Teachable Moments

You may recall the uproar that an immigration law in Arizona recently caused.  After begging the federal government for help in protecting its borders, dealing with violence against its citizens and law enforcement officials from illegal immigrants, and a host of other problems, Arizona finally decided to do something about it.  The problem was not the existing federal law.  The problem was the federal government was not enforcing it.  So the state passed a law mirroring the federal law and in essence said, “If you won’t do your job, we will.”

But the act somehow set off a political firestorm, and many people raised loud voices in opposition.  Among them was the owner of the Phoenix Suns, Robert Sarver.  Sarver said, “However intended, the result of passing the law is that our basic principles of equal rights and protection under the law are being called into question…and Arizona’s already struggling economy will suffer even further setbacks at a time when the state can ill-afford them.”  Sarver even had his team wear jerseys that said “Los Suns” to show his support for those he thought were offended.

But someone has offered a rebuttal to Mr. Sarver.  The text has been making the rounds via email and has been attributed to Arizona Governor Jan Brewer.  Whoever is the author has a great point:

“What if the owners of the Suns discovered that hordes of people were sneaking into games without paying? What if they had a good idea who the gate-crashers are, but the ushers and security personnel were not allowed to ask these folks to produce their ticket stubs, thus non-paying attendees couldn’t be ejected. Furthermore, what if Suns’ ownership was expected to provide those who sneaked in with complimentary eats and drink? And what if, on those days when a gate-crasher became ill or injured, the Suns had to provide free medical care and shelter?”

This speaks to a bigger point.  When it comes to other people’s money, liberals are just that: more than generous.  Yet when it comes to their own personal possessions, they are strangely stingy.  And that is why they should not be in charge of others’ money, lest they spend it all, and collapse the society.