I’ve been reading a blog called Sacraments Wholesale for a few months and really love the content.  The author is reasonable, logical, and grounded in both his faith and his views.

Deacon Tim, the author, did a great job with his post on Harry Reid’s cowardice and political expediency at the expense of religious freedom.

Please head over to see what Deacon Tim has to say and subscribe to his RSS feed.  Great work Tim.

View Album

Here’s a great summary of the findings in yesterday’s ruling that overturned Prop 8.

From Politics Daily.

1. “Individuals do not generally choose their sexual orientation. No credible evidence supports a finding that an individual may, through conscious decision, therapeutic intervention or any other method, change his or her sexual orientation.”

2. “California has no interest in asking gays and lesbians to change their sexual orientation or in reducing the number of gays and lesbians in California.”

3. “Same-sex couples are identical to opposite-sex couples in the characteristics relevant to the ability to form successful marital unions. Like opposite-sex couples, same-sex couples have happy, satisfying relationships and form deep emotional bonds and strong commitments to their partners.”

4. “Marrying a person of the opposite sex is an unrealistic option for gay and lesbian individuals.”

5. “The availability of domestic partnership does not provide gays and lesbians with a status equivalent to marriage because the cultural meaning of marriage and its associated benefits are intentionally withheld from same-sex couples in domestic partnerships.”

6. “Permitting same-sex couples to marry will not affect the number of opposite-sex couples who marry, divorce, cohabit, have children outside of marriage or otherwise affect the stability of opposite-sex marriages.”

7. “Proposition 8 places the force of law behind stigmas against gays and lesbians, including: gays and lesbians do not have intimate relationships similar to heterosexual couples; gays and lesbians are not as good as heterosexuals; and gay and lesbian relationships do not deserve the full recognition of society.”

8. “Proposition 8 increases costs and decreases wealth for same sex couples because of increased tax burdens, decreased availability of health insurance and higher transactions costs to secure rights and obligations typically associated with marriage.”

9. “Proposition 8 singles out gays and lesbians and legitimates their unequal treatment. Proposition 8 perpetuates the stereotype that gays and lesbians are incapable of forming long-term loving relationships and that gays and lesbians are not good parents.”

10. “The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment. The sexual orientation of an individual does not determine whether that individual can be a good parent. Children raised by gay or lesbian parents are as likely as children raised by heterosexual parents to be healthy, successful and well-adjusted.”

So the judge struck down the most important parts of this law, the parts that allow police to stop and check the immigration status of suspected illegals.

Here are a few articles from the WSJ and the LA Times.  This should not come as a shock to anyone that supports the rule of law here in the States.  The Constitution clearly prohibits the states from passing immigration laws.  To pass this law and pay for the AG to take it to court is an unbelievable waste of the taxpayers money.

There’s a serious disconnect in the Republican/Conservative Party now.  They claim to want to reduce the government involvement in everyday life and cut government spending and waste, but they pass laws the interfere with people’s lives.  They claim that the government is a horrible steward of your tax dollars, which it certainly can be, but then they spend thousands of dollars chasing frivolous lawsuits and clogging the courts.  Any reasonable constitutional scholar, no matter their ideology, could have saved a bunch of time and money by explaining the federal system of government.

The details of this law are unimportant, as are the underlying goals of the Arizona government.  The only important consideration for the judge was “Is this a constitutional law?”.  Short answer: No.

Came home on the 4th, found 15 pounds of Tomatoes from Ashley and Don

View Album

View Album

View Album

Ok, maybe I’m a little punch drunk from this crazy race, but I have to ask, what’s the worst that could happen if people voted for Alvin M. Greene?  I mentioned this in a comment on Ian’s site.

Let’s break this down by reason’s not to vote for him:

1. Criminal Record: Clinton admitted to smoking pot=Illegal.  Bush had a DUI=Illegal.  Obama admitted to doing coke=Illegal.  Teddy Kennedy killed a girl while driving drunk=Illegal.  Let’s not even get into the Foleys, Larry Craigs, and Sanfords of the country.  So he’s been accused of a felony.  At least we know who this guy is.  He’s not hiding anything and he’s not guilty yet.

2. Inexperience: This is totally bogus.  People are always complaining about “Washington Insiders”.  This guys is clearly not an insider.

Our current crop of politicians in SC haven’t exactly brought about prosperity.  Since Campbell and Riley, I’d argue that we haven’t had any serious leadership.  Hodges was a fucking joke.  So was Beasley.  Sanford, we’ll he’s just Sanford.

3.  Military Discharge: Let’s assume he’s telling the truth about his honorable discharge.  To get an honorable discharge, you have to be in good standing.  If he was a horrible soldier, he would have received a General discharge.  If he failed to conform to the military lifestyle, he probably would have received an OTH (Other Than Honorable) discharge.  He certainly didn’t get a Big Chicken Dinner or a DD.  So he served, might have separated unwillingly, but still honorably.

His military record is much more substantial than Jim DeMint‘s.  He at least served.

4. He’s Not That Bright: We’ve never made intelligence a prerequisite for political office, let’s not start now.

Why Vote for Greene?

So, let’s say this guy sticks it out, beats his felony charge, and makes it to the general election.  Why would someone vote for him?  Well, he’s a veteran.  In today’s society, this is a big deal.  This guy put his money where his mouth is.  He didn’t spend his time talking about the honor and dignity of serving, he served.  He didn’t pay lip service to our freedom and pat veterans on the back, he picked up a rifle and walked a post.  And he did it for 13 years.  Why he was separated, I don’t know, but he is a vet.  Period.  Full Stop.

He’s unemployed.  Big fucking deal.  If Jim DeMint loses this fall, he’ll be unemployed too.  George Bush is unemployed too.  Not so, you say?  This is just the basic difference between the upper classes and the middle to lower classes.  Reminds me of one of my wife’s coworkers in DC.  She took care of her grandchildren and they were poised to lose their apartment.  She was resigned to being ‘homeless’ again.  If we hit hard times and lost our apartment, we’d be fine staying with friends for a few days or weeks.  We also have family that would help us out in a bad situation.  While we might be technically homeless, we wouldn’t actually be without a place to lay our heads.  Why?  Because we’re white and middle class.  We have credit cards and a built in safety net called family and friends.  But for this woman, there was no net.  No friends with the means to help.  No family to loan her money.  Nothing.  Lose the apartment, you’re homeless.  If we lost our apartment, we’d be crashing on someone’s couch for a week or two.

Same with Mr. Greene’s unemployment.  Most politicians would be functionally unemployed if they lost their next election.  The difference is the connections.  Many are lawyers and can easily find a job with a friend or old partner if they lost an election.  Mr. Greene’s situation is different because he’s not quite your standard politician.

If people are serious about tossing out the current crop of politicians, this guys is a great start.  He needs to get his positions out there and start talking about why he is a real choice for Senate.  Based on the sketchy details available about his positions, he’s a pretty agreeable guy.  He’s for offshore drilling, a reasonable and logical position.  He thinks gas is overpriced: who doesn’t?.  He believes in a diplomatic solution to the North/South Korea issue: We certainly don’t need another front in addition to our current wars.  He wants more infrastructure investment and supports the 2nd Amendment: Likes guns and believes that we’ve failed future generations by wearing out the large public works projects of yesteryear.  Do I need to remind anyone of the I-35 Bridge collapse?.  He wants to put the unemployed back to work.  What’s not to like about this guy?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Alvin Greene, South Carolina Democrat Senate Nominee, Faces The Media (VIDEO) (huffingtonpost.com)
• Who Is Alvin Greene And How Did He Get The Democratic Nod For Senate To Run Vs. Jim DeMint? (alan.com)
• South Carolina’s Democratic nominee as mysterious as his victory (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• Alvin Greene: South Carolina’s Democratic conundrum | Richard Adams (guardian.co.uk)
• Alvin Greene Revealed…Sort Of (atomiurl.com)
• Unemployed military veteran Alvin Greene wins South Carolina senate nomination (telegraph.co.uk)

View Album

View Album