Mark Steyn Destroys Lindsey Graham

Via NRO:

Andrew, ever since I ran into a spot of bother in Canada, I’ve found myself giving speeches in defense of freedom of expression in Toronto, London, Copenhagen, etc. I did not think it would be necessary quite so soon to take the same stand in the land of the First Amendment against craven squishes of the political class willing to trade core liberties for a quiet life. I have no expectations of Harry Reid or the New York Times, but I have nothing but total contempt for the wretched buffoon Graham.

A mob of deranged ululating blood-lusting head-hackers slaughter Norwegian female aid-workers and Nepalese guards — and we’re the ones with the problem?

I urge you to read the whole thing.

Advertisements

To Read Or Not To Read…

That is the question for Arlen Specter and his brethren in the Senate. Mark Steyn nails it in The Corner:

Re my earlier post, an Arlen Specter defender (the loneliest march down Main Street?) writes:

Every CEO in the country, including Ronald Reagan as President, reads executive summaries of important documents. The idea that any Senator has to read an entire bill is nonsense. He needs staff not only to read it but to relate how items on page 3 relate to provisions on page 1009. Did George Bush read every line of the bills he signed? Bill Clinton signed Welfare reform and I bet he did not read the final bill (though to be fair he is wonky enough to have read a lot of it). What is true is that without time there is no way staff could read it and draft the necessary critiques for Senatorial review but this “He hasn’t read the bill stuff” is stupidity not some great insight.

Sorry, I pass. Arlen Specter is not a CEO — notwithstanding the vast Gulf Emir-sized retinue to which he has become accustomed. He doesn’t run anything. He has no payroll to make, no contracts to fulfill, no deliveries to expedite. A legislator is elected to legislate — so, if he doesn’t read the law before he makes it law, he’s not doing the only job he has. When you go to see Barbra Streisand, she has an orchestra and a conductor and arrangers and lighting designers and hair stylists, but she’s still expected to do the singing herself. If she stood up and said, “Okay, I’ve outsourced ‘People’ to my intern Kevin and ‘You Don’t Bring Me Flowers’ to the niece of a friend of mine who needed a summer job and the Yentl medley to some people Kevin met for a breakfast session and said seemed to know what they were talking about,” you’d begin to wonder why anyone needs Barbra.

Why does anyone need Specter? Why can’t we just eliminate the middle-man and have his “staffers” announce their collective vote like a U.N. Security Council meeting?

If a bill is too big to read, it’s a good sign you shouldn’t be passing it. Rule by anonymous technocrats is a form of tyranny, however benign.

The last point is key and one that isn’t made often enought: If it’s too big to read, it shouldn’t be passed.

The Death Of The American Idea

Mark Steyn gives us a sobering look at where America stands and where it’s going. I’m afraid he’s right. A sample:

I disagree with my fellow conservatives who think the Obama-Pelosi-Reid-Frank liberal behemoth will so obviously screw up that they’ll be routed in two or four years’ time. The President-elect’s so-called “tax cut” will absolve 48 per cent of Americans from paying any federal income tax at all, while those that are left will pay more. Just under half the population will be, as Daniel Henninger pointed out in the Wall Street Journal, on the dole. By 2012, it will be more than half, and this will be an electorate where the majority of the electorate will be able to vote itself more lollipops from the minority of their compatriots still dumb enough to prioritize self-reliance, dynamism, and innovation over the sedating cocoon of the nanny state. That is the death of the American idea – which, after all, began as an economic argument: “No taxation without representation” is a great rallying cry. “No representation without taxation” has less mass appeal. For how do you tell an electorate living high off the entitlement hog that it’s unsustainable and you’ve got to give some of it back?

The Trial Of Mark Steyn

Or should that be Josef K.? I don’t know if many of you know what’s going on in Canada right now. If not, you should take note. Mark Steyn is a political pundit, writer, man of letters, etc. who was born in Canada and cut his teeth in the writing profession in the UK. His columns are published in papers, not just in America, but around the world and he has written several books including his most recent America Alone. It is here that his career has taken an Orwellian turn.

A supporter of the war on terror, Steyn’s recent book deals with America’s struggle in this conflict while much of the rest of the world turns a blind eye. While the West falls into the trap of the nanny state, the population of radical Muslims in increasing dramatically and could lead to the fall of many democracies. Only America (or at least the Red State half of America) bucks this trend and fights the good fight.

As with many publications, a section of the book was previewed in a political magazine, in this case Canada’s oldest Maclean’s. Little do many Americans know, Canada, a supposed democracy, does not have free speech. Instead, it has what is called the Canadian Human Rights Commission and some offshoots of this including the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. Last December, the Canadian Islamic Congress filed a complaint with the Tribunal against Maclean’s for publishing what they called “flagrantly Islamophobic” articles by Mark Steyn. Turns out much of what they found Islamophobic were actual quotes from radical Muslims. However, this has proven to be no defense as the tribunal has condemned Steyn’s use of “sarcasm” when writing about these radicals. An investigator with the Tribunal was asked what value he gives free speech when he investigates. His reply: “Freedom of speech is an American concept, so I don’t give it any value.”

Folks, this is the stuff of fiction. Something you expect to read in Orwell or Kafka, but it’s really happening. The Tribunal has a 100% conviction rate on “hate speech.” This is not Canada, this is Oceania. Imagine for just a moment that America had such a tribunal and Dan Rather was investigated for his made up story on George W. Bush’s service records. The entire world would be in an uproar…the U.N. would be talking sanctions, but as this involves telling the truth about radical Islam, the world is silent.

This is scary stuff.