27
Aug
2008
All right! Wow! Ha ha. What a great-looking audience. My name is Hill Larrius, and it's great to be here in Vegas! Whoo!
Hey, what's up with these crazy presidential candidates? We have this McCain guy for the Republicans, right? Now, I'm not gonna say he's old, 'cause he really didn't fight in the Civil War, right? Hell no! He was already way too old for that war, see? Ha ha ha.
Then over here we have this Democrat, Obama, who keeps promising change. So if we elect him president, we'll have change, right? Like he'll raise our taxes and all we'll have left in our pockets is change. Ha ha ha! Ooooh. Hey, don't get mad at me, I'm just the messenger here.
The
recent Saddleback Civil Forum on the Presidency was a wash. Both
candidates, who claim to be Christians, spent much of their time
pandering to the nearly 3 million television viewers who tuned in.
But in terms of what presidential candidates John McCain and Barack
Obama had to say, their responses were largely lacking in content.
Regardless
of your opinion on Iowa's smoking ban, some of the temporary
administrative rules - such as the distinction between bars and
restaurants - go beyond the intent of the law. As the end to the
commenting period approaches, the Iowa Department of Public Health
(IDPH), which is in charge of making and changing the rules, needs to
be more reasonable.
As
an object lesson to the political pragmatists of the United States -
those "practical" advocates of "democracy" who see no role
for principles in government, just "majority rule" - one need
only pause and consider the recent events in Venezuela to realize the
profound impact principles actually do have on human affairs.
If
there's one thing the United States stands for, it's unfettered
free speech. It is vital to a functioning democracy. Unfortunately,
the increasing use by government and law-enforcement officials of
"free speech zones" and other stifling tactics to purge dissent
has largely undermined the First Amendment's safeguards for
political free speech.
