Monday, July 01, 2013

Cruising the Web

Here's another example of incompetence in the federal government as the U.S. Park Police admits that they've lost track of thousands of guns. Do you think a private business would be in such a sorry state? It's yet another reason not to turn major parts of our economy over to mammoth bureaucracies.

While the Supreme Court is signalling skepticism on affirmative action, the Obama administration is trying to achieve race preferences through its regulatory policies throughout the government. Expect more Court challenges and more defeats for the Obama administration over time. Meanwhile, those policies are poisoning activities from education to bank loans.

The Washington Post reviews how administration warnings about the evil effects of sequestration were just wrong.
This is why the sky didn’t fall. Sequestration was intended to show there was no longer any escape from austerity in Washington.

There was.
It turns out that, when given discretion, government officials could find ways to cut money and not harm the basic mission of their agencies. Imagine that. Obama wanted to make it seem as if it were impossible to cut any money from government spending without harming programs that everyone likes; it turns out that that just isn't true. And now that he's called wolf one time, what will happen the text time?

One way we could save a whole lot of money is if our elected officials just stayed home instead of having to pay hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars for them to travel abroad. Don't these guys have the internet? They could save some money and Skype their meetings.

The Democrats' complaints on how groups were counted for targeting by the IRS doesn't disprove that the IRS was overwhelmingly targeting conservative groups, but it does demonstrate how incomplete the Inspector General audit of what was going on was.

Carl M. Cannon reviews the history of how journalists have treated abortion as a sacred cow and been unable to intelligently cover issues touching on religion.

And Jonah Goldberg questions why "women's health" has now become the euphemism for abortion rights. Isn't there a lot more to women's health than abortion? But then that is the attitude of the Obama administration which, out of all the medical needs that people might have, chose to make mandatory the free provision of birth control, sterilization, and the morning after pill rather than, say, diabetes, cancer, or heart medicine. Of course, as Goldberg points out, liberals would prefer to make as many medical decisions as possible, except abortion, subject to the control of government.
Conservatives want to leave it to women to make their own choices: about what to eat, whether to smoke, how fast they can drive, whether they can own a gun, etc. Many conservatives would also like to see women live long enough for the chance to make those decisions, rather than be snuffed out in utero.

Of course, this argument will be wholly unpersuasive to the folks shouting the loudest about “women’s health decisions.” Which raises an even greater irony. The basic conservative or pro-life view is that abortion is different than other health-care decisions because there’s a harmed party other than the mother. This fact, not sexism or traditionalism or theology, is what trumps the general conservative preference for individual freedom. You don’t have an unfettered right to harm someone else.

But once you get beyond abortion, conservative public policies treat women like autonomous human beings capable of making their own choices — about health care or anything else. It’s the abortion-rights extremists who boil down the vast range of issues and choices raised by the term “women’s health” to a single issue: sexual reproduction, as if women were nothing more than breeders. And yet conservatives are the ones who’re called sexists.
Joe Biden (or his staff) invents a quote and is quite inept about it. Imagine that. I'm always suspicious when a liberal (conservative tells us that he's heard behind closed door from Republicans (Democrats) complaining about their party's extremism. We're supposed to believe that Washington is so vilely partisan, but members of one party like to bad-mouth their own party to members of the opposing party. It always sounds might convenient to me.