, which would make it a violation of state law to be in the U.S. without proper documentation.
It would also grant police the power to stop and verify the immigration status of anyone they suspect of being illegal.
Under the measure, passed Tuesday by Arizona's lower house, after being passed earlier by the state Senate, foreign nationals are required to carry proof of legal residency.
If the Feds refuse to stem the flow of illegal immigration — and clearly Obama's not trying — it's inevitable the states most affected will do what they can.

Guess who's not happy? The open-borders crowd:

"The objective is to make life miserable for immigrants so that they leave the state," said Chris Newman, general counsel for the Los Angeles-based National Day Laborer Organizing Network.

Now there's a concept: unauthorized foreign nationals leaving. If enough states get tough, "leaving" should begin to look like: heading south of the border. Ya think?

If Arizona's governor signs the bill, look for some activist judge to rule it unconstitutional on the premise that immigration is the province of the federal government not the states. (That's what happened to Proposition 187 in California.) If that happens, look for growing demand for a strict national bill — which won't be forthcoming, of course. So the real battleground will be this fall, at the ballot box, in state after state.