Categories
News

Barbour to Appoint Rep. Roger Wicker to Lott’s Senate Seat

AP – Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour on Monday announced his choice for Trent Lott’s replacement in the Senate: Rep. Roger Wicker, a conservative congressman.

Barbour said it was important to select a person with Lott’s “conservative values” and who would be able to work with Mississippi Sen. Thad Cochran, also a Republican.

“I am a mainstream conservative in the mold of Trent Lott, Thad Cochran, Haley Barbour and (U.S. Rep.) Chip Pickering and I believe the vast majority of Mississipians share this philosophy,” Wicker said at a news conference. “At the same time, I hope my constituents and colleagues view me as a pragmatic problem-solver.”

Wicker will serve until a state-mandated special election is held Nov. 4. He is expected to be a candidate in that race. The winner will serve out the remainder of Lott’s term, which runs through 2012.

Wicker, 56, had been mentioned as a possible successor since Lott’s resignation earlier in December after serving one year of a six-year term.

Wicker was elected to the U.S. House in 1994 to succeed the late Rep. Jamie Whitten. He has been re-elected six times from the 1st District in north Mississippi. Wicker was resigning from the U.S. House.

Lott served 16 years in the U.S. House before moving to the Senate in 1988. Lott announced in November that he would resign before the end of the year. He resigned Dec. 19 after Congress wrapped up its work for the year.

Lott, 66, said he wants to spend more time with his family and to pursue other job opportunities, possibly teaching. He ruled out any health concerns, but said it’s time for a younger voice to represent Mississippi in the Senate.

Categories
Letter From The Editor Opinion

Letter from the Editor: God is a Republican

God (R-Heaven) is much on the minds of the presidential candidates these days, and particularly on the minds of His colleagues in the Republican party.

God, as has been made abundantly clear in recent years, is a Republican and speaks to his partymates regularly. President George Bush has said he hears from Him quite often. Mitt Romney says without religion, there is no freedom (and God doesn’t mind that he’s a Mormon). Mike Huckabee says his rise in the polls is “God’s will.” Rudy Giuliani says the Bible is “the best book ever written,” and John McCain says he sees the hand of God when he hikes the Grand Canyon, though he thinks evolution might still be possible if you think it is. (Ron Paul now has a blimp and apparently doesn’t feel the need to curry God’s favor.)

Using this logic, we must conclude God is in favor of waterboarding, rendition, declarations of unilateral war, lying to grand juries, accepting bribes, unbalanced budgets, Rush Limbaugh, unchecked pollution, allowing people to pray to Him in school, Fox News, and tax cuts.

God is obviously opposed to evolution, gun laws of any kind, illegal immigration, unions, abortion, gay marriage, taxes, the Hollywood entertainment industry (except for Fox Entertainment shows like Family Guy and K-Ville), doing anything about global warming, and income taxes.

Of course, God also speaks to people other than politicians, including many athletes. He makes it possible for lots of dramatic homeruns to be hit and touchdowns to be scored. (God does not like the Memphis Grizzlies, for some reason. My theory is that Hakim Warrick is a Democrat.) And, oddly enough, God speaks to Willie Herenton, also a Democrat. But many of his supporters are Republicans, so that may explain God’s willingness to chat with the mayor.

There’s no denying Republicans have the edge when it comes to the Almighty. He’s in their corner. He answers their prayers. He’s on their side. Not much we can do about it.

Oh, God tosses the rest of us a bone now and then. I appreciate, for example, that he’s allowing my summer flowers to bloom in December. They look really nice with my Christmas decorations. Thank God.

Bruce VanWyngarden

brucev@memphisflyer.com

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

Less Government is More

“Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys.” — P.J. O’Rourke

I promised last week (The Rant, October 18th issue) to propose a solution for the competing desires of the liberal Vermont Republic and conservative League of the South to secede  from the union. So here are my ideas for what we really can do to make this  work:

First, let’s face it. We live in a divided country. Every recent national election has been close to 50-50 splits, and we are also split on how we want to run the ever-expanding federal government. As European countries such as Great Britain and France become more conservative and pro-capitalist, we in the U.S. seem poised to elect Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, who want to expand the  powers of Washington into healthcare and beyond. It will not work.

I held out hope in 1994, when the Republicans swept into a majority in Congress. They did force a few good things, such as welfare reform and  lower taxes. But over time the Republicans preferred power over principle, and they have been a bitter disappointment.

The federal government provides us with one important service, which is national defense. Lately, to let us know how important they are, the feds have been using our military in wars of choice that never  seem to turn out well. In fact, it is no longer “defense;” rather, they seem to take pleasure in deploying our troops for offense — while  confiscating 38 percent of our incomes in taxes to do so. Congress also run up trillions in deficits because they have no collective sense.

On the other hand, our state and local governments take much less of our income, and they balance their budgets, because they have to. They then provide us with services we actually use and count on: schools, roads, libraries, trash pickup, parks, airports, police, and  fire protection. They tend to do so in a manner that suits local priorities. And if you do not like what they do, you can simply move to another state.

The federal government, on the other hand, seldom does anything that pleases locals. It is more concerned about preserving and expanding its powers. Realistically, most of us can’t move to another country if we don’t like what the feds do. Movie stars sometimes threaten to do it. But most don’t follow through, which was a pity in the case of Barbra Streisand and Rosie O’Donnell.

So my solution to the unworkable-yet-appealing idea of secession is to grant more powers to the states and fewer to Washington, D.C. It is, after all, what our founding fathers intended in the first place. If you read the Federalist Papers, you will realize that they never intended for our national government to be expansive and overbearing. They wanted the states to be in charge. That way, if, for instance, you want an abortion on demand, then you move to a state that allows it. If you want to smoke weed, then you go to a state with liberal pot laws. If you think that we should pay for everything for people on welfare, you go to a state that provides flat-screen TVs and offers an assortment of French cheeses that are both delicious and  presented in a pleasing manner.

The basic reason that we fought for our independence is so we could do what we damn well please as long as it doesn’t harm others. Yet at every turn, the federal government seems to want to make us do as they think we  should, whether it comes to using windmills, driving a Prius,  or being forced to join the Hillary Healthcare Plan. (It’s interesting to me that the Democrats, who complained loudest about the  inept federal response to Katrina, are now advocating a federal takeover of  healthcare.)

The U.S. government spends our  money to make us increasingly dependent on the U.S. government’s programs.  Unfunded mandates, (which is not Larry Craig going to the bathroom without his wallet), are not good for states either. They not only waste federal money, they waste states’ money, too, with legislation that forces states to implement programs without providing funding to run them.

The Republicans did it with the expensive prescription drug-benefit giveaway. When a product that the private market should sell, such as prescription drugs, is taken over by the government, the first thing — and perhaps the only thing — that the drug companies need to buy are congressmen.

Our free-spending federal government officials think they are filled with enough hubris to believe that they should even tell other countries what to do. They call it “foreign policy.” The real answer to fixing foreign and domestic policy is allocating less money and power to the federal government and more to to state and local governments.

Ron Hart is a Southern libertarian who writes political satire. He lives  in

Florida and is an investor. His e-mail is

RevRon10@aol.com.

Categories
Opinion The Last Word

The Rant

The League of the South met recently in Chattanooga. Like its liberal cousin to the north, The Vermont Republic, the League of the South wants to secede from the Union. While it is not necessarily a bad idea, I vaguely remember a Ken Burns PBS documentary that makes me think that this has been tried before.

The League of the South says that it is not racially motivated. (And what better way to demonstrate this than to have the Confederate Flag as your symbol on your Web site?)

The liberal secessionists in Vermont want out of the federal government for other reasons. They want gays to be able to marry and accessorize freely — and they do not want to fight wars.

The South, and in particular my home state of Tennessee, the Volunteer State, enjoys fighting and will do so at the drop of a hat. In fact, most Southern men will sign up and be on the battlefield well before they ask what the war is about — and that includes bar fights. Our warring predisposition will certainly serve the South well when we inevitably invade Vermont someday.

If you think about it, breaking up the United States into a different alignment makes sense. Corporations make markets and companies more efficient by buying them and breaking them up into more cost-effective pieces. The rock-and-roll group Grand Funk Railroad, for example, could be bought and broken up into several more valuable bands, perhaps ones that employ less cow bell in their music.

The possibilities are endless. We need to ask ourselves, for example, do we really need both a North and a South Dakota?

And Southerners can quickly get past being split off from the North as long as it does not affect the SEC football playoffs. Another plus for us is that a secession might finally eliminate the Bowl Championship Series.

The real reason there is a movement in the liberal North and the conservative South to secede is a simple one: We disagree on everything.

We in the South do not think that Congress always has our best interest at heart, like when they are in session making laws. We believe that the fundamental failure of the federal government and Congress (with its 11 percent approval rating) is its unstoppable propensity to spend our money.

Hillary Clinton, for example, recently made a campaign proposition to give $5,000 to every child born in the U.S., including illegals. (Not to be outdone, and in an effort to jumpstart his failing campaign, John Edwards said he would match the $5,000 per year and throw in a lifetime supply of Robitussin.) Offering just any “tussin” would be viewed as unacceptable by the Democrats since, if the rich get Robitussin, no generic form of “tussin” should be forced upon the poor.

When you get down to it, the South and North differ fundamentally on two issues: abortion and guns. Southerners think abortion should not be legal after the first trimester. Northern liberals think abortion should be legal up to age 12.

On guns, we Southerners want our assault weapons in the glove compartment of our trucks, ready to blow away anyone who poses a threat to us, real or imagined.

Northerners believe that only the police, gangs, and the Mafia should have guns.

If we do split, the South could finally realize its dream of no separation of church and state and govern by religious denominations instead of political parties. The Baptists would be like the Shiites and the Methodists like the Sunnis. That has worked well in Iraq.

As we in the South know, as long as our leaders go to church and sing hymns on Sundays (and especially if they tell us about it enough), they prove both their moral superiority and leadership credentials. We will need no laws, just the Ten Commandments. And we certainly do not need zoning laws, as proven by driving through Panama City, Florida, or any Atlanta suburb.

The North will be aligned and beholden to every half-assed organized special-interest group that can afford a microphone. The overriding theme will be that if enough special interests — be they teachers’ unions, cab drivers or plaintiffs’ lawyers — get together in any seemingly victimized fashion, they can get something free from the government. Liberal Democrats love this country, much like O. J. Simpson loved his ex-wife and his sports memorabilia.

The North can keep the United Nations, and we in the South can learn about the rest of the world the way we always have — by visiting Epcot Center in Orlando.

Ron Hart is a libertarian columnist who lives in Atlanta.

Categories
Politics Politics Feature

The Tennessee Stud: Fred Thompson’s Womanizing Ways

Well, that didn’t take long. Former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson declared for president on Jay Leno this week and three days later, the press starts digging into ol’ Fred’s dirty laundry. And there’s plenty to dig into, if today’s London Daily Mail story is any indication.

A few excerpts from the Mail‘s profile of big Fred: A Mail investigation raises serious questions about whether the affable Thompson is the committed pillar of ‘family values’ that conservatives take him to be.

His second wife, Jeri, is a blonde 24 years his junior. They wed in 2002 after Thompson was advised that if he wanted to become President he needed to quell a reputation as a womaniser that earned him the nickname the Tennessee Stud.

His conquests include the five times-married “Elizabeth Taylor of country”, Lorrie Morgan, and three-time-divorcee Georgette Mosbacher, known as the “Divine Mrs M”.

Moreover, when Thompson married his first wife, Sarah Lindsey, at Lawrenceburg Methodist Church in 1959, she was already two months pregnant with their first child.

There’s more, lots more. Read the Mail story.

Categories
Opinion Viewpoint

No Conservative Party

The Republican Party is not now, never was, and never will be a conservative party. It is what it has always been: a representative of the rich and of big business.

It might have become a conservative party in 1964, when Barry Goldwater was nominated as the presidential candidate. The Rockefeller wing of the party, to which the Bush family has always been a part, conducted the most vicious character assassination campaign against Goldwater in modern political history. The liberal Rockefellerites preferred a crook from Texas to a conservative.

The Rockefeller wing never lost control of the party again, co-opting Nixon, Ford, and even Ronald Reagan, who was forced to take George Bush as his vice president. The Bush people, within two years, ran off nearly all of the original Reagan supporters.

There was a famous quote by James Baker, the first Bush’s hatchet man. He was quoted as saying: “Who else are the conservatives going to vote for?”

Well, Mr. Baker discovered that the conservatives had three choices in 1992. They could stay at home, they could vote for Ross Perot, or they could vote for Bill Clinton. I hope he thought of that while he watched Clinton’s inauguration.

The hard truth is that if you are a genuine political conservative, you don’t have a party. The Democrats are practically socialists; the Republicans are closer to corporate fascists. Neither one offers conservatives anything but rhetoric.

But let’s define our terms, because it is my belief that not many Americans today are really conservative. Political conservatism has nothing to do with such social issues as abortion or gay marriage. Those are moral and philosophical issues that properly belong to the state legislatures.

A true conservative recognizes that the Constitution is a binding contract that should be interpreted literally and in the context of the time at which it was written and ratified. A Constitution that means anything a judge says it means means nothing. Abraham Lincoln and his Republican Party were the first to violate it in a blatant manner. One of Lincoln’s cronies referred to it as “a worthless piece of parchment.”

A true conservative is fiscally responsible. Laying debt and interest payments on posterity is neither conservative nor liberal. It is just obscenely irresponsible.

A true conservative believes in noninterference in the affairs of other countries. Regime change is a policy favored by fascists or communists, but it has nothing to do with American conservatism. Americans have the right to govern only one country — their own. Americans have an obligation to defend only one country — their own.

A true conservative believes in a free economy and that beyond protecting the public from force and fraud, the government should not interfere in private affairs.

There are a lot of other things that define a genuine conservative, but suffice it to say that the Republican Party, with its imperialistic foreign policy, its disdain for the Constitution and the rule of law, its fiscal irresponsibility and its erosion of personal liberty, is not by any stretch of the imagination a conservative party.

It wouldn’t be a bad idea for people to sit down with a pencil and paper and list what they actually believe. Clarifying their own political philosophy might make them less susceptible to the demagoguery and political propaganda that characterize our present age.

When the Founding Fathers laid the burden of self-government on us, they didn’t do any favors for the ignorant and lazy-minded. Tom Jefferson observed that those who expect to be ignorant and free expect what never was and never will be.

Charley Reese has been a journalist for 49 years. He writes for the Lew Rockwell Syndicate.