What gives Congress the right to regulate it?
Nothing in the Constitution.
Note that (as with Roe v. Wade), one’s position on abortion is, or at least should be, irrelevant to whether Congress (or SCOTUS) has the power to declare it either legal or illegal. It’s about process, not outcome. But too many from both sides of the aisle (as we saw with ObamaCare) don’t give a damn about process if they get the outcome they want.
Could he be this election cycle’s Ross Perot?
Just what we need.
Has he finally been mugged by reality?
Dreyfuss, who in 2006 called for the impeachment of then-President George W. Bush, has long been a critic of special interest money in politics; in 2011, during an appearance at the National Press Club, he called for a constitutional amendment “prohibiting money, politics and television.” He also started The Dreyfuss Initiative in support of teaching civics in schools.
Well, the latest piece is at least consistent with that. And at least he recognizes that “getting money out of politics” would require a Constitutional amendment. But he doesn’t seem to recognize that the best way to get money out of politics, at least federal politics, would be to remove the incentive, by limiting the power of the federal government to what the Founders intended, particularly restoring the 9th and 10th Amendments.
[Late Tuesday-morning update]
Given the turn the comments have taken, this seems relevant: Government corruption, from the IRS to the DOJ.
[Bumped]
An excerpt from @KirstenPowers new book.
As I noted to her on Twitter this morning, they’re not “liberals.” They’re leftists. I’m a liberal.
…give pollsters the politically correct answer. Then they vote.
This could be a big problem for the media/Dems next November. There is nothing about polling in the Constitution, and too often, they’ve been used as political weapons. Here’s hoping they finally start backfiring on the Left, as they just did in Britain.
An atheist blogger hacked to death in Bangladesh.
Anyone who is not a Muslim (and many who are the wrong kind of Muslims) is a target.
[Update a few minutes later]
Speech doesn’t justify killing people. Killing people justifies killing people, though.
Unfortunately, the FBI has an “interesting” response to threats against Pam Geller:
Pamela Geller told Fox News’ Sean Hannity that neither the Federal Bureau of Investigations or the Department of Homeland Security have yet to respond to her requests, now that she’s officially a target of the Islamic State.
This is an excellent opportunity to flush out the enemy. But this administration can’t admit that we have any enemies, other than domestic ones who want to reduce the size of government.
It would be a non-problem, if we weren’t being completely economically irrational about it. But hey, it’s California. We’re economically irrational about energy and transit, too.
It’s particularly sad when this sort of insanity comes from the judicial branch. It is not “child abuse” to leave a kid in a car for ten minutes.
Is it the end of Britain, as we know it?
Could be. Not sure that’s a bad thing. The Scots were never a good fit, and letting them go their own way will allow the English to be English again. It seem like Labour is (finally) finished in the south. This might actually open up some political space in England for a true liberal party.
…are all right. Some of them, anyway.
Actually, I think (or at least hope) the trigger-terrorized special snowflakes are a minority, but a noisy one.
[Update a few minutes later]
Some students at Columbia are mocking the new Puritans as well.