Of hecklers and softballs

.

C'mon, she had to be a plant, right?

While campaigning in Peoria, Illinois yesterday, ahead of today's primary in that state, Mitt Romney confronts a heckler demanding free birth control and promptly smokes it into the gap for a stand-up double.

Question from woman in Peoria, Illinois: "So you’re all for like, 'yay, freedom,' and all this stuff. And 'yay, like pursuit of happiness.' You know what would make me happy? Free birth control."

Romney: "You know, let me tell you, no no, look, look let me tell you something. If you’re looking for free stuff you don’t have to pay for, vote for the other guy. That’s what he’s all about, okay? That’s not, that’s not what I’m about."

This demostrates precisely what we have been saying all along with respect to the willy-nilly making up of rights out of thin air and particularly making goods and services rights: "free" stuff necessarily requires the involuntary confiscation of other people's wealth and property to pay for it.

This woman wants "free" birth control (yes, we will be using air quotes from here on out whenever applicable) but that comes at a cost to everybody else in the form of higher premiums so that this woman can get laid. That may be her pursuit of happiness but we're pretty damn sure the founders didn't intend for her pursuit of the same to be the responsibility of others. Pursue getting laid on your own dime is elegant in its simplicity.

And irony of ironies, since this woman is insisiting that we all pay for her to get laid, an activity we were once told was the exclusive domain of the two (or more) consenters, she is now insisting that her getting laid be our business as well. Hey, we are paying for it, after all.

It is completely incoherent logic but logic just the same for a reditributionist statist.




We have been told to stay away from the contraception issue as it is one of those un-winnable social issues. Nonsense. The contraception issue , if approached correctly from religious conscience, personal freedom and fiscal responsibility angles will help illustrate the conservative and libertarian principles of the freedom coalition.

.

Taking the forgiveness path

From "Living Like a Liberal: it's hard work politicizing your whole life":

When we get there, I quickly unrack the bikes, and we tear off down the trail before anyone can stop us. There are signs everywhere warning park vehicles to slow for turtles. The river below is thick with spatterdock and pickerelweed. Our bikes slalom through trails lined with Green Ash, Red Maple, and Swamp Magnolia, while the skies overhead are patrolled by red-tail hawks, ospreys, and even the occasional bald eagle.

We have a fine time of it. But when we return, and I start re-racking the bikes, as sure as the sun rises, a park employee comes shuffling across the parking lot. “For future reference,” she says, “there’s no biking here. We are a sanctuary.”

“Really?” I say. “You allow vehicles to go through. There’s no sign saying ‘no biking.’ ”

“Well,” she says, “we have one on our website.”

I thank her for her attention, telling her we just finished biking, so we won’t be needing to anymore today. Back in the car, the kids are puzzled. “Man,” says Luke. “Isn’t it annoying when people try to ruin our walks and rides? They don’t let us do anything. They don’t allow dogs. They don’t allow bikes. They only allow turtles.”

“Yes,” I say, trying to share my values. “But we learned an important lesson.”

“Don’t bike there?” asks Dean.

No, I say, trying to bring it home. I explain to them that my assignment is to live liberally, and that classic liberalism was all about fighting for freedoms to do things (for voting rights, for civil rights, etc.). But that modern liberalism is mostly about people telling you what you can’t do—no smoking, no sodas in schools, no trans fats, no biking in parks.

“Some people tell you to question authority,” I explain, “But if you never ask authority for permission in the first place, they can’t tell you no.”

The boys nod their heads in unison, both of them wearing conspiratorial smiles. Sharing values can be rewarding. Let’s just hope they don’t tell their mother.

Remember this summer to be ungovernable and to experience life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness subversively and completely irresponsibly.

Old (conservative) Guys Rule

Americans grow happier as they age, surveys find. And a new Pew Research Center survey shows the tendency is holding up as the economy tanks.

Happiness is a complex thing. Past studies have found that happiness is partly inherited, that Republicans are happier than Democrats and that old men tend to be happier than old women.

So, what’s the deal? We don’t have anything to add regarding the gender and age factor but we do believe the political orientation bias is due to one’s world-view and general outlook on life.

Our conservatism has always been based on what mankind can accomplish and of unlocking that great potential from within. What mankind can do vs. what it is that he can’t do. From that basis, conservatism is essentially a positive mindset. Our view of liberalism, however, is that it seems to focus much more on the shortcomings and inherent weaknesses of mankind. What mankind is incapable of doing vs. what it is that he is capable of doing. Liberalism is therefore, more of a negative mindset.

These two different belief systems are manifested by the degrees by which both groups believe the government must intervene on behalf of the citizenry for protection, establishing a fair playing field in society and providing services.

It seems to us that a much more content and happy soul is achieved with a mindset of what man can do vs. what man cannot do.

And all this to say, we don't believe you are automatically consigned to be a bitter old man if you happen to be a lib.

Again, nothing scientific to back-up this assertion, just what we’ve observed over the years.