Sali on Dog Fighting
Posted by Adam Graham in : Idaho Conservative, TheThe Idahoan has Bill Sali’s explanation of his recent vote against an anti-dog fighting bill:
“Dogfighting and cockfighting are appalling and barbaric. That is why all but one state in the nation have banned cockfighting, and that last state, Louisiana, thankfully, appears to be acting to stop this bloody phenomenon. The question that was presented to us recently in Congress is whether the federal government should pass stiffer penalties for cockfighting and dogfighting.
“My answer was this: Do my constituents really want Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi telling them what to do, telling them what the penalties should be for crimes committed in our state? Or is this something the people of Idaho, through their elected representatives, can address? Should our limited federal resources be used to go after dog- and cockfighters? I’d rather direct those resources toward drug cartel operatives and terrorists.
“While it would be easy for me to vote for anything that outlaws bad behavior, the bill before us would have poked the federal government’s head into places where the states should reasonably be expected to act. It’s hard to vote ‘no,’ believe me. I could have easily joined the majority and said “yes” to the passage of the bill. I’d rather do what’s right because it’s right and not because it’s easy.”
And that’s why we love Bill Sali here at Adam’s Blog.
Comment by Bubblehead [Visitor]
“And that’s why we love Bill Sali here at Adam’s Blog.”
Because he tilts at windmills and is completely ineffective as a Congressman? While he provides a lot of humor, I really wish he’d at least refuse to accept a salary to really demonstrate his commitment to his principles.
And where exactly in the Constitution does it say that Congress shall have the power to pass resolutions honoring football teams? (That’s the only thing he co-sponsored that passed, or likely will even get a hearing.)
Comment by Adam Graham [Member]
Congress can pass any non-binding resolution they passed. I know you’re bitter but he’s doing a good job. Sometimes the most effective thing for good is to be a voice against the stupidity being pushed by Pelosi and Company. Far better than Liberal Larry Grant ever could be.
Also, Sali has never said members of Congress should serve without pay.
Comment by Bubblehead [Visitor]
But his reason for opposing the minimum wage increase was that power wasn’t in the Constitution. And if he didn’t accept a salary, he’d be reducing government spending — and let’s be honest, that’s the only way he’d make any sort of contribution to reducing government spending.
Comment by Adam Graham [Member]
That’s an absurd argument. He’s standing against the tide, doing all that anyone up there can. Reforms take time, but you need people to beat the drum, not serve as Nancy Pelosi’s lapdog.l Liberal Larry Grant would be up there feeding at the trough.