Personal Liberty Digest™ will be upgraded this weekend to reflect a dynamic new look and mobile-friendly viewing to enhance your experience! Plus, we'll be providing even more of the compelling content you've come to expect, delivered in a whole new way!

  Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty

A Nation Of Ignoramuses

July 22, 2013 by  

A Nation Of Ignoramuses

The United States is devolving into a Nation of ignoramuses, its citizens increasingly ignorant of U.S. and world history and particularly uninformed regarding the Nation’s founding documents and what led to the creation of their Nation.

The government’s public (non)education system, the agenda-driven mainstream media propaganda system, Hollywood’s disinformation, campaigns promoting bread and circuses and the infusion of millions of aliens into the country are doing the job the collectivist progressive elites envisioned. The goal is to manufacture a populace too ignorant of their rights and too preoccupied to fathom even most repressive tyranny.

A recent national poll by the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center revealed that almost half (47 percent) of 18- to 30-year-olds agree with the statement that the 1st Amendment goes too far in the rights it guarantees.

The poll sampled 1,006 American adults from the 48 contiguous States. Its findings are astonishing and maddening.

The 1st Amendment reads:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

When asked to name the five specific freedoms in the 1st Amendment, 36 percent of those polled were unable to name any. Freedom of speech was named by 59 percent, followed by freedom of religion (24 percent), freedom of the press (14 percent), right to assemble (11 percent) and right to petition government (4 percent).

The survey found that that while the percentage of Americans who can name the five 1st Amendment rights has generally increased since the organization began annual polling in 1997, the overall awareness of the 1st Amendment has decreased.

Among all those surveyed, 64 percent say the 1st Amendment does not go too far. But 52 percent of blacks and 50 percent of Hispanics say the amendment does go too far. That number drops to 29 percent of the white population.

The poll was conducted in May as stories about the government’s spying on journalists with The Associated Press and FOX News were coming out. It showed that Americans were split over whether reporters should reveal their sources if doing so made the country safer. Fifty-one percent opposed government requiring journalists to reveal their sources, while 44 percent supported it. That number is up from 37 percent in 2008.

And although only slightly more than half opposed journalists being forced to reveal their sources, 80 percent expected the news media to act as a government watchdog. How journalists are supposed to do that if they can’t keep their sources confidential was not asked. The question would probably not have been understood by the 49 percent.

The (non)education system and schools — predominantly run and staffed by socialists, progressives, collectivists and Marxists — omit teaching on the Nation’s origins and vilify the Founders and their struggle — demonizing the great explorers and the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry while glorifying Marxist criminals like Che Guevera.

Regimes — Presidential, Congressional and judicial — past and present have trampled the Bill of Rights almost out of existence. The 1st Amendment is no exception.

Christians are a main target of the statist elected class, media punditry and Hollywood, all of which are working overtime to destroy the value system and morality that has existed in this country since its inception.

The Barack Obama regime has targeted Christian-owned businesses for special persecution by requiring, through the unConstitutional Obamacare deathcare system, the inclusion of birth control and abortion services in their employee healthcare plans in direct contravention of their religious beliefs against them.

It has foisted upon the country, through court sanction, abetted by an ongoing propaganda campaign and against the wishes of the majority, homosexual marriage: a union that is anathema to Christian teachings.

Freedom of speech, assembly and redress are under attack in myriad ways. The Department of Justice’s targeting of reporters, the regime’s persecution of whistle-blowers, attempts by the government to gain control of the Internet, the National Defense Authorization Act’s Section 1021, the creation of “thought crimes” through hate crime laws and the massive Orwellian surveillance state all bespeak of a regime that is becoming increasingly fearful, lacking in legitimacy and totalitarian.

In ways subtle and overt, Hollywood is destroying the moral fabric of society and the masses lap it up. Hollywood portrays the family matrix as dysfunctional, glorifies perversion and strips males of all dignity, portraying them as idiotic buffoons, lazy, incompetent and in constant pursuit of base animalistic pleasures.

Hollywood demonstrates a misogynistic attitude toward women. They are sexualized, often scantily clad and presented as “eye candy” and sexual objects; and if their bodies and features aren’t perfect, their characters are subject to ridicule and/or presented as inviting abuse or being either villainous or simpleton. A UNESCO report on the portrayal of women in the media describes the litany of common images of women: “the glamorous sex kitten, the sainted mother, the devious witch, the hardfaced (sic) corporate and political climber.”

The regime, aided and abetted by the mainstream media, constantly inflames passions, creates conflict and feeds the public distractions and bread and circus that serves to obfuscate and cover up its crimes.

Meanwhile, the Nation and the republican system are in a state of collapse — that collapse being staved off temporarily through welfare, never-ending unemployment benefits, food stamps, free telephones and other free “stuff” and money printing. The dumbed-down public remains unaware that the regime and its elite puppet masters are stealing its wealth and enslaving it, binding the chains tighter by the day.

The 2nd Amendment is under constant assault. Even though it is the Amendment by which all others can be preserved, the public is increasingly buying into the lie that guns are objects to be scorned as if they’re scorpions that sting on their own. The media and the Obama Administration overhyped the George Zimmerman trial in an agenda-driven effort to stir racial conflict and create a flashpoint of violence over which it can push for stricter gun laws or, worse, martial law.

The 4th Amendment is long gone, crushed under the so-called USA Patriot Act, NDAA, the ever-expanding Department of Homeland (in)Security and the massive National Stasi Agency spying apparatus.

Fifth Amendment rights are being eroded by the courts and the regime daily. Now Americans can be targeted for drone attacks and murdered without due process. More and more the courts are allowing the law enforcement apparatus to use all your words against you so that it’s no longer safe to even have a conversation with a police officer. And, as the ongoing DOJ persecution of Zimmerman shows, double jeopardy provisions are non-existent.

These and other rights are pushed aside and thrown into history’s trash heap. They’ve disappeared with hardly a whimper.

Important issues like the criminal “Gang of Eight’s” amnesty bill, Internal Revenue Service targeting, Benghazi terror attacks, Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal, long-term high unemployment, payoffs to and thefts by the banksters and Wall Street, ongoing money debasement and the regime’s illegitimacy are ignored while the masses occupy themselves with prescription drugs, wall-to-wall coverage of celebrity escapades, sporting events and falsely created racial issues.

Bob Livingston

founder of Personal Liberty Digest™, is an ultra-conservative American author and editor of The Bob Livingston Letter™, in circulation since 1969. Bob has devoted much of his life to research and the quest for truth on a variety of subjects. Bob specializes in health issues such as nutritional supplements and alternatives to drugs, as well as issues of privacy (both personal and financial), asset protection and the preservation of freedom.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “A Nation Of Ignoramuses”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at

  • Alondra


    Woman Calls FBI Claiming To Be Obama BC Forger: FBI Directs Her To The News Media


    P.S. But FBI & DOJ Claim They DO NOT Need A Warrant To Read Your Emails, Chats, FB Messages

  • Alondra

    By his own admission, Soros has created a massive media machine and targeted conservative groups, talk radio, and — his primary target — Fox News Channel.

    Soros-funded a “War on Police” that targeted Chicago in May and Tampa in August 2012, according to Dr. Tina Trent, who investigates Soros’ alleged anti-American activities.

    Alleged anti-police activist groups such as ANSWER, Critical Resistance, CopWatch, the Ella Baker Center, the Midnight Special Law Collective, The Ruckus Society, the Jericho Movement, and the new SDS are funded directly or indirectly by George Soros, and are using Occupy Wall Street encampments as training camps to teach the confrontational protest strategies perfected by radical, eco-anarchist “crisis-makers” including Lisa Fithian and others.

    An Examiner news story dated September 8, 2011, revealed his deep-seeded hatred for conservatives and America in general:

    “George Soros released a report that claims a conservative cabal of groups and individuals are Islamophobic and the 9-11 memorials are more about hatred for Muslims than commemorating the killing of close to 3,000 Americans by radical Islamists.

    “Soros calls these Americans, most of whom are conservatives, Fear Incorporated.

    “The Soros group known as the Center for American Progress (CAP) is deliberately attempting to take attention away from events in the U.S. that are in progress to commemorate the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history, and focus that attention on claims of Muslim-bashing by members of counterterrorism think-tanks, terrorism analysts and some members of the news media such as Fox News Channel, according to a media watchdog.

    “According to Cliff Kincaid of Accuracy in Media, the Soros-funded group, Media Matters, ran parts of the Soros-CAP report, emphasizing the ‘role played by right-wing media’ such as Fox News in supposedly fanning the flames of Islamophobia.”

    P.S. Do NOT doubt about that the Soros groups are funding the TM’s riots.

  • Alondra
    • Proteus1946

      Indoctrination is the process of inculcating ideas, attitudes, cognitive strategies or a professional methodology (see doctrine). It is often distinguished from education by the fact that the indoctrinated person is expected not to question or critically examine the doctrine they have learned. As such the term may be used pejoratively, often in the context of education, political opinions, theology or religious dogma. The term is closely linked to socialization; in common discourse, indoctrination is often associated with negative connotations, while socialization refers to cultural or educational learning.

      Religious indoctrination, the original sense of indoctrination, refers to a process of imparting doctrine in an authoritative way, as in catechism. Most religious groups among the revealed religions instruct new members in the principles of the religion; this is now not usually referred to as indoctrination by the religions themselves, in part because of the negative connotations the word has acquired. Mystery religions require a period of indoctrination before granting access to esoteric knowledge. (cf. Information security)

      As a pejorative term, indoctrination implies forcibly or coercively causing people to act and think on the basis of a certain ideology. Some secular critics [who?] maintain that all religions indoctrinate their adherents, as children, and the accusation is made in the case of religious extremism. Sects such as Scientology use personality tests and peer pressures to indoctrinate new members. Some religions have commitment ceremonies for children 13 years and younger, such as Bar Mitzvah, Confirmation, and Shichi-Go-San. In Buddhism, temple boys are encouraged to follow the faith while still very young. Critics of religion, such as Richard Dawkins, maintain that the children of religious parents are often unfairly indoctrinated. The process of subjecting children to complex initiation rituals before they are able to critically assess the event is seen by Dawkins and other critics of religion as cruel.

  • Alondra
  • Alondra

    Public Schools are Teaching What???

    • samurai

      Here is anarticle about the libturd socialist states of America.
      Don’t some of these thing come right out of the Book of Revelation? FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
      You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot.
      “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.”
      Joseph Stalin
      *Isn’t this what the 5th column is already doing in this country?

  • enoughalready

    It is fast becoming the greatest show on earth and our leaders have become the stars of the show. That is what they want to be, plastic heroes and heroines, adored by the masses as celebrities, instead of being recognized for their real value, which of course they are completely devoid of. Unfortunately, the president sees himself as a hero in a blockbuster movie instead of a president. What a loser.

    • Robbie

      What a loser indeed! Accomplished at three of the best universities in the nation, a member of a top law firm, elected a state Senator and then a federal Senator, elected President of the United States and then re-elected by an impressive margin in the popular vote as well as in the electoral college winning all of the swing states. What a loser!

      • samurai

        Prove he graduated. His records are missing, professors can’t remember seeing him in class, has a fake SSN, is a citizen of Indonesia, etc., etc., etc. Do you ever think about what you say before posting these rants? No intellectual content. Here is something about how we trying to get back to our Christian principles is seen as a revolutionary act.
        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
        You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.
        “We do not have to destroy America with missiles; America will destroy itself from within.”
        Nikita Khrushchev

        • Robbie

          The Khrushchev quotation is really revealing. America will destroy itself from within will it? How very profound! But let’s look at this from a reality point of view. America remains alive and well and Krrushchev’s Soviet Union is, ummm, gonzo.

          We know Obama graduated from Columbia University because he was then accepted into Harvard University. You can’t do a higher degree without having received the initial one. Got that? And we know he graduated from Harvard because he was then accepted to teach at the University of Chicago. He taught Constitutional Law at U. of C. only AFTER getting a law degree at Harvard. You can’t get a job teaching law unless you have a law degree first. Got that dummy?

          You can claim that no one knew him or ever saw him at, say, Harvard, but that simply does not make any sense at all. Obama was chosen to be the Editor of the Harvard Law Review one year and the next year he was chosen to be the President of the Harvard Law Review. You can’t get chosen – by the students and staff of Harvard University – for those very presitgious positions if no one knows you. Try to think these things through on your own instead of repeating drivel from wacco web sites. Thank you.

          • Jibbs

            Want to buy some swamp land in Arizona?

          • Robbie

            No thanks. You’ll have to keep your property yourself.

          • Jibbs

            I think you are missing a new episode of “dancing with the czar’s”…

          • Robbie

            What I’ve noticed from your two postings is that – as far as the debate that is going on – you actually have nothing pertinent to contribute.

          • Jibbs

            I don’t debate idiots or leftist, they never stop talking or listen to the truth…..just like my sister, you could be handed the truth on a golden platter and still deny it.
            SO where are those so called degree’s and why did bo and michelle give up their lic. to practice law. All they did was avoid their first scandel.
            Just the plain fact that his father is a British subject and NOT a US citizen bar’s him from becomming President, you might want to go read Article II.
            BO is not a natural born citizen!

          • Robbie

            I feel sorry for your sister.

            As far as where the President’s degrees are they are probably framed and hanging on a wall in his Chicago home. Both Obama law licences are on hold – not given up – which is common when a lawyer is no longer active in that profession and – as you may have noticed – the Obama’s have moved on to bigger and better. And, by the way, the citizenship of a parent of a natural born American doesn’t matter. If you are born in the U.S.A. – as Obama was – you are a citizen.

            I feel real sorry for your sister. You must be know in the family as the big goof who gets all his “ideas” from non reality based sources. Fun times.

          • Jibbs

            I have two nephew’s and two niece’s who cannot be president due to the fact that their mother was not born in the U.S. In order to be natural born both parents must be U.S. citizens.
            if you were born in 1961, to claim automatic U.S. Citizenship (not natural-born citizen), both parents had to have been U.S. Citizens. And if that was the case, AND they were married, at least one had to have resided in the U.S. before you were born. That can be found under INA 301(c). If the parents were both U.S. Citizens but were not married, then the mother had to have resided in the U.S. for 12 continous months before your birth. That can be found under INA 309(c). If only one was a U.S. Citizen, if it was the mother, then the mother had to live in the U.S. for at least 10 years before you were born and at least 5 of those years had to have been after she turned 14. This can be found under INA 301(g). If the father is a U.S. Citizen, then the same applies, 10 years in the U.S. and at least 5 of those had to have been after he turned 14. PLUS the child has to have been legitimated before age 21 if the parents weren’t married. INA 301(a)(7). His mother left the US before the 5 years were up, she would have to stayed until the day she turned 20
            Here is a link:


          • Nadzieja Batki

            Because according to you all has been said and done in favor or O. So any opposition should be quiet because you and your Marxist ideologues say so.
            Why don’t you not leave this site in suspense as to what will happen to people if they don’t subscribe to your commands?

          • Robbie

            I can’t recall giving any commands. In fact I just reread my posting and there’s not a command to be seen.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The pot calling the kettle black.

          • hippybiker

            Wrong! According to the Chicago Sun-Times in 2007, he was nothing more than a non tenured, visiting, part time, assistant lecturer. Also, he was not very well liked by the rest of the staff because of his arrogant attitude.

          • Robbie

            I didn’t say he was liked and only that he taught there. Actually thank you for confirming that.

          • Ted Crawford

            Interestingly enough, Obama is the ONLY Editor to have NEVER been published in the entire History of the Harvard Law Review! Wonder what that’s about?

          • Robbie

            He was the editor not a writer.

          • Charlie

            So Robbie, are you a natural born idiot or is it just a well polished act ?

          • Robbie

            Sorry if the facts I presented disturbed you but facts can do that sometimes. I hope you’re feeling better soon.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The disturbing part is that you think they are facts.

          • Robbie

            Care to share with us which of the facts I noted are not true?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Robbie says — “We know Obama graduated from Columbia University because he was then accepted into Harvard University”.
            I’m being repetitive now, because a dense Liberal Progressive just can’t read English.
            We DON’T know that Obama graduated from Columbia University just because he was accepted into Harvard.
            Please note also that you did not say Harvard Law School. You just said Harvard. And please note that there are numerous ways that he could have gotten into Harvard LAW School without his previous education being from Columbia.

            Kapish, Ignoramus?

          • Robbie

            O.K. already. You win. Obama went to Harvard Law School straight from high school. He must have been really smart to get in to an advanced graduate degree without an undergraduate degree first.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The question is — “Why is a guy, who claims to be Canadian, such an avid defender of Obama?”
            I smell some fish.

          • Robbie

            Better get that sniffer checked out.

          • mark

            That’s ad hominem, Dave. Just respond to his arguments with a rational critique of your own

          • TheOriginalDaveH
          • TheOriginalDaveH
          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Robbie says — “We know Obama graduated from Columbia University because he was then accepted into Harvard University. You can’t do a higher degree without having received the initial one. Got that?”.
            That’s what passes for logic in your world, Robbie?

            Obama could have entered Harvard through multiple channels, including straight from High School, and including international applicants:

          • Robbie

            Actually I’m really pleased with some recent postings here – folks are actually admitting that Obama went to Harvard!!!!!!!! This is a great breakthrough. Oh, by the way, you don’t get into the law program with just a high school diploma.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I could care less where Obama was born, or where he went to school. What I care about is that he’s further growing Government and further decreasing our Freedom. But he is far from alone in those efforts. I only point out your failed logic about Obama, Robbie, because I want readers to know that Liberal Progressives are not what they claim to be.

          • Robbie

            Don’t fret. It’ll all be good.

          • Proteus1946

            If you don’t care where Obama was born or where he went to school, why did you post that ‘birther’ nonsense in your lead off to this thread. I’ll vote to put you and Donald Trump in the same box, and ship it off to Palmyra Island.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Robbie says — “Oh, by the way, you don’t get into the law program with just a high school diploma”.
            Regardless of that, the issue was whether him being accepted by Harvard proved that he went to Columbia.
            Wiggle out of that one, Liberal Progressive.

          • Robbie

            Let’s look at it this way Dave: when someone seeks to study for an advanced degree (i.e. Law) you have to have first achieved an undergraduate degree (i.e. a BA). A high school diploma is simply not sufficient. So to get into Harvard Law he had to have had a BA from Columbia (could have been another university but no other one has claimed him as their own. You’re not really that clear on how university system degrees work are you?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            You’re not very clear on anything I’ve said, Robbie. Don’t try to condescend me. All the readers need do is read both our comments to see who’s being logical and who is just being an equivocating Liberal Progressive.

          • Robbie

            Yes, let the readers decide. Some might agree with you that you don’t need an undergraduate degree to study law at Harvard and that Obama went to Harvard right out of high school! Hee, hee.

      • CJM2

        ovomit is accomplished at NOTHING unless you want to say he is a tyrannical despot who wants to be the imperial ruler of the USA. Anyone who believes this predatory pathological liar in chief will become a traitor themselves.

        • Robbie

          Accomplished at NOTHING? I listed all the things he has accomplished. How did you miss that? Unless you consider degrees from three great universities plus being a state Senator, federal Senator and being elected President TWICE as being NOTHING. What, I wonder, have you accomplished?

          • Jibbs

            Ahhhh, hahahahahahaha…..really?
            He never ever intruduced his own bill in the senate and never showed up to vote on any.

          • Robbie

            False. Do you make this stuff up on your own or do you just parrot some wacco conspiracy theory web site?

          • Jibbs

            I lived in IL. at the time he was in the senate, I suggest you go look up his offical voting record and read it for yourself..

          • Robbie

            You said “senate”. You didn’t specify which one so it was vague. In the United Staes Senate Obama in fact voted 251 times.

          • Jibbs

            Robbie @Jibbs • 20 minutes ago

            Flag as inappropriate
            You said “senate”. You didn’t specify which one so it was vague. In the United Staes Senate Obama in fact voted 251 times.
            251 vote’s out 1300, that is pathetic. And to think that he was paid for doing nothing. That is less than 1/5.
            Why did he bother to vote at all, and he never ever introduced his own bill. He only rode on the backs of others. Just like college, present, but did nothing.

          • Robbie

            Let’s play a little skill testing problem. Which number is greater: 251 or 0?

          • Jibbs

            On the first 500 times he should have voted, he voted 127 times…..just over 1/5. It’s like not voting at all.

          • Ted Crawford

            In addition to that Jibbs on the rare occasions he did vote, he, overwhelming, voted “Present” In other words he had absolutely NO IDEA what the vote was about!

          • Robbie

            You may think that voting hundreds of times is “like not voting at all” but I think that voting hundreds of times is actually like voting hundreds of times. But, hey, that’s just me. You may think that voting hundreds of times means “never showed up to vote…” but that’s just plain illogical.

          • CJM2

            I have accomplished a great deal and did so HONESTLY, without lying, cheating, committing fraudulent acts or other crimes. He was never elected, he is in office only because of his FRAUDULENT ELECTIONS—and that is a proven fact.

          • Robbie

            So his election to the state senate and his election to the federal senate and his election to President TWICE were all fraudulent? And he got away with it all four times? Wow. That in itself (although none of it is true) would be pretty impressive.

          • CJM2

            Spoken like a true ovomit troll. Evidently, you are paid by the number of postings you place; it’s obvious you aren’t paid for stating the TRUTH!

          • Robbie

            O.K. maybe you’re right. I was NOT writing the TRUTH. I’ll correct myself and reverse what I wrote which ought to satisfy your concept of the truth. So, Obama was NOT elected as a state Senator and he was NOT then elected as a federal Senator and he was NOT elected President and then he was NOT elected a second time as President with a majority and an impressive victory in the electoral college. There you go – the TRUTH as YOU think it to be!

          • CJM2

            Your response is so asinine; there just isn’t any comparison to an adult tantrumming like a two year old when others disagree with them. I reiterate: No person is lawfully elected to any position when they use FRAUDULENT voting practices in order to achieve that position. That person may sit in the position, but they are not legitimately elected as an official due to the fraud.

          • Robbie

            And do you have examples of election fraud in, say, the last presidential election? It’s one thing to just make the claim but a shred of evidence would be nice.

          • CJM2

            The 110% votes counted for ovomit (and 0% for Romney) in PA should at least give you a clue. Now, do some research on your own.

          • Robbie

            When you say that Obama got 110% of the vote in Pennsylvania (and Romney got 0%) do you mean that in the entire state Obama got every single vote and then some? I don’t understand how you can say such a thing. I watched several networks election night and Obama carried the state but only by about 5 or 6 % as I recall. 110%??? Please clarify. There’s something wrong with your math here.

      • Mike

        You’re right. Only the finest people in the world get elected to political office or go to college. He’s rather god-like, when you think about it.

        • Robbie

          Despite your touch of sarcasm I would agree with you that the process of getting to the absolute top job on planet earth does, indeed, take some special talents and strengths and character traits.

  • Beverly Golato

    So true. Educate your children.

  • dan

    We lost the Republic in the Civil War.
    We lost Democracy and the Rule of Law with Obama.

    • Jibbs

      We are not a democracy, but rather a Constitutional Republic.

      • Vigilant

        On paper, yes; in reality, the progressives/socialists have democratized the nation through the 17th amendment and helping the people to discover they could vote themselves goodies at every turn.

        The 10th Amendment is on life support.

        • dan

          i can’t get over President Jimmy Carter’s comment that even he realizes that the current POTUS is no longer even observing the form of democracy out of my thoughts.
          …but I agree with you,Jibbs,in theory….unfortunately ,
          our government has long ceased observing the restrictions placed on it by the Constitution.

    • Ted Crawford

      I would respectfully disagree in small part here Dan. The Republic was serverly damaged by Mr. Lincoln, arguably for cause. However i feel it did survive untill March 4, 1913, and ended then, when our first true Socialist President took the Oath of Office. I agree that our ailing Democracy ended with Obama!
      America, as predicted should we apathetically allow our Republic to degenerate into a Democracy, has rejected self Government!
      “Remember, Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There never was a Democracy yet that did not commit suicide” John Adams
      ” The American Republic will endure, untill the Politicians realize they can bribe the People with their own Money” Alexis de Tocqueville

      • Vigilant

        Agreed, Ted, but I would push back the beginning of the end to Theodore Roosevelt. He was no friend of the Constitution, nor its prescribed checks on executive power. Progressivism was born with Roosevelt, not Wilson.

        Please take the time to read

        • dan

          excellent…never a fan of manifest destiny

      • dan

        I have at times considered Andrew Jackson’s administration to be the turning point of the Republic,but your point about the Federal Reserve takeover is valid…
        and Lincoln’s AND Jackson’s battle against the bankers is
        that which I admire most of both men.

        • Vigilant

          I’ve always found it odd that the only president pictured on postage stamps of both the Union and the confederacy was Andrew Jackson.

          You would have thought that Jackson’s strong stance on the SC nullification crisis would have forever alienated him from southern sentimentality, but it didn’t. I think it goes to show that the tariff issue, contrary to the assertions of the neoconfederates, was a non-issue in 1860.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          They were two different animals. Lincoln fought with the Bankers because he wanted to print unbacked paper money (Greenbacks) to fund his War of Aggression Against the South, and the Bankers didn’t approve.
          “The breakthrough for proponents of inflation came with Abraham Lincoln and the War Between the States. To finance it, the federal government issued a legal tender paper money with the Legal Tender Act of 1862, the so-called greenbacks. The greenbacks could be a substitute for gold or silver payments everywhere – only California made an exception. This experiment ended in 1875, when the government turned the greenbacks into credit money, by announcing that as from 1879 they would be redeemed into gold. Meanwhile, in 1863–65, the Lincoln administration had created a new system of privileged “national banks” that were authorized to issue notes backed by federal government debt, while the notes of all other banks were penalized by a 10 percent federal tax. As a consequence was American banking centralized around the privileged national banks. Banks were expected to convert to the new system. When this failed, Congress placed a high tax on state banks’ circulating notes in an attempt to drive them out of business. The state banks adjusted and shifted from issuing circulating notes to taking deposits and offering checking accounts”.

          Jackson fought against the Bankers because they wanted to establish a Central Bank which he knew to be against the principles of Freedom.

          “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered…I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies… The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
          This quote is often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, but denies that it came from Jefferson:

          Still a great quote though.

          • Vigilant

            Abraham Lincoln speaking on the third attempt to establish a central bank in America:

            “The money powers prey on the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. The banking powers are more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. They denounce as public enemies all who question their methods or throw light upon their crimes.

            I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me, and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe. As a most undesirable consequence of the war, corporations have been enthroned, and an era of corruption in high places will follow. The money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in the hands of a few, and the Republic is destroyed.”

          • Vigilant

            Lincoln, continued,

            “The government should create, issue, and circulate all the currency and credits needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. By the adoption of these principles, the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be the master and become the servant of humanity.”

            “Government, possessing the power to create and issue credit and currency as money, and enjoying the right to withdraw both currency and credit by taxation and otherwise, need not and should not borrow capital at interest as the means of financing governmental work and public enterprise.”

            “The privelege [sic] of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of Government, but it is the Government’s greatest creative opportunity.”

            “No duty is more imperative on the government than the duty it owes the people to furnish them with a sound and uniform currency, and of regulating the circulation of the medium of exchange so that labor will be protected from a vicious currency, and commerce will be facilitated by cheap and safe exchanges.”

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Please, Vigilant, Lincoln was a railroad lawyer and a politician. Any words that came out of the man’s mouth could not be relied upon. Does the phrase Smooth Talker mean anything to you?
            Can you say Crony Capitalist?

          • Vigilant

            “Please, Dave, neither Di Lorenzo nor you is an historian. Any words that came out of your mouths can not be relied upon. Does the word “neoconfederate” mean anything to you?

            Can you say “True Believer?”

            Actions speak louder than words, sonny, and Lincoln’s actions with regard to the printing of greenbacks and his opposition to the private monied interests followed directly upon his stated intentions. Neither you nor TD can change that.

            As for “railroad lawyer and a politician,” don’t ever accuse me of ad hominem statements again after that paltry attempt to condemn a man because of his occupations.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, DiLorenzo is better than just a Historian. He is an economist, praxeologist, and a historian, so he can analyze what really went on, rather than what Vigilant wants to believe.
            You’re an ideologue, Vigilant. Anybody who reads enough of your comments can see that.

          • Vigilant

            Perhaps you’d like to tell me where he got his degree in history, as I can’t find it anywhere, huh Davy?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Davy? Good Grief, you have become a Liberal Progressive. You’ll try anything to get your way, won’t you?
            Since when does one need a History degree to be a Historian? Because you say so?
            Bow to the Almighty Vigilant.
            But feel free, Vigilant, to quote from Thomas’s books and tell us what’s wrong and why.
            I expect instead to hear your normal manipulative techniques.

          • Vigilant

            Good grief, Davy, I’m addressing my remarks based on your mental age, not your chronological age. There, there, grab your pacifier and take a nap.

            “Liberal Progressive?” Right. You’re really getting desperate when you have to resort to the demonstrably untrue characterization of my political views!

            As for being an ideologue, your definition would be helpful. You and I agree politically about 90+% of the time. Does that make you an ideologue as well?

          • Vigilant

            “Thomas DiLorenzo is an Austrian school “economist” and pseudohistorian who holds a post as a professor of economics at Loyola College, Maryland and as a fellow at the Ludwig von Mises Institute and formerly worked for the neo-secessionist League of the South Institute… He is one of the foremost proponents of Neo-Confederate thought today. His body of work is something of a synthesis of the alternate universe histories put forth by Neo-Confederates, free market fundamentalists, and libertarians, all in one package.

            “Despite his post as an economist, DiLorenzo is more known for his works of “history.” The first thing to note about DiLorenzo’s interpretation of history is that it reads much like Marxist histories, just replace “class conflict” with “individual vs. state.” Historical events revolve solely around this conflict and the characters who took part in these events can be shoehorned into either box, the evil “statists” or the virtuous “individualists.”

            And other interesting things at

          • fenix1

            Not just great but also unfortunately for the American People very True!

          • dan

            great reply,Dave…brushed a few cob-webs from my memory. I KNOW that quote from somewhere…lols

        • Vigilant

          Indeed, Jackson and Lincoln both fought the private banksters who would eventually succeed in mortgaging away our rights by making us dependent upon the Federal Reserve.

          Lincoln advocated the greenback in lieu of paying the exorbitant interest rates demanded by the banksters. His temporary war measure was necessary to finance the prosecution of the war.

          “Lincoln’s opposition to the central banks financial control and a proposed return to the gold standard is well documented.”

          His move was identical to JFK’s to prevent dependence upon foreign banking interests. Some say JFK was assassinated over it.

          • Vigilant

            “Lincoln succeeded in restoring the government’s power to issue the national currency, but his revolutionary monetary policy was opposed by powerful forces. The threat to established interests was captured in an editorial of unknown authorship, said to have been published in The London Times in 1865:

            “If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic during the late war in that country, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debt. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”

            Lincoln was assassinated in 1865. According to historian W. Cleon Skousen:

            “Right after the Civil War there was considerable talk about reviving Lincoln’s brief experiment with the Constitutional monetary system. Had not the European money-trust intervened, it would have no doubt become an established institution.”

  • Al Chemist

    The poll explains a lot: the present occupant of the WH, his administration, and the democrat controlled Senate.

  • KG

    “Dr. Livingstone, I presume?…..Stepping out of the jungle gloom…” or, more like creating more gloom.

    Our present educational system was created around 19th century concerns, using 18th century means to promote children into the 21st century. No wonder why the educational system seems to be broken. The worst part though is politicians and pundits have re-written history for their own aims. Kerry, a true “war hero” in every sense of the word, was ‘swiftboated’ by a bunch of neoconservative neanderthals who still argue for ‘states rights’ and ‘unleashing capitalism’ onto Americans. A series of books have come out with these ‘neoconfederate’ delusions of grandeur to ‘swiftboat’ Abraham Lincoln. And all the ‘teabaggers’ who claim to want to ‘get back’ the Constitution, and yet can’t seem to recall even reading the darn thing! Now, why would Mr Livingstone be so concerned for children? Maybe because of what this guy said:

    “Those who have youth on their side control the future”- Adolph Hitler

    • samurai

      You have forgotten that Hitler’s state controled the children.
      “I calmly say, ‘Your child belongs to us already. Waht are you? You will pass on. You descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”
      Adolf Hitler
      November 06, 1933
      “This new Reich will give its youth to no one, but will itself take youth and give youth its own education and its own upbringing.”
      Adolf Hitler
      May 01, 1937
      The rest of your post is just some worthless rant. IOW, no intellectual content. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
      You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.
      “True religion is the foundation of society. When that is once shaken by contempt the whole fabric cannot be stable or lasting.”
      Edmond Burke

      • KG

        You seem to be well read in Nazi literature. Most conservatives are not Nazis, but all Nazis are conservative.

        • samurai

          The Nazis were socialist, so what side of the fence are socialists, hmmm? Hitler was also an atheist, but no conservative. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
          You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.
          BTW, the quotes I gave were from the bokk, “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich.”

          • KG

            Both of yous guys are soooo funny!

          • Ted Crawford

            While you are completely clueless! Hitlers personal correspondence make it abundantly clear he did not view the Communists as enemies so much as compeditors for the same group of people!

          • KG

            Well, we know that, somehow, the Republicans have the ‘white trash trailer park” vote. But if they would realize that “da gubment” is actually on their side, they might start voting Democrat again.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            This isn’t a Republican/Democrat issue. It’s a Freedom issue.

          • KG

            Wrong. Marx was correct.

            Our epoch, the epoch of the bourgeoisie, possesses, however, this distinct feature: it has simplified class antagonisms. Society as a whole is more and more splitting up into two great hostile camps, into two great classes directly facing each other — Bourgeoisie and Proletariat.


          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Funny how KGB switches from claiming that he isn’t a Socialist to quoting Marx. Drugs, maybe?

          • Ted Crawford

            The term “Progressive Logic” is not considered one of the Worlds Ultimate Oxymorons without just cause!

          • KG

            Funny how TheOriginalDaveH forgot to put his Misies link here. Drugs? Doubt it. Just kinda silly! ;)

          • JeffH

            Misies? Yeah, drugs!

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Better make sure it was Marx and not actually Engels who was doing the thinking and talking for Marx.

          • Alondra

            Yep, In some meaning Engels for Marx was as Teleprompter for the Kenyan FRAUD.


            1) Both used multiple names
            2) The same view on Religion: It is the sigh of the oppressed creature
            3) Both could NEVER hold down a REAL STABLE JOB
            4) Both are for the THEFT thru the “redistribution of the wealth”.
            5) Both hate Christianity
            6) Both are for the “COLLECTIVE” salvation in the Hell.

          • S.C.Murf

            Dave, kg doesn’t like his freedom. he would rather be told what to do and when to do it. Makes it much easier on his mental capacity.

            up the hill

          • Alondra

            WRONG. His Liberal/Progressive philosophy is:
            “FREEDOM for me, but NOT FOR THEE”

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Yes. The difference between Stalin and Hitler? One had a bigger mustache. Those two reptiles despised each other as only reptiles in pursuit of the same prey can.

          • Bob666

            Very well stated Alfred

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Two entities alike in one respect may, or may not, be alike in others.
            My friends in Sweden would be unappreciative of equating socialism with fascism.

        • Vigilant

          “Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei .”

          What part of “sozialistische” do you have difficulty with?

        • Jibbs

          Like I said before, “idiot” fits you very well.

      • Alfred Ferguson

        Yes. The quote is accurate, presumably. But what was Burke’s definition of “true religion”? I do not think that he ever defined the term. Or, if he did, that definition is unknown, to me. Perhaps you would supply it? Thank you.

    • hippybiker

      “Kerry, a true war hero?” I do believe he was outed by real soldiers who were in essence ‘the real heroes.’ As for ‘Dishonest Abe,’ he singlehandedly destroyed our Republic, and is responsible for the deaths of 100s of thousands of Americans both civilians and soldiers alike. You should be ashamed of yourself for bending history to your twisted leftist beliefs.

      • KG

        Do you clean your white hood before you burn the crosses or after?

        • hippybiker

          There you go again…”Shooting the messenger and not the message.” I’m not surprised that you would make an unfounded statement like that, being ignorant of true American history. For your information, Dishonest Abe was a Southerner and didn’t give a Rat’s A$$ about the slaves. In the Lincoln Douglas debates in Ottawa, IL Lincoln is quoted as saying “I feel the the White and Black races can never coexist in the same society.” He was also in favor of shipping all the Blacks back to Africa. Furthermore, The Emancipation Proclamation only freed the slaves in the Rebel States and Territories. It was business as usual in the Northern States. As a matter of fact General Grants wife owned slaves in the State of Illinois. Once again, your profound ignorance comes through like bad body odor.

          • KG

            As with all wars, the reasons are as varied as humans on the face of the earth. However, there is one aspect that is undeniable. This was really a war between two social systems. One has it’s roots in ancient Egypt, the other was a recent development. One had roots in owning humans as chattel, the other was ‘conceived in liberty’. Weather or not you believed in either system, the deferral of the slavery issue was going to be decided one day. And that day came on April 12, 1861, when Fort Sumpter was attacked by Southern rebels.

            The Constitution:
            Section. 9.The Migration or Importation of such Persons as any of the States now existing shall think proper to admit, shall not be prohibited by the Congress prior to the Year one thousand eight hundred and eight, but a Tax or duty may be imposed on such Importation, not exceeding ten dollars for each Person.

            Thomas Jefferson, a slave holding ‘guru’ of personal freedom, was constantly trying to reconcile the two ideas. He was blinded to Americas true destiny – not pastoral and agrarian, but urban and industrial. The south was stuck in an old system that was doomed to failure anyway.

            Trying to ‘swiftboat’ Lincoln?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            For those curious readers. Look for “American Colonization Society”:

          • Vigilant

            “For your information, Dishonest Abe was a Southerner and didn’t give a Rat’s A$$ about the slaves.”

            For your information, Lincoln strongly advocated the 13th Amendment. Kind of difficult to reconcile your claims.

            Was Lincoln a racist? Beyond a doubt, as were most Americans in his day. Was he anti-slavery? Beyond a doubt.

            P.S. Try reading a real history book in lieu of non-historian Di Lorenzo’s neoconfederate lies.

          • hippybiker

            You could be correct in your assumption, however, the supposed 13th amendment that was anti-slavery was illegally ratified, due to the fact that there already was a 13th amendment to our Constitution. The original 13th amendment was adopted to make it abundantly clear that Article l section 9 clause 8 was to be enforced. This was the idea written in absolute stone that restricted Lawyers(being agents of the BAR)against holding offices of public trust. Don’t believe me? Go look it up.

            “Life is tough, its even tougher when your stupid.” John Wayne “Ignorance can be cured, stupidity, on the other hand is often a terminal, and very painful disease.” hipshotpercusion

          • Vigilant

            “the supposed 13th amendment that was anti-slavery was illegally ratified…”

            That’s neither here nor there, and has nothing to do with your original assertion that Lincoln “didn’t give a Rat’s A$$ about the slaves.”

            I’m fully aware of the original 13th and the fact that it merely restated Article l Section 9 Clause 8 with the exception that it would have denied citizenship to those so “honoured.”

            Now if you can tell me what possible relationship exists between the original 13th and Lincoln’s support for freeing the slaves, we might have something to talk about.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Lincoln used the issue of slavery as a war measure because the South was seeking help from England.
            Lincoln had no love for the blacks:
            “As Lincoln stated in a famous, August 22, 1862 letter to New York Tribune editor Horace Greeley, “My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that.”

            From Black historian Lerone Bennett:
            “Who freed the slaves? To the extent that they were ever ‘freed,’ they were freed by the Thirteenth Amendment, which was authored and pressured into existence not by Lincoln but by the great emancipators nobody knows, the abolitionists and congressional leaders who created the climate and generated the pressure that goaded, prodded, drove, forced Lincoln into glory by associating him with a policy that he adamantly opposed for at least fifty-four of his fifty-six years of his life.”

          • Vigilant

            Both of those biased and unworthy articles were written by Di Lorenzo, the man who is making hay as a rabid hater of Lincoln and has not one degree in history.

            As the title of today’s PLD article indicates, we would indeed be a nation of ignoramuses if we gave any credence to ANYTHING Di Lorenzo says regarding Lincoln.

            P.S. Lincoln STRONGLY put his backing with the Congress to pass the 13th Amendment. That, sir, is no lie.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Because you say so, Vigilant?
            Name-calling, ad hominem attacks, unsupported accusations. You’re behaving just like the Liberal Progressives on this board, Vigilant.
            But fret not, when people read the suggested books, you can bluster all you want but the genie will be out of the bottle.

          • Vigilant

            I’ve told you several times before, I encourage the reading of Di Lorenzo’s pap. Even a cursory look at his writings reveals a man consumed by hate, not a dispassionate historian. He is, after all, an economist, not an historian.

            His terminology, his mendacious propaganda speaks for itself. True historians examine and report on history in an unimpassioned light. Di Lorenzo’s inflammatory language reveals his true agenda: to paint Lincoln in as bad a light as possible.

            That you choose to consume his bile hook, line and sinker is your problem. The source documents, with which both you and Di Lorenzo seem to be utterly unfamiliar, tell a different story. I’m tired of perennially quoting from those documents because you have studiously ignored them in the past.

            You are indeed, in every sense meant by Eric Hoffer, a “true believer.”.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            More ad hominems. You just can’t help yourself, can you Vigilant?
            And feel free to provide us with the “source documents”, Vigilant. Until then, carry on with your blustering.

          • Vigilant

            As I said, I’m tired of perennially quoting from those documents because you have studiously ignored them in the past. You prefer, as you always have, to ignore the many detailed quotations I provided in the past. You were too obtuse to read them, so I’ll not regale you again with the indisputable truth.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            More like pummel me with horse puckies.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Apparently you didn’t notice that there were two other authors in my list of books, one of them a Black historian. What slander do you have for them, Vigilant?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Slave States that fought with the North:

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Are you proud of what your progenitors did to the Ukrainians, KGB?

          • KG

            Are you proud of what your catholic progenitors did in the Balkans?


          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I’m not Catholic, dumdum.

          • KG

            No? But a majority of your right wing Republican Nazi friends are. I keep forgetting that you are an Ayn Rand atheist. Sorry about that.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            Add me as well to being an Ayn Rand Atheist.

          • Ringgo1

            An “Any Rand Atheist” is a term clearly over the line for Objectivists. Shame.

      • fenix1

        We have “Gun Laws” out the “Wazoo” that no one will FULLY enforce including the DOJ. We do NOT need more gun laws. Besides laws do NOT stop those who are intent on doing harm to others! More laws are just a way to “chip away” at the 2nd Amendment and will eventually lead to Registration and then Confiscation. And we ALL know what that leads to. Almost 200 million people were murdered by their own Governments using the same analogy in the 20th century alone. Friends, History DOES repeat itself!

        Don’t even get me started on JohnK’s ***! 3 Purple Hearts and NEVER went to a Hospital! “Roger That”…Ha Ha Ha Ha…
        75th.Rgr.Rgmt. Vietnam (70-71)

        • John H. Holliday D.D.S.

          Exactly correct. Yes, the Second Amendment also clearly indicates that the Federal government, State governments, County governments or councils, City governments or councils, Town governments or councils and any Home Owners Association groups or governments all have exactly 0% Jurisdiction of the Second Amendment and all have exactly 100% NO Jurisdiction of the Second Amendment except when a crime has been committed using a firearm but self defense as in the Zimmerman case of self defense is not a crime.

    • Jibbs

      The word “Idiot” fits you well!

    • Ted Crawford

      Let’s take a serious look at your selected quote, just which Party created the Department of Indoctrination? Common Core & C Scope? Who recieved the bulk of the “youth” vote? Which Party has decided through PPACA that one is still considered a Dependant “youth” untill at least 26 ?
      Which Party seeks to disarm the law abiding Citizens?
      Where did such idiotic ideas come from?
      “Germans who wish to use firearms should join the SA or SS. Ordinary Citizens don’t need guns, as their having guns dosen’t serve the State” Heinrich Himmler
      “A system of licensing and registration is the perfect device to deny gun ownership to the Bourgeoisie” Lenin
      “All Political Power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns” Mao Zedong

      • KG

        I’m not talking about ‘party’ as much as ‘American’. While I have been a Democrat since H W Bush lied about Dukakis and almost destroyed America in 1989 through the S&L crisis (remember that?) I see myself as American. The gun legislation that was defeated a few months ago had absolutely nothing to do with confiscation, but with firming up laws that are already in place. I guess you like to buy guns for you felon friends – a ‘straw buy’ that killed the warden in Colorado.

        I’m a Democrat who owns several guns. I do not believe in confiscation. I believe in Freedom. But I also believe in Responsibility. We should have a statue of Responsibility as well as liberty because the two go hand in hand.

        • Ted Crawford

          What you claim to believe in and what you admittedly support are two, very different things! ! Here is what the progressives intend, from their own mouths:
          “We’ll take one step at a time. We’ll have to start working again to strengthen the Law, and then again the next Law…our ultimate goal, total control of hand guns is going to take time” Peter Shields
          ” We’re going to hammer guns on the anvil of relentless Legislative Strategy! We’re going to beat guns into submission” Charles Schumer
          “Gun Bans are an idea who’s time has come” Joe Biden
          ” Waiting periods are only a step, registration is only a step, the prohibition of Private Firearms is the goal” Janet Reno
          ” I don’t care about crime, I just want to get the guns” Harold Metzenbaum
          “As you know, my position is we should ban all guns, get rid of them, no manufactur, no sale, no importation, no transportation, no possesion of a handgun” John Chafee
          This issue is a startling display of the differences between the Liberal Democrat (now extinct) and the Progressive Democrat that has infested a once proud Party!
          “Gun Bans do not disarm criminals, they attract them” Walter Mondale
          ” Certainly one of the chief guarentees of Freedom, under any Government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the Citizens to keep and bear arms” Hubert Humphrey
          “Both the Olgarch and the Tyrant mistrust the People and therefore deprive them of arms” Aristotle

          • KG

            So, you agree, Hubert Humphrey should have been a good president?

          • Ted Crawford

            At the time and even now I believe he would have been a better Presiden than Nixon. I actually voted for him in ’72’ which wasn’t too surprizing given I was a registered Democrat and was working in the Campaign of my representative Patricia Schroeder (D) Colorado! It was my three+ years of working in that campaign that cleared my head of the fallacy that the Democrats were actually working for the common man!

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          KGB, you are as far away from “American” as a Socialist misinformer can get.

        • speedle24

          Karl, If the laws were “already in place” there really wasn’t any need for additional legislation now was there?

          So you believe in “responsibility” eh? How about those receiving all the excessive entitlements? Wouldn’t you think they should take more responsibility?

          • KG

            The laws that are in place have been flaunted by many “patriot” gun dealers. Just ask one at the next gun show you go to.

            How about those receiving all the excessive entitlements?

            What is excessive?

          • speedle24

            Well we can start with the latest scam discovered where welfare recipients in New York were using their food stamps to send barrels of food to their friends and relatives Haiti and the Dominican. It seems a bit excessive for the American taxpayer to be funding the food bill for foreign countries out of the American welfare laws, don’t you think?

            How about Obamaphones? Should we be funding wireless communications for citizens?

            I don’t have time to either remind myself or look up the hundreds and hundreds of welfare abuses in this country, and that’s before we even talk about the excessive “legal” entitlements we are paying for every day.

    • TheOriginalDaveH
    • speedle24

      Excuse me Karl, would it be too much trouble for you to list the heroic acts of John Kerry “in every sense of the word”?

  • Vigilant

    “‘Goals 2000’s’ agenda is to create an environment for all American citizens
    from cradle to grave using the school system as a national nucleus to regiment
    people to have a predictable outcome…The educational system in America will be nationalized. The parents’ role in their children’s upbringing will be minimal…The entire concept was developed under President George Bush, who supported a one world concept, and it has been championed since the day after the election by Hillary Clinton. If you thought Hillary’s national health care program was scary, or born out of secrecy, wait until you get a load of what is in store for your children under the guise of education. Is this your vision of America of Year 2000? It is not ours…”
    — “Who Will Raise Our Children?” written by David J. Willmott, editor, in Suffolk Life Newspapers, September 13, 1995

  • Ted Crawford

    It’s abundantly clear that many of our Politicians, from both parties, either fail to understand, or intentionally misuse the Constitution! In respect to the Ist. Amendment, given the fact that it was the Bible that was the first book used by schools to teach reading, and was still employed that way even after the Mcguffey Reader was introduced, it’s readily apparent that our Founders believed that a Divine Creator had a prominant place within our Society. It’s also a fact that in 9 of the original 13 State Constitutions, one couldn’t even seek Public Office without being; “A member in good standing” of a Congragation!
    With respect to the Second Amendment; It’s equally clear they are incorrect in their intrepretation. When a politician declares things such as “You don’t need an Assault rifle for self defense” and “you don’t need 30 round magazines for hunting”, their error is apparent! It’s a given that these two actions had NO part, whatsoever, in the drafting of the Second Amendment! Rather these were considered as “unalienable rights”!
    John Kennedy clearly understood the Second Amendment. ” By calling attention to a well regulated Militia,the security of the Nation, and the right of each Citizen to keep and bear arms, our Founding Fathers recognized the essentially Civilian nature of our Economy. The Second Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic Civilian-Military relationship in which every Citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his Country. For that reason the Second Amendment will always be important” John Kennedy

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Ted says — “It’s also a fact that in 9 of the original 13 State Constitutions, one couldn’t even seek Public Office without being; “A member in good standing” of a Congragation!”.
      Yes, there was much anti-Freedom sentiment in the colonies even after the Constitution. But I wouldn’t brag about that.

  • mark

    “The (non)education system and schools — predominantly run and staffed by socialists, progressives, collectivists and Marxists — omit teaching on the Nation’s origins and vilify the Founders and their struggle — demonizing the great explorers and the likes of Thomas Jefferson and Patrick Henry while glorifying Marxist criminals like Che Guevera.” C’mon, Bob. This is just typical right-wing cant that doesn’t reflect at all the educational reality of the way tens of thousands of our schools operate everyday. This is just a caricature of right-wing paranoia – and a comical one at that! Such exaggerations in no way represents the education that I nor my children received. That the average citizen doesn’t retain much knowledge of the Constitution or our early history has more to do with the failure of Americans to continue to educate themselves after they graduate high school or college. Numerous studies have shown that human beings only retain a small percentage of what they learn in school. You have to become a “perpetual” or lifelong student to stay up on such matters or have your life’s profession centered on such subjects (like teachers, journalists, pundits, etc.) to stay up on such topics. Most people are too busy making a living, raising a family, trying to enjoy life to devote that much time to keeping up on our nation’s history or on-going debates on the Constitution. You and I have that inclination but most don’t and they are not ignoramuses because they choose to concentrate on other – for them (believe it or not) – more important concerns.

    Best, mark

    • Ted Crawford

      “more important”?!?!
      ” The Death of Democracy is not likely to be from assassination from ambush. It will be a slow extinction from apathy, indifferance and undernourishment” Robert M. Hutchins
      “The Tryanny of a Prince in an Oligarchy is not so dangerous to the Public Welfare as the Apathy of a Citizen in a Democracy” Charles de Montesquieu
      ” The price of Apathy towards Public Affairs is to be ruled by Evil men” Plato
      All the activities whos’ virtues you extolled,”Making a Living, Raising a Family and the enjoyment of life” can only occur if we first do the hard work of paying attention!
      “If a Nation expects to be ignorant and Free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be” Thomas Jefferson

      • mark

        Yes believe it or not, Ted, for many people who work at low-paying jobs to feed their children, pay rent, utilities, and taxes, purchase gasoline for their work vehicle and books for their kid’s classes debates over the First and Second Amendments and the role that Jefferson and Patrick Henry played in the Revolution are not a major concern. I grew up in such a family and my Mom and Dad worked numerous exhausting jobs to keep all our heads above water. I don’t remember too many historical debates over the dinner table when my Dad was nodding off before he got an hour or two sleep to go to his night job – after just having worked his day job.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          You can thank the Progressives for that, mark.
          And I’m sure you will in some future comment as you are claiming that they have created prosperity for American workers. It seems that you guys switch from side to side depending on the current point you want to make.

          • mark

            Well, my Dad had six kids so that had something to do with his need to work 2 jobs at various times in his working life to try to give his children better opportunities for the future. A good deal of his work was union work for which he was well-paid and grateful. But like many American workers of his era, he did lament the loss of so many good-paying manufacturing jobs that went overseas in search of lower wages – a policy supported by free marketers in both parties, though more of them in the GOP. He did end up with a union pension and benefits for which he was thankful but as I write, his former company is stripping more and more benefits from his health plan in violation of promises they made many years ago. They are strict capitalists, I wouldn’t call them Progressives. Capitalists break their promises too, Dave. Life, especially political-economic life, is complicated. It doesn’t all have one Von Mises Institute solution for everything

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            The loss of American jobs has nothing to do with Free Markets, mark, and everything to do with the growth of Government — which you promote.
            When the non-producers are consuming 40% of our GDP, it’s kind of hard to make ends meet.
            By the way, mark, haven’t you in the past claimed that Free Markets have never existed? Correct me if I’m wrong, please.

          • mark

            I don’t recall ever commenting on that issue, Dave. But I will now – a true free market has never existed in any human state or polity. Just as true communism has never existed. They are both theories. To the free-market capitalism argument, there has always been some kind of state intervention in all economies. Even in the supposed heyday of laissez-faire capitalism in 19th-century America, huge government-ordained, pro-business tariffs existed, anti-slave importation rules and later the overthrow of slavery by government proceeded. The government built, subsidized or financed roads, rails, canals, and schools to promote economic development using taxpayer funds, a military and military manufacturing base sponsored by government flourished (though nowhere near the size of the one today!), and state-security forces shot down striking and/or protesting workers in the street. (1877 Railroad and 1892 Pullman Strikes) Not exactly a neutral or hands-off government there. Something around a third of the Ancient Egyptian economy, if you want to go further back, consisted of the building of the pyramids and the maintenance of the Pharaoh’s security and armed forces.

            But the fact that these systems never existed according to their theorists’ designs does not mean that communists or free marketers, who supported large elements of these competing programs, did not exist. Gus Hall and Milton Freidman would be 2 examples of these. Neither of them ever brought a truly communist nor free market society into being but they certainly believed in their separate fairy tales. I don’t believe in either.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            mark says — “a true free market has never existed in any human state or polity. Just as true communism has never existed. They are both theories”.
            Yet, earlier he said — “he did lament the loss of so many good-paying manufacturing jobs that went overseas in search of lower wages – a policy supported by free marketers in both parties, though more of them in the GOP”.
            So let’s see — The Free Market has never existed, but it is responsible for the loss of our jobs to other countries.
            Wow, logic only a Liberal Progressive could spout.

          • mark

            There is a difference between the question of whether a true free market ever existed and whether supporters of such a fantasy exist as I explained in my post. I can name you numerous examples of supporters of free markets: Milton Freidman, Jack Kemp, Adam Smith, Hayek, yourself. But I can’t give you one example of a nation or polity in history that ever had a truly free market. And neither can you. So what is illogical about this? God does not exist – in the minds of millions of atheists who cannot find any definitive proof of his existence and who note that faith not logic forms the sole basis of his existence for all believers. But lots of people passionately believe in God’s existence disregarding such irrationality and strongly support what they see as God’s policies and dictums. And they have real political power in this world. Just take a look at the Middle East or at the Congressional Prayer Caucus or numerous Christian political organizations in our nation. Free Marketers and Communists share this one commonality: blind, near religious faith in a theoretical utopia that never has existed and if it did would no doubt be a failure despite their belief that it would solve all or most of humanity’s problems.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Milton Friedman was a Monetarist.
            You can’t have Free Markets with Central Banks. That’s an oxymoron.
            Jack Kemp was not a Free Market advocate:
            Neither was Adam Smith:
            But one out of four isn’t bad, mark (or is it?).
            And we have had Free Markets sporadically throughout History such as that which existed in Venice, Italy around the 14th century. But they last only until the non-producers with Power (Government) catch on and start their pillaging.
            We can never achieve Perfection either, mark, but does that mean we shouldn’t strive for it? What is your point anyway? That we shouldn’t strive for positive outcomes if they didn’t exist previously? That makes no sense to me other than just another of the many manipulative attempts that Liberal Progressives make to stop people from upsetting their cushy applecarts.

          • mark

            Even 14th century Venice had a considerable state sector and monopolies for various trade companies. State-sponsored war against trading rivals and their growth into an empire warped their original development. And their empire took a hard blow when Constantinople fell to the Turks in 1453 and the Portuguese used an alternative sea route to end their monopoly on commerce with the Near East and the Eastern Mediterranean. I agree though that Venetians were freer than most peoples of their era with a republican-style government that of necessity often intervened in their largely capitalist, though mercantile economy.

            On your other point, I don’t think we should strive for an unjust perfection. To me, Marxist socialism even in its purest form would be unjust to the majority of people living under it, so why strive to perfect an unfair system? Similarly pure free market capitalism, while it is definitely less onerous than Marxist socialism, without government intervention and regulation would lead to massive monopolies and socioeconomic injustice. A strong government referee and participant is necessary to ensure education, infrastructure, the larger public interest, and the rules of the game, otherwise the most ruthless, successful, and richest win again and again until they establish a tyrannical economic oligarchy as existed in late 19th and early 20th century America. Thankfully the Progressives tamed the worst excesses of this system. P.S. I know you don’t agree with any of this but I don’t think this makes you inferior, immoral, or dangerous. I intelligent love debate.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            mark says — “Similarly pure free market capitalism, while it is definitely less onerous than Marxist socialism, without government intervention and regulation would lead to massive monopolies and socioeconomic injustice”.

            Are you really that clueless, or are you just a Shill? I strongly suspect the latter. It makes no sense that you could be hanging around here for all these years and still haven’t learned that the Government uses regulations and other devices to feather theirs and their Crony Capitalists’ nests. They are the opposite of what the average citizen thinks they are:

            And the only way a “monopoly” can exist is with the aid of Government:

            Note, Folks, that I post these links for you, not people like mark who aren’t here to learn anything but instead are here to keep you from learning.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Mark says — “state-security forces shot down striking and/or protesting workers in the street. (1877 Railroad and 1892 Pullman Strikes)”.
            That’s the Propaganda version of events.
            The real version:
            “Thus, when unions took to the streets in the first great
            labor dispute that might be called national, the railway strike of 1877, and engaged both in an illegal conspiracy that stopped intercity traffic and in serious rioting and destruction of property, state troops armed with Gatling guns were called out, and 26 men died in the ensuing gun battles. The strike eventually failed, but union leaders were not prosecuted for having called the strike or participated in it, only those individuals caught red-handed were prosecuted. Law enforcement by either police or judicial action was powerless to prevent recurrence of labor actions or violence within them. A pattern was being set”.

            To fully understand the situation and Government’s and Crony Capitalists’ role, the reader should read this article:

        • Ted Crawford

          I’m sorry for your missing out. My father was an Ironworker and I chose The Electrical trade but these discussions did take place around our table. My father was a veteran who hit the beaches of Normandy and I served for five years, two in Vietnam. The future of the nation was in my Fathers house, and is in my house far more important than The Family Guy or the Playoffs!

      • mark

        And Ted, it was also very easy for Thomas Jefferson to do all of his pontificating on the importance of freedom since he had slaves doing all his manual labor for him and his family. My Dad who was a carpenter, construction worker, and janitor never had this luxury.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          What does Jefferson’s slave ownership have to do with his words of wisdom?
          Instead of the usual ad hominem attacks, mark, perhaps you could muster some intelligible remarks about the content of his quotes?

          • mark

            Nothing except that it proves he was a hypocrite, a human rights abuser, and a possible rapist. While he said many wonderful things about freedom and was a great intellect, I can’t help but be skeptical of him as a political leader and model due to his policies as president even more so than his personal behavior where he failed over and over again to live up to his lofty ideals.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            What do you mean “possible rapist”, mark? Why even throw something like that in unless you are purposely trying to slander the man?
            Anyway, you have no legs to stand on, mark, being an enslaver yourself.

          • mark

            I am talking about the Sally Hemming’s controversy. It is fairly well known, although the evidence that the middle-aged Jefferson forced his teen-aged slave girl to have sex with him is not conclusive (it might also have been his cousin, given the latest DNA work-ups done) hence my use of the qualifying adjective “possible.” As to my being an enslaver, this is obviously another of your ad hominem attacks that you always condemn others for using, Dave (very inconsistent there). I have never owned any slaves nor taken part in the slave trade. In Marxian terms ( he was a famous economist but I doubt they have any of his works in the Von Mises on-line Library), I have never owned a private business that employed others for less money than I make – what critics of capitalism used to call “wage slaves.” Neo-confederates and Southern apologists (there are several at the Von Mises Institute) even today call Civil War era Northern industrialists the practitioners of “wage slavery,” versus chattel slavery. This includes an author you recently recommended to posters, Lochlainn Seabrook who wrote Everything You Were Taught About the Civil War is Wrong, Ask a Southerner. I suppose you mean I am the supported of a federal government that has made slaves of all Americans but this is a rather ridiculous exaggeration in my view similar to calling someone who works at Subway a “wage slave” but Seabrook is still using this term regarding the antebellum North that according to him was full of them.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            mark says — “As to my being an enslaver, this is obviously another of your ad hominem attacks
            that you always condemn others for using, Dave”.
            No, mark, it is just fact. You not only vote for Politicians to take other unwilling peoples’ money, which represents their labor, thus slavery, but you also hang around this board trying to persuade others to do the same.
            Wage Slavery is just one of many Liberal Progressive lies. You aren’t a Slave unless you provide your labor unwillingly. Get it? UNWILLINGLY. If you don’t like the offered pay rate, the solution is simple — Don’t take the job!
            I realize in the Liberal Progressive world UP is DOWN and DOWN is UP, but I would bet that most of the people reading this board have a normal sense of morality.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Those readers who would like to know more about Jefferson’s slave holding, and his rationalization for such, can start here:

        • Ted Crawford

          In other words you have no substantive arguements to refute my post! By the way I’m a Construction Electrician by trade and raised four children! Excuses are like armpits, most people have a couple and they often smell bad! One can make excuses or be Free but you can’t do both!

          • mark

            No I can dispute a couple of your quotes as well. Unlike Montesquieu, I think that a monstrous tyranny is more dangerous than apathy, though apathy is certainly a problem. I also disagree with Robert M. Hutchins. Democracies are more likely to be destroyed by right-wing coups: Argentina 1976, Chile 1973, Dominican Republic 1965, Indonesia 1965, Guatemala 1954, Iran 1953, and by outright military invasion such as from the Nazis during World War II and the Soviets in the same era and during the Cold War than by apathy and indifference.

        • Stuart Shepherd

          Mark- just because Jefferson had slaves doesn’t make what he said UN-TRUE. Gee- I’VE been a construction worker and a janitor and even I can see that!

          • mark

            No, but it does make him a hypocrite and a human rights abuser. Not my kind of guy, though I am sure you have no problem with this.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Jefferson was a product of his generation. He did the best he could given his environment.
            What’s your excuse for enslaving people, mark?

          • Ringgo1

            It is obvious to us all that Thomas Jefferson was/is not your “kind of guy”. This actually says more about YOU than TJ.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      The usual ad hominem attacks in lieu of facts from mark.
      The rest being mark’s personal conjecture. For instance:
      mark says — “Numerous studies have shown that human beings only retain a small percentage of what they learn in school”.
      Good news, mark. Since there are numerous studies, you should have no problem posting a link to just one for us.
      But even if that were true, it plays right into what Bob is saying. Our Propaganda Schools are purposely under-educating the students so they will be unaware of the Freedom being regularly stripped away from them.

    • speedle24

      Wrong Mark. It is the exactly your attitude that has created this corrosive “let somebody else do it” mindset among the newer generations. You are so stoic and unyielding that you refuse to look past anything you see in the daily news that might help explain why things are happening like they are happening.

      The fact is learning about the Constitution and why it was created should be as much of a learning staple as the ABCs. Why? Because it protects future generations from what is going on right now. Basic “Education” occurs at an early age, and our education system has failed miserably (primarily because the malcontents of the 60’s gained control of academia). You are right that people fail to continue to educate themselves, but if the foundation of the basic premise that created this relative paradise of a country is not there we should not be surprised when wrong decisions are made.

    • SplendidIsolation

      Here’s where education is headed. Educate yourself on Common Core.
      These are great videos that explain what’s giong on:

  • Warrior

    I’m still undecided. Another face piercing, tattoo, or wearing my pants around my knees? Sooo many choices to express myself!

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Don’t knock it, Warrior. It is a heartening sign that the human urge for Individual Freedom has not been totally stamped out.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Then why do tattoos all resemble each other and the same body parts are tattooed?
        I always thought it was a way of people to stick their middle finger at God because he gave a command not to mar the body like the pagans do, ‘so there we will be like the pagans’.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Believing in a God is not a requirement for being a Freedom Lover.

          • Jeff

            Have you discussed this with “Samurai,” one of your “thumbs up” guys? He might have a different view.

          • JeffH

            Oh my, I see unhinged Jeff’s jealousy rearing it’s ugly head…he must not like all of his elicited “thumbs down”.

          • Jeff

            Obviously, the “thumbs down” comments by you and your ilk wound me to the quick. What will I ever do without the support of the many Birchers, Birthers, Racists, borderline Nazis, gun nuts, and wingnuts who populate these blogs? The “thumbs down,” like your repetitive and meaningless name calling, just tell me I must be on the right track.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            What are much more damaging to you, Jeff, are your ridiculous comments. But please, keep on commenting so the innocent readers can learn what Liberal Progressives are really made of.

          • JeffH

            You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make him drink…just try to lead him away from the trough and he’ll resist, not wanting to lose his “righfull” place.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            They have Trough Rights now?

          • JeffH

            Isn’t there something in the Constitution that grants them that right to feed at the government trough?

            Isn’t that what the “General Welfare” clause is about?

            The trough feeders define it that way because they actually believe that it provides that the governing body empowered by the document may enact laws to promote the general welfare of the people, sometimes worded as the public welfare.

          • Ringgo1

            Are you actually PROUD of your ignorant bigotry? (That’s what it looks like…)

          • Alondra

            That is NOT look!
            Unfortunately That is REALITY!!!

          • Ringgo1

            Looks like “Jeff” has down voted both of us. You are correct, of course.

          • JeffH

            unhinged and sorely wounded Jeff…I see your hypcricy is raising it’s ugly head again…” The “thumbs down,” like your repetitive and meaningless name calling, just tell me I must be on the right track.”

            Only in your pathetic little twisted progressive mind!

            Look at the bright side, 666 always gives you a thumbs up vote…no credibility voting for another with no credibility…go figure.

            The heat gettin’ to ya? I think it’s conservative mind control that has forced you to be an ignorant progressive… despite all of your moaning and groaning.

            Want some cheese and crackers with your whine?

          • Jeff

            I must admit you’ve got me stumped. I can’t imagine how even your twisted mind can come up with “jealousy” when I mentioned that two individuals I never agree with, DaveH and the Clown Samurai, may disagree about something. Of which one am I supposed to be jealous? Maybe you could trade one of your guns for a new insult dictionary.

          • JeffH

            Yes you are stumped. Funny how the obvious becomes twisted to you whining ignoramuses.

          • Jeff

            Here’s a town where you might be right at home should you ever be able to separate from your guns for a few days to travel.


  • jim b

    The government’s 12 year sentence is a root cause of the decline. The government has dumbed down the educational requirements of the past several decades. They have not introduced any viable alternative other than spending more money, and have fought tooth and nail against other forms of education that have been proven to provided better education i.e. charter schools. If governments big toe isn’t severed from the education process it will only continue to bloat and decline as all other government run anything does. Our current potus is a perfect example of ignorance reaching the highest levels of government, a trumped up academic record and accomplishments that has yet to be validated. Not a single release of his so called Columbia U records and transcripts. The only thing we know of his education is that he did drugs, and snorted cocaine throughout college, and this was his own story, in his own book, and nothing about his academics. Well as the saying goes, “ Ignorance is Bliss “!

  • Louis Lemieux

    The recent annual poll conducted for the Newseum Institute shows more support for the First Amendment than was measured in 2002, when 49 percent of respondents agreed the First Amendment “goes too far.” This year 34% said likewise.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      From infowars:
      “A recent national poll shows that 34% of Americans believe the First Amendment “goes too far in the rights it guarantees”………
      That belief is up 13% compared to the results of the same survey conducted last year, the largest single-year increase since the center started the annual surveys in 1997″.
      The Propaganda is working. Hopefully, recent events will wake people up to reality.

      • Louis Lemieux

        I’m not questioning the high percentage of accuracy of this poll, but I believe national and world events do have an effect on how people think and respond to a poll, be it one way or another.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      As would be expected by most of the regular Freedom Lovers who know Louis well, he has cherry-picked the poll results to compare the year (2002) of the most anti-Freedom results out of the last 15 years of the survey. Scroll down to the 4th page, chart named “The First Amendment Goes Too Far in the Rights it Guarantees”.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Who is doing the polling, who is paying for the polling, what questions were asked to get the wanted answers?

  • PatCindyCunningham

    Ignoramuses? Oh yes! I have a theory about that. It seems Reality Programs have been popping up like crazy for quite sometime. I thought it was a fad and would stop but, I thought wrong. Of course People have other ways to play, Ipods and texting and web searches but, seems to me People are stuck like glue to Reality Programs.

    Why else would every cable channel and, most regular stations be putting them out like Rabbits? In the meantime our Country is going to the Dogs and at least half the nation is clueless. Could Reality Programming be the way Obama is changing this nation? By not paying attention and waiting for the next Reality Show to come on?

    • Proteus1946

      I don’t have much to contradict your beef with. There are entirely too many Reality Programs on TV. Same goes for WWF Smackdown wrestling and other so-called sports. Apparently, there are lots of folks that watch them, otherwise advertisers wouldn’t be paying big bucks to keep them on the air. ‘Free Enterprise’ in all its glory.

      BUT . . . just where do you get off blaming Obama for such programming? The FCC only sets some standards for commercial broadcast, not programming content. For instance, you cannot say ‘$hit’, or ‘F*uck’, or even ‘Tit’ on commercial broadcast TV (different rules for cable stations like HBO, etc.). They (the FCC or Obama) don’t have much authority over WHAT is broadcast (within certain ‘taste’ rules, like full-frontal nudity).

      Personally, I don’t watch any Reality program, nor WWF Smackdown, not even many sports (I will watch a couple of games during the World Series, and maybe the Rose Bowl). If there is nothing of interest on TV, I could always watch one of my DVDs or video tapes. Same applies to you – if you don’t like it, don’t watch it (and there’s nothing Obama can do about it).

  • TheOriginalDaveH

    David Erickson (facebook) says — “As to the rest of the article, it’s so blatantly partisan as to be worthless”.
    No, David, it is your vague ad hominem attacks that are worthless.
    Feel Free, David, to explain which parts of the article are “blatantly partisan” and why you feel that way.
    Meanwhile I won’t hold my breath while waiting for an intelligent response.

  • Stephan F

    “The United
    States is devolving into a Nation of ignoramuses.” Not entirely correct…the U.S. is a nation of lazy ignoramuses – we’re already there. But that’s really old news Bob and I tire of hearing the constant drumbeat of how people are just dumb, stupid, and lazy. More importantly — much more importantly — the Do-Do birds in this pathetic flock have evolved into a nation of thieves. And when you combine those two common human failings (ignorance & immorality) it’s easy to understand how we got to this really nasty set of circumstances we find ourselves in.

    Does the average person really desire to hear the truth about reality? No. Not only that but he wouldn’t
    give a damn if he did hear it. And that’s the key. As long as he can keep feeding at the government pig-trough he neither desires nor cares to hear about
    the truth, or reality. “Just keep those freebies coming, thank you very much. And I don’t even want to hear about any talk of stopping them.” This is the crux of the issue we face today. And until we can find a way of removing all those millions of greedy little pigs suckling at the trough we’ll never find a way out of this mess. Until then, I’ll just keep right on living like Ali Baba and the 330 million thieves.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      By the way, stories of lazy ignoramuses are very ancient news which are always up to date
      YOU can be tired of hearing about the ignoramuses but THEY ARE HERE and we have to adjust our lives around the government trough fillers and eaters. Unless you find it easier to give up and go with the societal flow, it is difficult to think and reason and lots easier to shut the brain down.

  • 1baronrichsnot1

    It’s too late to reeducate the mis and under informed now in society who can’t even name their VP, Any other so called leader that they probably voted for. We have to pick the younger folks up here now as they enter Public school systems, teach them the truth about american history, teach them to read and write, teach them math and sciences, etc. educate them in gov’t so they can identify scams, pyramids perputrated on the people, punish and vote out the crooks and corrupters. An infestation of progressive/marxists into our gov’t has caused this current generation to be for all purposes “lost”.

    • Diane Ringen

      I am a retired teacher with 30 years experience. I never gave up on a student. Got frustrated perhaps!

      • Proteus1946

        According to 1baronrichsnot1, you must be a progressive/marxist that for years indoctrinated our youth with American History UNtruths, didn’t teach them to read and write, taught no math or sciences nor educate them in Civics. What did you do, really, for 30 years? Sure doesn’t sound like my career in teaching, and probably not your’s either.

        I’d really like to see Bob Livingston’s WRITTEN curriculum that he seems so proud of. Has he ever written any textbooks that he would feel appropriate for schools? Curious minds want to know.

        • Diane Ringen

          I never gave up on a student, and I am not about to give up on the current generation which 1baronrichsnot1 claims for all purposes to be lost. We all, myself included, have children and grandchildren in this generation. I really loved teaching American history. It is the current administration that is indoctrinating our youth with UNtruths..

          • Proteus1946

            I’ve only given up on one student in my life. One student in my welding class simply could not learn to weld. Something to do with hand-eye co-ordination. Even though I spent more time with individual instruction with this kid than any other, he just couldn’t do it. I suggested he transfer to auto shop (after over two months of trying), and he did rather well there. I still remember him as a very likable kid that just couldn’t do it. At some point, the theory of diminishing returns takes over.

          • Diane Ringen

            You didn’t give up on him, you just re channeled him to a place where his talents were stronger. We aren’t all successful at everything. Most of us aren’t.

          • Proteus1946

            Thank you. That’s a much better way to think about it. I didn’t fail the kid (as a teacher), I just re-channeled him. Ya know, I still think about that kid, and some other fond memories I made while teaching.
            Thanks again – you must have been one of the ‘good’ teachers.

          • Diane Ringen

            We have all struggled with some kids. Taught 1 kid named Jeff in 8th grade. We butted heads the whole year. Years later my husband and I were having a drink in a bar and he asked me to dance although I didn’t immediately recognize him. He spent the evening with us. 6 months later he committed suicide. I have always been
            grateful for that night.

          • Diane Ringen

            Did you receive my story about my 8th grade student? I never saw it come through on the blog.

          • Proteus1946

            I saw it yesterday, but it seems to have disappeared today.
            I too had a student suicide. One of my students in Job Corps seemed pretty depressed. I talked to him quite awhile to try to cheer him up. He went home that evening and shot himself. The funeral was really sad. I guess all the signs were there, but what more could I have done?

          • Diane Ringen

            My story was for your eyes not for the world to see. Wow, Let me think on this one awhile.

          • Diane Ringen

            Many years ago in our area there was a man who killed his wife and some of their children while shooting the others who survived. The night before he did this, he sat up with his father talking over his problems in a very depressed state. His father did everything he knew to so, but it did not help. Only God knows the minds of these people.

  • Diane Ringen

    America GET SMART. Our government has become so corrupt. I think we can make one of two choices. Will we turn to God who is the only one who can save us? Or will we refuse to turn to Him and allow this corrupt government ruin us ALL?

    • Barack Embalmer

      As most of you know we have a war on religion going on in this country that seems to be aimed at Christianity. With comments that God is the only one who can save us on here that just gives them more ammunition to attack Christianity even more. How is God supposed to save us from this corrupt regime anyway? You Christians are going to have to change strategy and quit posting bible verses for a while. It is OK to believe and this country was founded on religion, but quit forcing your beliefs on everyone else on here, it only appears that your “not sure” when you try to forcefeed religion in this way! Vote these suckers out!!!

      • BillP

        So let’s bomb those heathens with love and the bible. Let’s win this horrible war.

        • Diane Ringen

          Let’s do!

          • BillP

            I was being sardonic. I can walk into any church, synagogue or temple in this country and pray, noone is going to barge in and arrest me or take me away. As far ass voter fraud please show me where and how much fraud is going on. This is a bogus issue perpetrated by some boogeymen.

          • SplendidIsolation

            BillP: That’s exactly what the Jews thought back in 1939.

            “Then they came for the Jews,
            and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Jew.

            Then they came for the Catholics,
            and I didn’t speak out because I wasn’t a Catholic.

            Then they came for me,
            and there was no one left to speak for me.”

          • Diane Ringen

            You are right! Someone asked me why did God allow the holocaust to happen? Not sure he actually allowed it, but since it did happen, where is the lesson for us all? Keep these things from happening in the future?

          • BillP

            So you are comparing this nation and its government to Nazi Germany. So which religion is going to be 1st this time. When I read this type of post I know the people writing them are delusional

          • SplendidIsolation

            Why does that statement make me “delusional”. I find it interesting that you use the typical Alinsky tactic of insulting and demeaning me instead of actually defending your position. I was simply responding to your statement that “no one is going to barge in and arrest me or take me away”. That IS what many people believed back in 1939.

          • BillP

            I find it interesting that you try to link me to somone I am not a follower of. As for demeaning you, you are using a quote to answer my question but you didn’t use the whole quote. Could it be because the Nazi’s came for others 1st? You left out that they came for the socialists first. Then they came for the trade unionists next. Well answer my questions where/when have they come to take the christians away in this country?

          • SplendidIsolation

            Abridged version for sake of brevity. You’re right, they came after a whole slew of people. I wasn’t trying to link you to Mr. Alinsky. I just stated that you used a typical liberal tactic when confronted with truth. As for taking Christians away … Have you heard about the Romeike Family? They were granted asylum in Memphis because Germany forbid them from Christian homeschooling. And then the Holder DOJ decided that they didn’t want them here and started proceedings to deport that family back to Germany where their 6 children would be taken from their custody and the parents have been threatened with prison. It’s not exactly the same as Nazis taking Christians away but it’s about as close as you can get. What type of person would do that to this little insignificant family that just want to raise their children in a Christian manner?

          • BillP

            HoThe Romeike Family matter is a home schooling issue in Germany not in the USA. The Romeikes were denied aslyum. Their case was heard by the 6th Circuit Court of appeals.

            The Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals disagrees. The U.S. grants safe haven to people who have a well-founded fear of persecution, but not necessarily to those under governments with laws that simply differ from those in the U.S., Judge Jeffrey Sutton wrote in the court’s decision.

            “The German authorities have not singled out the Romeikes in particular or homeschoolers in general for persecution,” he wrote for the three-judge panel in the case, Uwe Romeike v. Eric Holder, Jr.

            Judge Jeffrey Sutton who wrote the court’s decision is a Republican and was appointed by President GW Bush. However you conviently started with the religions and left out the Socialists. Since Presdient Obama has been labeled a Socialist I guess the “they” will come for him 1st.
            You haven’y shown any evidence of any being prevented from practicing their religious beliefs in this country. I will repeat what I stated initially – I can go into any church, synagogue or temple and pray without feear of being taken away.

            Back to the 1st part of your reply, you wrote an abridged version of the quote.

          • SplendidIsolation

            You missed the point I think. The current administration is making a CHOICE to deport a family that will be persecuted for their religious beliefs in Germany. Germany may not be but Eric Holder most certainly is singling them out after they were already granted asylum.

            I find it VERY disingenuous and duplicitous that Eric Holder is so fired up about sending this wonderful family (who obeyed the rules) back into persecution while at the same time refusing to deport a group of individuals (illegal immigrants) that are (and have been) breaking the laws of this country to the tune of at least 15-20 million people.

          • BillP

            No I didn’t miss the point. The gov’t issues aslyum status to those in danger of being repressed by their gov’t. Germany has a “law” against home schooling. The Romeike can return to Germany and put their children in schools, endo fissue. If they “choose” to try to home school their children they risk arrest.
            It’s funny that you don’t mention that this administration has deported more people than the prior one.
            Still not seeing any “war ” on religion in this country.

          • SplendidIsolation

            And the Romeike Family was being repressed by their govt and Holder doesn’t give a rat’s ass. They requested asylum and it was granted. Why does Holder feel the need to stick his nose in?

            They came here believing that America embraced those who are being persecuted for their religious beliefs (like the first settlers in America). Not in Obama’s “Fundamentally Transformed” America.

            Maybe I’m asking the wrong questions … Are you FOR or AGAINST religious persecution?

          • BillP

            There is law in Germany forbidding home schooling. The Romeike Family chose to break that law. They are not being persecuted for thier religious beliefs. They can send their children to school in Germany or legally move to another country. Trying to politcal asylum in this country without a valid reason is not accepted. They can practice their religion in Germany they just can’t home school their children. This is a legal issue not a religious one as you keep trying make it.
            You are not asking the wrong question ( you only asked one) you are trying to use religious persecution as a case for them to be here in the US when they can openly practice the religion in Germany.

          • SplendidIsolation

            The Immigration and Nationality Act authorizes the Attorney General to grant asylum to a refugee, defined as “an alien who is unwilling or unable to return to his or her home country ‘because of persecution or a well-founded fear of persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.'”

            The German law passed in 1938 by Adolph Hitler made it illegal to home school. Laws passed since then have only strengthened that law.

            The Romeikes are only following their beliefs. As stated in Acts 5:29:

            “It is our duty to obey the orders of God rather than the orders of men.”

            They home school because they disagree with what the government is teaching and they’ve decided that God would have them teach their children at home (just like my wife and I have decided).

            My question is … WHY is Holder so intent on sending them back when he’s fighting so hard for illegals from Mexico?

            The Romeikes are facing fines in Germany that exceed their capacity to pay and would result ultimately in the loss of their house (not to mention the prospect of jail and loss of parental custody).

            Is there no compassion at all in Holder’s heart?

          • BillP

            The Romeike Family were “Not” persecuted for their religious beliefs in Germany they were home schooling their children which is against the law in Germany. Whether you or I like this law is not relevant. They don’t qualify for asylum in the US. You can keep claiming this but it doesn’t make it true.

            You still haven’t shown any proof of a war on religioons in this country which was my original question to you. Where/when did they occur?

            Please don’t respond with more Romeike Family matters.

          • SplendidIsolation

            Forget it … you have ingested too much Kool-Aid to see logic and truth.

          • BillP

            Typical religious zealot reply. When asked to prove something uses the Kool-Aid tactic. Keep your blinders on and live in your little bubble world

          • SplendidIsolation

            I feel like I’ve answered your questions and you just keep telling me to answer your questions. My response to “war on religion” won’t really matter will it? Are you really going to agree with anything I say?

            Everyone has beliefs and mine happen to be based on Christian principles. I don’t think that makes me a “zealot”. It just means I have a basis for my beliefs. Demeaning me doesn’t really doesn’t help your case does it???

            As for “my little bubble world” … I’ve been on both sides. I grew up under a legalistic church which drove me to the liberal way of thinking. The more I listened and learned the liberal world view the more I realized the complete lack of logic espoused. Everything was about emotion. Closed-mindedness and elitism prevailed. As I matured and started raising a family I realized that conservatives tend to think things through and apply logic to the situations they encounter in life. In almost ever instance … it just made more sense.

            Think about it … Liberals will fight tooth and nail against animal cruelty but they will then oppose putting a 20 week restriction on abortion. A babies heart is beating at 18 days. It’s DNA is fully intact. It is human life. But a liberal is OK with ending that life AT ANY POINT in the pregnancy. How is that remotely logical? And the horrible procedures used to perform those abortions is barbaric.

            Economically, liberals want to throw money at every social problem. Our educational system is worse today than it was 40 years ago and we’ve thrown tons of money at the problem. Detroit is bankrupt after 40 years of liberal policies. The stimulus did next to nothing. Unemployment is through the roof and the welfare rolls are at an all time high. And we’re $17 trillion in debt!

            And the list goes on and on. You can call me names if you choose (it’s your 1st amendment right) but it might not hurt you to stop for moment and consider the logic of both sides and see which one really makes sense.

          • BillP

            Please explain how you answered my question of providing example(s) of how the US gov’t is waging a war on religions. That’s all. The Romeike Family issue is with the German gov’t. Give me some factual examples.

            I didn’t demean you, you do live in a sheltered world. Well I’m told I don’t understand or that I drank the Kool-Aid I guess that’s a display of your christian charitable nature.

            Talk about generalizing people your very narrow view of liberals is laughable. So every liberal is in favor of animal rights while favoring abortions. liberal policies ruined Detroit (you make want to see want happened to the car industry there until the llast few years), Liberals are closed minded (as opposed to the open-minded conservatives who don’t believe in science), illogical (don’t you think painting all liberals that way points out the biased view you have, unemployment is coming down – people who had dropped out of the job market are coming back to look for jobs. Let’s 100’s of thousands of jobs lost in the last year or of W’s reign compared with over 2+ years of monthly job gains.

            Your comment of “it might not hurt you to stop for moment and consider the logic of both sides and see which one really makes sense” What you mean is I should accept your version of things, let’s really be honest on thast point. You may want to do the same thing and see that President Obama has accomplished a number of things though I don’t belive you will give him any credit

          • SplendidIsolation

            As I prefaced my last note: “Are you really going to agree with anything I say?”. Of course not.

            Last thing … I was YOU when I was younger. I thought my way out of progressivism. Hopefully you’ll mature and learn to think for yourself as well. Best of luck.

          • BillP

            There the conservative’s credo unless you believe what I say you are immature and incapable of original thought.

            Talk about arrogance. You apply certain characteristics to all liberals which shows a bias by you. There are tens of millions of liberals and you deem them all the same. That demonstrates a lack of mature thought on your part, I don’t consider all conservatives to be the same.

            Your arrogance is dripping off of you. I’ve worked for over 40 years (due the math and then still want to qiuestion my maturity) the last 33 in designing and developing software (gee I’m glad my lack of logic didn’t hurt me in this field)

            Another thing you were never me, you don’t know me, how and where I grew up, what schools I attended, who I married, how many children my wife yet deem to project your narrow view of liberals on to me.
            Thinking your way out of progressivism sounds like an oxymoron. I might have said you thought your way back to conservatism

          • SplendidIsolation

            Maturity has nothing to do with age. Sorry I got you so worked up … Your spelling and grammar went to hell on your last message. I can’t help but laugh. I simply said that I used to think like a liberal. That’s what I meant by “I was YOU”. Of course I don’t know where you went to school, or where you grew up, etc. You have helped prove my ILLOGICAL point. Incidentally, I own my own computer consulting business and I can say unequivocally that I’ve met MANY programmers that are not logical when it comes to social/political issues.

          • BillP

            You can laugh all you want, all that does if reinforces how arrrogant you come across. You have called me immature and stated that it has nothing to do with age, I can agree with that to a point. However working for 40 years and raising a family is hardly a sign of immaturity.

            What I object to is the smugness of your comment “Hopefully you’ll mature and learn to think for yourself as well”. That comment is so full of condescension. Just because I don’t agree with your religious or political views doesn’t mean I can’t think for myself. I have had a succesful business life and have a very happy and wonderful family life. If that’s following the flock then I guess I’m a sheep. One thing I know I’m not and that is being so rigid in my thinking and beliefs that I am sure I’m right and everyone else is wrong. For the record I’m not a programmer but am an analyst/ designer, I don’t write code anymore. Even your comment about programmers is smug, you deem many of them “not logical when it comes to social/political issues”. Why is that so, because they don’t agree with your views

          • Frank Kahn

            Aside from the fact that you are being obtuse, the obvious answer is Christians.

          • Frank Kahn

            Aside from the fact that you are being obtuse, the obvious answer is Christians.

          • Diane Ringen

            I think you meant sarcastic then. Currently there is a woman in Ohio who voted 6 times for Obama. She was an election worker. I think she is serving 2 years in jail. I encourage you to read widely!

          • BillP

            No the word is sardonic, if you don’t know the word spend the time to look it up. Wow “ONE” woman voted “SIX” times for Obama. I have googled and found a woman who voted twice not six times. So that one vote must have swung the election to Obama. Romney lost becuase he ran a horrible campaign and had nothing in common with the non-rich peopel.

          • Frank Kahn

            Actually, sarcastic fits it better, I can find no attempt at humor. You were being sarcastic.

          • BillP

            Well Frank according to the website Sardonic means characterized by bitter or scornful derision; mocking; cynical; sneering. I don’t see humorous in this description. I wasn’t trying to show humor, just distain when I hear that Christians are beiong attacked in the USA.

          • Frank Kahn

            Well, my research shows something different.

            adjective sär-ˈdä-nik
            Definition of SARDONIC
            : disdainfully or skeptically humorous : derisively mocking


            “If someone is being scornful and mocking in a humorous way, call her sardonic. If you want to write comic sketches for late-night talk shows, work on being sardonic.

            Sardonic comes from the Greek adjective Sardonios, which actually describes a plant from a place called Sardinia that supposedly made your face contort into a horrible grin…right before you died from its poison. The Greeks used sardonic for laughter, but we only use it when someone’s humor is also mocking or ironic.”


          • BillP

            Well Frank let’s agree to have different meanings for the word. I don’t normally try to demean people and you have been cordial in these comments. If you were to look at a liberal website National Memo and see how a number of right wing people post comments you would be upset too. I just don’t believe religions are under attack in this country. You will have your beliefs and possibly we may even agree on some issues. It has been nice chaatting with you

          • Frank Kahn

            I am willing to accept that we might agree on something, but on religion we will never agree.

            There are many obvious attacks on religious beliefs in this country. If you fail to see this, you either have a different definition of religious beliefs or are ignorant of the facts.

            The sanctity of marriage being between a man and a woman is a religious belief. The forcing of acceptance of same sex marriage is an attack on that belief.

            Homosexuality is against almost all modern western religious beliefs. Forcing acceptance of homosexuality is an attack on that belief.

            Abortion is murder in the eyes of Christians. Murder is wrong. This is a religious belief. Forcing the nation to accept abortion, as a RIGHT, is a grievous attack on religious beliefs.

            Contraception, in any form, is against Catholic, if not other, Christian beliefs. To force them to condone and participate in providing them is an attack on religious beliefs.

            There are many more, some of which are subtle, and some that are outright flagrant attacks on the Christian religion.

          • BillP

            Frank now you are being a bit demeaning. The same sex marriage is a”legal” issue no religion is being forced to marry any same sex couples. Homosexuality is against modern religions but again it is illegal to discrininate against gay people. There are churches and synagogues around the country that willingly accept gahy people into their fold. All the other issue are legal matters that don’t require any religion to accept abortion or contraception. People can prochoice if they want to or they can practice birth control if they want to. Many relgious people are prochoice and practice birth control. That is their “legal” right. It seems to me that you want to have religious beliefs outweigh legal rights guaranteed in some case by a constitutional amendment, you haver heard of Roe vs Wade. I don’t want to live under any theocracy, my rights and beliefs are mine and no religion has the right to infringe on them

          • Frank Kahn

            You see, when I state facts, you go off the deep end, and start spouting nonsense. There is nothing demeaning about stating facts, that is a sorry excuse for an opinion.

            “Frank now you are being a bit demeaning. The same sex marriage is a”legal” issue”

            NO, marriage is a religious issue, it is outside the authority of the government to define or support. Marriage is, by definition (since the world was populated with humans) a joining of one man and one woman for the purpose of propagation of the species. It is not only a religious belief / rule, it is one of nature. To make it legal, through the color of law, for two men or two women to get married is immoral.

            “no religion is being forced to marry any same sex
            couples. ”

            Wrong again, and using a straw man argument. You don’t have to force Christians to marry the same sex (which I did not portend) just to infringe their rights. As evidenced by the ignorant civil suits brought against religious people, who refuse to support and provide for these unions, the church is in danger. If a Catholic priest refuses to perform a wedding ceremony for two men, he can be sued for discrimination. That is a direct violation of his religious beliefs. Force, in this case, actually violates the first amendment.

            “Homosexuality is against modern religions but again it is illegal to discrininate against gay people. ”


            “There are churches and synagogues around the country that willingly accept gahy people into their fold.”

            I really don’t care if there are people that are willing to accept murderers into their fold, it does not give you the right to say murder is good. Your argument does not support the force of acceptance and participation of others.

            “All the other issue are legal matters that don’t require any religion to accept abortion or contraception. ”

            WRONG AGAIN, the color of law is not legal, so it is not a legal matter. And, you are as stupid and wrong as all the other bleeding heart liberals when you attempt to say that normal people have to accept murder just because you say so.

            “People can prochoice if they want to or they can practice birth control if they want to. ”

            Lets get the words and concepts correct. pro-choice is not correct. It is pro-murder, the baby has no choice in your pathetic liberal world. Murder of babies (abortion) is not an option of birth control. The only time that I can see where abortion is warranted, is when the offspring being born will have liberal gene’s.

            “Many relgious people are prochoice and practice birth control. ”

            No, true Christian, is pro-choice, and practicing birth control is not the same thing. Abortion (murder) is not birth control.

            “That is their “legal” right. ”

            You need a lesson in the meaning of the word RIGHT, as well as a course in what is LEGAL. TheY have no RIGHT to commit murder of unborn babies, they have permission to do it.

            “It seems to me that you want to have religious beliefs
            outweigh legal rights guaranteed in some case by a constitutional amendment, ”


            “you haver heard of Roe vs Wade. ”


            “I don’t want to live under any theocracy, ”


            “my rights and beliefs are mine and no religion has the
            right to infringe on them”


          • BillP

            [comment has been edited]

            As for marriage being “marriage is a religious issue, it is outside the authority of the government to define or support” Then why do most if not all states require people to get a marriage license? Once you have this license you can get married by a justice of the peace, a priest or minister or rabbi or imam. Why also did Republicans ffeel a need to pass DOMA if they have no authority to support marriage? Also the IRS tax code deals with marriage and has separate tax rates for married people versus single people.

            Gee Frank I originally thought you were reation but you hase shown yourself to be a religious zealot. Now I’m “am as stupid and wrong as all the other bleeding heart liberals” I guess tolerance of different views don’t exist in your religion (Are you part of the Westboro Baptist fanatics” ?
            Again you make statements of law suits being brought against some church to marry same sex people. Where/when? Rerading your definition of marriage you would then exclude atheists (they don’t have a religion). How about a man and woman who marry but don’t want to have children?
            My statement about not wanting to live under a theocracy is inane but you fictional war on religion is a believable fact.
            I will not waste any more of my time with this. You live in your world and I will live in my world.

          • Bob666

            OK Frank,

            Hers is the question:

            “Homosexuality is against almost all modern western religious beliefs. Forcing acceptance of homosexuality is an attack on that belief”.

            Is anyone forcing you into a Homosexual Marriage?

            “Abortion is murder in the eyes of Christians. Murder is wrong. This is a religious belief. Forcing the nation to accept abortion, as a RIGHT, is a grievous attack on religious beliefs”.

            I get your feelings on this one.

            “Contraception, in any form, is against Catholic, if not other, Christian beliefs. To force them to condone and participate in providing them is an attack on religious beliefs”.

            Is anyone forcing a catholic (or any other religion) to use birth control or other forms of contraception?

            Just asking.

          • Frank Kahn

            Dealing with you is a real pain in the back side. You have no concept of reality at all.

            “Hers is the question:

            “Homosexuality is against almost all modern western religious beliefs. Forcing acceptance of homosexuality is an attack on that belief”.

            Is anyone forcing you into a Homosexual Marriage?”


            “Abortion is murder in the eyes of Christians. Murder is wrong. This is a religious belief. Forcing the nation to accept abortion, as a RIGHT, is a grievous attack on religious beliefs”.

            I get your feelings on this one.

            “Contraception, in any form, is against Catholic, if not other, Christian beliefs. To force them to condone and participate in providing them is an attack on religious beliefs”.

            Is anyone forcing a catholic (or any other religion) to use birth control or other forms of contraception?”


            “Just asking.”


          • Bob666

            Wow Frank,
            Did something craw up your rear end and spike out?

            “Dealing with you is a real pain in the back side. You have no concept of reality at all”.

            Actually Frank, it would appear that most would say that applies more to you. I did read your post and read it again.

            Here is my point, what does it matter to you if two people of the same sex get married? are they doing it in your living room?


            So now you resort to an ad hominem? I’m not “Queer” Frank-not that here is anything wrong with that. So are you saying that everyone should live your life style and by your standards?


            Talk about reality Frank, Many insurance companies have been providing contraceptives for years. It has only been due to a very vocal religious minority did the furnishing of contraceptives come into question about twenty years ago.

            As a business owner who provided health insurance for as many as five hundred employees, we had the option not to include contraceptives but felt that it was not our right to enforce our moral, political or ethical will on our employees.

            I guess the moral to this story is Frank, you expect the world to dance to your tune or get off of the dance floor?

          • Diane Ringen

            I think I will stick with sarcastic!

          • BillP

            If a free country, I will stick with mine. Per sardonic means – characterized by bitter or scornful derision; mocking; cynical; sneering: a sardonic grin. By the do you have any proof of widespread voter fraud. Your one example is a woman who sent an absentee ballot and voted at the polls too. Since President Obama was elected with a nearly 6 million vote majority please subtract one vote from his total. That was sarcasm.

      • Diane Ringen

        Yes, as you say, vote the suckers out. But if you don’t believe voter fraud runs rampant in this country, then think again! And if you think I quoted any Bible verses, then you need to spend more time reading yours.

        • Barack Embalmer

          Yes I believe that voter fraud is rampant in this country and no you didn’t post any bible verses (others do) but we still have the problem … how do we get rid of these criminals in this administration if we cant vote them out? And thanks for the advice but I don’t “need” to read my bible right now,thanks.

          • Diane Ringen

            I challenge you and everyone else as well to solve this particular problem…voter fraud. I want to end on a friendly note with you. Just keep that Bible close for when you do need it. Hopefully, we will always have that right.

        • fenix1

          Hopefully, if everyone implements Voter I.D. that will stop alot of this dumb [expletive deleted] AND, in this day and age there is NO legitimate excuse for anyone NOT to have an I.D.!

      • fenix1

        As i once heard years ago, “God WILL help you Navigate through rough seas but YOU have to paddle the Boat”!

        • Barack Embalmer

          I have never heard that one but I like it!

      • SplendidIsolation

        Your statement “quit forcing your beliefs on everyone else” is one I hear frequently. The thing is … EVERYONE has beliefs that they “force” on everyone else. Every time they post something they are expressing their BELIEFS.

        Why is it NOT OK for Christians to express their beliefs and why is it typically stated as “forcing your beliefs on everyone else”?

        Everyone has beliefs and everyone in America has the right to share their beliefs. Who gets to decide which groups are prohibited from expressing their beliefs?

        • Nadzieja Batki

          I wonder if Timbo used that phrase “quit forcing your beliefs on everyone else” on his parents and his teachers and his employers, etc..

  • red neck

    It is easy to rule over people that are either ignorant or stupid and it is hard to rule “over” people that are intelligent and informed.. However the American people are not to be “ruled over” but this corrupt regime demonizes all that have a clue which is evident by the IRS…. Some people just have an over abundance of stupid…..

    • Jeff

      That’s the best start to an autobiography I’ve seen in a long time. I think you’ll have a bestseller on your hands.

      • JeffH

        I’m sure your name, unhinged Jeff, will be included in the “over abundance” chapter.

      • red neck

        Jeff… ( not JeffH ) …
        I’m glad to see you prove my point for me as to the amount of stupid some people have namely you!

  • Bernard Forand

    Fortunately there is hope and is being demonstrated more and more every day with the moderate republicans and the intellectuals of the party that are distancing themselves from the dysfunctional “Ideologues” of their party. Obama has aided them with his brilliance. A Tea bulwark has fallen.
    Obamacare drives a wedge, fracturing republican party. Phoenix Arizona’s Governor Jan Brewer pulled off a major coup by distancing herself, along with a few staunch republican state senators, from their extremist elements within their party. Rallying the support by emphasizing “Moral and Monetarily Correct”. Stating “It’s pro-life, it’s saving lives, it is creating jobs, it is saving hospitals,” and “I don’t know how you can get any more conservative than that,” Typical of the intoxicated Tea Party’s strategy. Derogatory remarks are let loose with no substance to any issue for debate. Going so far as to invoke some religious sniping by A.J LaFaro chairman of the Maricopa County Republican Committee, comparing Jan Brewer to Judas! Libertarian blog post by Tyler S. Boyer on the “Freedom Works” site, refers to Jan as “An unfortunate display of ineptitude.” Derogatory continues to surface from the right wing extremist. Reagan once said” Republicans should not speak ill of one another” Something the extremist have ignored as they have demonstrated on various issues, ignoring supporting their constituents for some personal ego political ploy. Ignoring the facts that voters agreed, in 1996 and in 2000, to extend Medicaid coverage to childless adults, one of the main beneficiaries of the Medicaid expansion. that voters agreed, in 1996 and in 2000, to extend Medicaid coverage to childless adults, one of the main beneficiaries of the Medicaid expansion. Mr. Coughlin states “Ideologues have their agendas” Mr. Coughlin goes on to say “and the part of the party that’s taking issue with the governor right now is all made up of ideologues”! “and the part of the party that’s taking issue with the governor right now is all made up of ideologues”! Moderate republicans will be required to expand their platforms to educate their constituents of the fallacies of the zealot extremist policies. Focusing on the more intelligent groups within their spheres such as women and independents.
    Bruce Merrill, political behaviorist senior research at Morrison Institute for Public Policy of the Arizona University states “how truly fractured the Republican Party in Arizona is.” expressly due to Obamacare. “how truly fractured the Republican Party in Arizona is.” expressly due to Obamacare.
    “The real brilliance of Barack Obama when he made Medicaid an all-or-nothing proposition,” giving states no option but to cover individuals with incomes up to 133 percent of the federal poverty line if they were to qualify for federal reimbursement, “was that he pitted fiscally conservative Republicans against one another,” he said.
    Governor Jan Brewer views it as merely bruised egos that will heal with time. “Nobody likes to lose, and that’s what happened”. AND this is but one example of many.
    Tea will not be served…. Out of service… 

    • Bernard Forand

      Alas there remains the naïve that have no comprehension of the IRS issue and continue to feast on their Red Herring delicacies served with a bottomless Tea Pot.
      IRS Use is nothing new. Nor is it for political activism and social groups. Little to nothing at present linking Obama with fore knowledge of this recent interest of the IRS’s investigations, to enforce Federal Tax Code 501 [c] [4] .
      F.D.R. used it against it Sen. Huey Long of Louisiana and Hoover’s Treasury Andrew Melton.
      Nixon against all those on his “enemies list‘. Boasting on the Watergate tapes to his aids of his use of it. Assigned George Schultz to investigate Hennery Kimmelan private business man that backed McGovern. Stating “ What’s he trying to do? Say that we can’t play politics with the IRS.
      Eisenhower against the communist party.
      Kennedy against nonprofit organizations. Hmm similar to what Obama is being accused of.
      Carter’s IRS director Jerome Kurtz ended tax exempt status to private Christian schools.
      Clinton had the IRS audit the Heritage Foundation and the NRA.
      George W. Bush against the NAACP for urging his defeat in 2004. Languished in the courts for 2 years. IRS alleged improper political activity. Civil Rights argued it was a victim of political bias.
      True as far back as F.D.R. Use of the IRS has been a bipartisan thing said Bruce Barllett, a tax official of Ronald Reagan and H.W. Bush. “BUT” this one of Obama’s seems to have originated from the bottom up rather than from the top down.
      IRS’s duties are to weed out organizations that qualify for tax exemptions and those that do not. Tax exempt organizations cannot show any bias to any political candidate or party.
      Number of applications for tax exempt status doubled to the pre elections of 2012. Fueling that rise was derived by the Supreme Court’s decision of 2010 {Citizens United} obscuring differences of political activism, mainly from the right, from social welfare groups. Promoting lawyers’ to find loopholes. Said Historian Stephen Hess.
      This amounts to nothing more than republicans redundant strategy of red herrings for their herd. If IRS did not investigate, then republicans would charge them of being guilty for not performing their duties as defined in 501 [c] [4]. Typical ploy of extremist right wing.
      Red herring being served at this time is to distract their herd from recognizing Obama’s achievement in reigning in the deficit in record time. Which they will soon be serving ominous warnings the deficit is decreasing the debt TOO FAST and will prove disastrous.
      GOP { Get Obama Persecuted } at all cost . Venomous deceitful character of republicans. Has been and is continuously being illuminated. 

      • red neck

        Hey I have an idea for you….. Stop regurgitating ( copy / paste ) from and other socialistic / progressive / communistic propaganda driven sites. In other words get out of your mommies basement and get some fresh air!

      • speedle24

        This accommodating relativism is SOP for the “progressive” blog trolls. The fact is while the IRS has always been manipulated for political reasons here and there, it has never in the history of the republic been used to such an extent (and with such overt political bias) as it has by this corrupt administration. Those are the facts Bernard, and they cannot be tossed aside as “business as usual” relativism.

    • Frank Kahn

      I am not sure if I read that mishmash of ranting correctly. DID YOU ACTUALLY ATTEMPT TO SAY THAT OBAMACARE IS SAVING LIVES, HOSPITALS AND IS FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE? Do you really believe that Obamacare has anything to do with actually improving the healthcare system in our country? Do you really believe that accepting the lies and abuses of liberals is a good thing?

      OBAMACARE, does not save any lives, nor does it make it less expensive to do so. It simply changes the formula on WHO PAYS.

      OBAMACARE, does not save any HOSPITALS, whatever that means, it has no control over their policies and procedures. If a hospital is unable to comply with OBAMACARE they will close, I dont call that saving them.

      OBAMACARE, does nothing to reduce the cost of healthcare. It simply redistributes the burden of cost. It is not financially beneficial to the majority of citizens, as they will be forced to pay higher premiums to subsidize the high risk members that the insurance companies are being forced to insure at the same premium price.

      And, when it comes to speaking about egos, you really need to check the ego meter when dealing with liberals.

  • hungry4food

    The RINO Republicans have no
    fight in them because they believe that any form of conservative value is out
    dated for the times of Worldwide Overpopulation see these links for this Proof
    of what has GDP growth stagnate . These technocrats advise our Government and
    world leaders of Governments ,

    this Next Link Paul R. Ehrlich has President
    Obamas Ear through the Science CZAR Holdren ,

    how this is Back Page News in a sound bite addicted society that has an
    attention span that is driven by a twitter feed and and talk show moment , of
    which these venues of reaching societies to inform them of these things that
    are effecting their ability to find peace and prosperity are silent on this
    issue because the Politicians cannot mange this debate and get reelected , but
    they are working fast behind the scenes creating stagnate growth to ZERO this
    Growth effecting their Idea about what is going to sustain Earth ,

    This issue which is the vocal point in all policy making but is silent
    in MS Media is why the societies around the world and US are Ignorant to why we
    have NO Growth Economic Policies and the Over Regulation that is standing in
    this way that has been the corner stone of Conservative value since the US
    Constitution was wrote !!!!!

    The fact that this Overpopulation issue is not a US or Developed
    nation issue bases on Fertility rates in this Chart ,
    , but rather a UN-developed nation struggle is why I say
    the way the current Trade Policy and International market structure needs
    restructuring to give a debate to the value of how Undeveloped nations need More
    FREEDOM to Follow and Learn about how a Finite Earth needs to be better
    understood in relationship to what is a faith based sustainable blue print of
    FREE will Free Choice Life is the foundation of where Individual Liberty lives
    and Peace is found . But every time this direction is brought up
    the Globalist push the Buttons on Labeling these Conservatives Isolationists
    and divides the society and the votes on this topic, like this guy here is
    doing here,

    This is why we need someone or groups that understand why we need to
    further this debate on the pretense that trade relations with undeveloped
    nations needs to have more requirements pegged to the policy instead of this
    simple trade and aid subsidies policies we have been engaged in that never
    holds the leadership to a standard of Higher education in their perspective
    societies so Real Quality of life replaces the ignorance of what is causing a
    unsustainable Finite Earth .

    This is why we need to overhaul the trade policy and include
    provisions in how we bring this topic into public debate and Improve the
    level of education to realize that Quality of Life and the value of that can be
    achieved with a Free Choice society if they just have the Chance to Understand
    this , and the association of this Understanding with what Faith says regarding
    sustainability . This will take away the Consolidation of Individual Liberty
    thats underway right now by the Elitist Ideologues but their direction will not
    bring a Peaceful solution because Free Will is trying to be suppressed and that
    has NEVER worked before in past Historic events that used Oppression against
    societies that were faced with more people than supply !!!

    This way Free Will can be the Goal and Oppressive Tyranny will again fade
    into the Shadows of the Elite Ideologues Meeting Rooms .

  • rbrooks

    The 1st Amendment reads:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of
    religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the
    freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to
    peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of
    grievances. <<

    Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a
    wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate
    racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment
    participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't
    stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your
    comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above
    policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the
    right to remove comments at our discretion. <The 2nd Amendment is under constant assault.<

    bob is correct.

    he fails to state that he supports the assault on the 2nd amendment. he only complains when he might be included in any new infringements.

    • Bob Livingston

      Dear rbrooks,

      You write: “bob does not want congress to infringe on his right to free speech… he wants to be the one that selectively infringes on free speech.” Please explain what relevance our comment policy has with the 1st Amendment.

      You write: “he fails to state that he supports the assault on the 2nd amendment. he only complains when he might be included in any new infringements.” Please point out where I have supported any assaults on the 2nd Amendment.

      Best wishes,

      • rbrooks

        the comparison is rather obvious. well, maybe not to the normal ignoramus. you do have a fair number of those as your faithful followers.

        you demand the right to selectively infringe on free speech.

        you demand that congress allow you the very same free speech you with hold from others.

        you want to be the one who determines what rights are granted to which individuals.

        as to the 2nd. you support infringements based on age, criminal and civil behavior.

        you even support concealed carry.

        you only complain when you feel that you may be included in any new infringements.

        where are your story’s demanding that all americans should have the same rights. regardless.

        you are as much the cause as the regime you write about.

        • Vigilant

          “you demand that congress allow you the very same free speech you with hold from others.”

          Son, you don’t have the first inkling about the Constitution. The First Amendment guarantees NOTHING regarding free speech (or religious freedom for that matter) at state level or below, nor does it prohibit exercise of editorial input regarding the printed or internet media.

          Talk about ignoramuses!

          • rbrooks

            lol. boy, that is an amazingly ignorant statement.

            not only do you deserve exactly what you are getting. you are in full support of the results.

            you are the one bob was writing about.

          • Frank Kahn

            Well, rbrooks, it would appear that there is some amazingly ignorant statements flying around here. However, those statements are not coming from Vigilant.

            “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or of the right of the people to peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

            There are 5 RIGHTS being referenced in that amendment. They are: Religious freedom (exercising), Speech, Press, peaceful assembly (come together) and petitioning the government about solving problems. They are named as freedoms, but they are RIGHTS. RIGHTS are the sole possession of THE PEOPLE, not the government, or any other group. All GROUPS have the exact same RIGHTS as the INDIVIDUAL CITIZENS that make it up.

            So, to the non-ignorant people, these rights are about WE THE PEOPLE, not government. These RIGHTS are not given by the government, they are also not controlled by them.

            In the first amendment, there are 5 RIGHTS that are enumerated as free from control. It also specifically states who cannot control them.

            It is in the first 6 words, “Congress shall make no law respecting”. It says that Congress (the federal government) cannot make any laws that interfere with those 5 rights. It is, in fact, a restriction placed on the government, that prohibits them from acting against the rights of the citizens.

            So, the amendment you are quoting is simply a road block to actions of the federal government, not to the citizens. I have every RIGHT to refuse to allow you to say things in my home. I can eject you from my property for saying things that I disagree with. If I have a web site, that allows comments, I can delete content that I find offensive, because I am responsible for all content that appears on my web site. I, personally, can violate all 5 of those items, on my property, if I object to the actions of someone, and follow proper legal procedure. I can force you to leave my property for practicing a religion that I find offensive. I can create a new religion, if I want to. I can force a group of people to leave my property.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I think where the Propagandized Liberal Progressives go wrong is lacking the understanding of what the Constitution was. It was an agreement between the States (then colonies) to form a Federal Government with certain Limited Powers. It was a list of rules, so to speak, for the Power and Behavior of the Federal Government. Those rules initially constrained only the Federal Government and were applied later to States by an overreaching Federal Supreme Court.

          • Vigilant

            “It was an agreement between the States (then colonies) to form a Federal Government with certain Limited Powers.”

            With all due respect, the colonies became states on March 1, 1781 with the adoption of the Articles of Confederation.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Oh, you got me. Pardon me while I seek medical attention for the wound.
            There is no “due respect”, Vigilant. You are just attacking me because I make you look bad on a regular basis.

          • Vigilant

            Let’s see, that’s the second time I’ve pointed out your abysmal lack of knowledge about American history, both times prefaced with “with due respect,” and that’s the second time you’ve shown you don’t have the balls to man up and admit your error straight up. Instead, you turn it around and make it about YOU, as you always do.

            No wonder your wife left you for a cop, of all things. How’s that for ad hominem?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            What else would I expect from an Ideologue who prefers manipulation over facts?

          • rbrooks

            we have come a long ways from a small group of colonies.

            you complain about the rules being changed.

            it was what the constitution was designed to do. allow change.

            if you are against those changes, the constitution allows you to make further changes.

            run for office. make a change.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Not the kind of change that Liberal Progressives have done to it. There is an Amendment process but we’re not talking about that.

          • rbrooks

            you are one of those liberal progressives. you support many of those changes and have a few of your own you would like to add.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Sea Kelp.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            You can run for office all you want, but you will not make a change to the Constitution on your whim.

          • rbrooks

            you might have noticed that those past politicians have made numerous changes.

        • Bob Livingston

          Dear rbrooks,

          You write: “the comparison is rather obvious.” Only to an ignoramus.

          You write: “you support infringements based on age, criminal and civil behavior.” Please show me where I have supported “infringements based on age, criminal and civil behavior.”

          You write: “you even support concealed carry.” I support everyone’s right to carry a concealed weapon. How is that an infringement? You are obtuse.

          Best wishes,

          • JeffH

            Not only is rbrooks obtuse but he’s probably well paid to troll these threads and spew such ridiculous allegations as was Flashmann…money not well spent.

          • Alondra

            Money washed out to the toilet. But Soros will help.

          • JeffH

            …with, MediaMatters, and a whole host of his other creations…

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I think they’re one and the same.

          • rbrooks

            actually you do not support everyone’s ‘right’ to carry.

            you do support requiring minimal back ground checks. as do most of your supporters. so you only support select americans being allowed to carry.

            but you support taking away the right to vote as well.

            no big surprise.

          • Bob Livingston

            Dear rbrooks,

            You write: “you do support requiring minimal back ground checks. as do most of your supporters.” You have evidence that this is my position?

            You write: “but you support taking away the right to vote as well.” You have evidence that this is my position?

            Best wishes,

          • rbrooks

            you must have a short memory.

            or a ghost writer.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          If Bob was like you presume, rbrooks, he would have removed all you lying, equivocating, Liberal Progressive Trolls and Shills long ago, so that the people who seek to understand the concepts of Freedom could peacefully exchange their ideas on this board.

          • rbrooks

            bob has removed comments in the past. he probably has removed posters as well.

            if it was up to you and bob, you would use hitlers approach to any one that disagreed with you.
            while proclaiming freedom for all.

            it is amusing to watch the dramatics.
            as you are violently suppressed on a message board.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            If that were true, you and your multiple personalities would have been gone long ago.

          • rbrooks

            bob has a little better definition of freedom than you do.

          • Bob Livingston

            Dear rbrooks,

            You write: “bob has removed comments in the past. he probably has removed posters as well.” Indeed I have. It is no secret.

            You write: “if it was up to you and bob, you would use hitlers (sic) approach to any one that disagreed with you.
            while proclaiming freedom for all.” Unfounded supposition on your part. Projecting much?

            Best wishes,

          • rbrooks

            dear bob,

            you gave the evidence in your own post.

            hitler started by removing those who disagreed with him.

            you freely admit you have restricted freedom of speech by removing those who disagreed with you.

            wishing you a speedy recovery.

          • Bob Livingston

            Dear rbrooks,

            You write: “you freely admit you have restricted freedom of speech by removing those who disagreed with you.” I freely admit to removing those who don’t follow the rules of decorum as established in the comment policy. If I removed “those who disagreed” with me, (and those who blatantly misrepresent what I have presented) you would not be here. That’s a far cry from restricting freedom of speech. Were I to remove you, your freedom of speech would still be intact.

            Best wishes,

          • rbrooks

            Were I to remove you, your freedom of speech would still be intact. <<

            my freedom of speech would no longer be intact. it would have been reduced. infringed.

            it sets a precedence.

            you complain that govt is infringing on your rights. you are correct. they are.

            with your past and present support.

            the politicians establish policy(s), just like you have.

            if you don't follow their policy's they remove you. just like you have.

            the govt believes their actions are what is best for the country. you believe your actions are what is best for your site.

            this is exactly how rights are lost.

            you are willing to defend your rights. you are just as willing to allow others to have their rights removed.

            at some point, the govt is going to include you with everyone else.

            they will use your past validation(s) & support of infringements, to include you.

            if the current administration decided that your site violated the govt's comment section, and then shut you down.

            would you feel your freedom of speech was still intact.

            would it be different if they removed just your articles & left the site up.

            you have a great day.

        • Ringgo1

          I see. So, you’re an “abnormal” ignoramus by your own criteria.

  • Edward Snook

    Right on Bob! Our government is not to blame for our current, horrible condition – the great majority of our people are…

    • Nadzieja Batki

      People who flock to Government are opportunists with a veneer of altruism. Wheedling them off the hook and forgiving them for the messes they create?

  • rbrooks

    >It has foisted upon the country, through court sanction, abetted by an
    ongoing propaganda campaign and against the wishes of the majority,
    homosexual marriage: a union that is anathema to Christian teachings.<

    emancipation and women's rights are anathema to christian teachings.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Funny, I don’t recall that from my Catholic School days, even though they heaped lots of indoctrination on me.
      Both Emancipation and Women’s Rights were used by Politicians as tools to grow their power. Clinton demonstrated the latter point by being the Chief Sexual Harasser and getting away with it — with the exception of a small minority of Women’s Groups.
      Government Coercive Meddling does nothing but feather the non-producers’ (i.e. Government) nests at the rest of our expense. It just creates resentment which results in more discrimination, not less.

    • SplendidIsolation

      Christian teaching promotes equal rights for pregnant women and the innocent babies growing inside them.

      Progressivism promotes reaching inside the woman and shredding that innocent baby into little pieces and suctioning them out. They ignore the fact that at 18 days there’s a heartbeat. These actions described as “women’s rights” are barbaric.

      The acts of Kermit Gosnell are considered “women’s rights” to liberal progressives. I’m actually surprised God has withheld judgement on America for so very long.

  • rbrooks

    >The goal is to manufacture a populace too ignorant of their rights and too preoccupied to fathom even (‘the’) most repressive tyranny.<

    absolutely correct.

    all you advocate is changing the curriculum that will be taught. you want to be the one that selects the curriculum.

    you do not want an educated public.

    you want a public educated by bob livingston. wayne root. perhaps a bit of rockwell? carylye? ann rand? throw in a little old tyme religion.

    you are not any different than the regime you write about.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      Did Bob say that, rbrooks? I must have missed that statement.

      I would like parents to be free to choose not just the school of their choice but also the curriculum of their choice for their children. Our educational choices are none of Government’s business. When Government is involved in Education, their obvious inclination, based on history and current events, is to indoctrinate our children to worship Big Government.

      The odd thing is that if the phrase “Big Government” was replaced with “Big Business” the Liberal Progressives would go bonkers (as they should), but somehow they give a free pass to the Big Government indoctrinators. Now, why is that?

      • rbrooks

        I would like parents to be free to choose not just the school of their
        choice but also the curriculum of their choice for their children. <<

        you make a very good point. which was the same point i made. you, bob, want to teach your particular version of propaganda. all you advocate is replacing the current version of propaganda with your own.

        When Government is involved in Education, their obvious inclination, based on history and current events, is to indoctrinate our children to worship Big Government. <

        i agree. all you are going to do is change whom is being worshiped. not really a change at all.

        The odd thing is that if the phrase "Big Government" was replaced with "Big Business" the Liberal Progressives would go bonkers <<

        big govt is big business. they are the same. you support big business. you give a free pass to big business. but not govt.

        the reason is obvious and well known.

        • JeffH

          rbrooks, all I see coming from you is “mass confusion” when you make ignorant statements like this:

          “you, bob, want to teach your particular version of propaganda. all you advocate is replacing the current version of propaganda with your own.” and “big govt is big business. they are the same. you support big business. you give a free pass to big business. but not govt.”

          You obviously have your own propaganda to spew, a dishonest and immoral agenda which has nothing to do with free choice, freedom or liberty.

          It is you and your progressives cohorts that prop up the force of Big Government and their partnership with their corporate “big business” Crony Capitalists , not Bob Livingston and not DaveH. They are quite the opposite of what you accuse.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          rbrooks says — “you, bob, want to teach your particular version of propaganda. all you advocate is replacing the current version of propaganda with your own”.
          And you arrived at that conclusion how, rbrooks?
          Obviously you were schooled (or dumbed down) in our Public Propaganda Schools.
          Quit putting words in our mouths, Liberal Progressive.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          rbrooks says — “big govt is big business. they are the same. you support big business. you give a free pass to big business. but not govt”.
          Another baseless accusation from the Liberal Progressive rbrooks. Do you guys ever have anything factual to say?

    • Stuart Shepherd

      You must have been extremely threatened by the truth of that article to react so strongly with those ad hominems, Mr Brooks. You don’t sound like one of the ignoramuses- you sound like one of the smart sociopaths.

      • rbrooks

        you must feel extremely threatened by the logical response given.

        has education always frightened you.

        • Nadzieja Batki

          Education into imbecility should frighten you, but why doesn’t it? Or is it that you can’t recognize it in yourself?

          • rbrooks

            frightened of your ignorance? no.

            i am disturbed by your willingness to remain ignorant.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Which philosopher educated you? Is it too much to admit Marx/Engel educated you.

      • rbrooks

        are those the only two you are aware of?

      • Proteus1946

        Here’s (my partial) list:

        Aristotle (Athens, 384 BC – 322 BC) is revered among political theorists for his seminal work Politics. He made invaluable contributions to liberal theory through his observations on different forms of government and the nature of man.

        Thomas Hobbes (England, 1588–1679) theorized that government is the result of individual actions and human traits, and that it was motivated primarily by “interest”, a term which would become crucial in the development of a liberal theory of government and political economy, since it is the foundation of the idea that individuals can be self-governing and self-regulating. His work ‘Leviathan’, did not advocate this viewpoint, but instead that only a strong government could restrain unchecked interest: it did, however, advance a proto-liberal position in arguing for an inalienable “right of nature,” the right to defend oneself, even against the state.

        John Locke’s (England, 1632–1704) notion that a “government with the consent of the governed” and man’s natural rights—life, liberty, and estate (property) as well on tolerance, as laid down in A letter concerning toleration and Two treatises of government —had an enormous influence on the development of liberalism. Developed a theory of property resting on the actions of individuals, rather than on descent or nobility.

        Charles de Montesquieu (France, 1689–1755)
        In ‘The Spirit of the Laws’, Montesquieu expounded the separation of powers in government and society. In government, Montesquieu encouraged division into the now standard legislative, judicial and executive branches

        Voltaire (France, 1694–1778)
        1756 – ‘Essay on the Manner and Spirit of Nations and on the Principal Occurrences in History’

        Jean-Jacques Rousseau (Switzerland, 1712–1778) ‘Discourse on Inequality’, 1755 and ‘On the Social Contract’, 1762

        Adam Smith (Great Britain, 1723–1790), often considered the founder of modern economics, was a key figure in formulating and advancing economic doctrine of free trade and competition. In his Wealth of Nations Adam Smith outlined the key idea that if the economy is basically left to its own devices, limited and finite resources will be put to ultimately their most efficient use through people acting purely in their self-interest. This concept has been quoted out of context by later economists as the invisible hand of the market.

        Smith also advanced property rights and personal civil liberties, including stopping slavery, which today partly form the basic liberal ideology. He was also opposed to stock-holding companies, what today is called a “corporation”, because he predicated the self-policing of the free market upon the free association of moral individuals.
        ‘An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations’, 1776
        ‘The Theory of Moral Sentiments’, 1759

        Patrick Henry (United States, 1736–1799)
        ‘Liberty or Death’, 1775

        It is notable that Patrick Henry refused to attend the Constitutional Convention because, as he put it, “I smelt a rat”

        Thomas Paine (United Kingdom/United States, 1737–1809)
        ‘Common Sense’ 1776
        ‘Rights of Man’, 1791–1792

        Thomas Jefferson (United States, 1743–1826) was the third President of the United States and author of the Declaration of Independence. He also wrote ‘Notes on the State of Virginia’ and the ‘Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom’. He was a champion of inalienable individual rights and the separation of church and state. His ideas were repeated in many other liberal revolutions around the world, including the (early) French Revolution.

        Alexis de Tocqueville (France, 1805–1859) ‘De La Démocratie en Amérique’, 1831–1840 (Democracy in America)

        Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. (United States, 1841–1935) was a jurist and writer. He wrote the influential book on legal theory ‘The Common Law’, which traced the creation of individual rights from familial rights common under Roman and Feudal law, and presented the “objective” theory of judicial interpretation. Specifically that the standard for intent and culpability should be that of the “reasonable man”, and that individuals can be said to objectively intend the reasonable consequences of their actions.

        There are many others, too many to list here, but they all have one thing in common: They are all listed as ‘Liberal Thinkers’ (in their time and place).

        The period of time of these men (with the exception of Aristotle) is called ‘The Age of Reason’ or ‘The Enlightenment’ with good reason.

        Have a good day reading some of the books and essays of these ‘libruls’ or ‘libtards’, then tell me why you think these guys were so wrong in their thinking.

  • Freespirit

    The only comment by you,Bob I disagree with is this: “These and other rights are pushed aside and thrown into history’s trash heap. They’ve disappeared with hardly a whimper. ” RIGHTS are NATURAL and as such CAN NEVER be pushed aside, thrown away or disappeared-they can only be ABROGATED because they are ALWAYS there, just being IGNORED by CRIMINALS in power and the IGNORANT in the public.

  • TML

    I agree with the premise of this article that a lack of education is paramount in the loss of freedoms, but I also believe that a certain level of fear leads some to abandon the founding principles even if they are well educated on the issue. Fear is, after all, the driving force that causes people to support measures which reduce freedom in exchange for perceived security in a perpetual ‘war on terror’, that they might not otherwise support.

    “Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.” – James Madison Political Observations, Apr. 20, 1795 in: Letters and Other Writings of James Madison, vol. 4, p. 491 (1865)

    • Proteus1946

      Good post and an excellent quotation from James Madison, and I agree with him on every point. BUT . . .

      Wasn’t this the same James Madison that declared war on Great Britain in 1812? Didn’t James Madison completely ignore the ‘hidden agenda’ of the ‘War Hawks’ in congress?

      Ostensibly, the War of 1812 was in response to the impressment of our seamen on the high seas by the British Navy, and other blockages to ‘Free Trade’ (Britain’s Navigation Laws, and others) . Yet, once war was declared, what was the first thing we did? We invaded Canada in a blatant land grab (and got our a$$es thoroughly kicked for our trouble – not once, but several times). That was the ‘real’ reason behind the War of 1812.

      Do you think it was very wise to declare war on THE major power on Earth (at the time, they were kind of busy with Napoleon) with only six warships in our entire navy, and only with our much-vaunted militia (and virtually no professional officers) as the guardian against invasion? Look up ‘Bladensburg Races’ on Wikipedia or any other source of your choosing. That was only typical of our militia’s prowess on the battlefield. Lots of good things (like winning) happened with the Navy (Open ocean and Great Lakes), but that was only a drop in the bucket compared to the loss and destruction of Washington. We’re very lucky we still have our country. If not for the Defense of Ft. McHenry (and Baltimore) things could have gone very badly for us. BTW, the ‘Treaty of Ghent’ was signed two weeks BEFORE the Battle of New Orleans, and was not even known about for another month, so did not figure into the equation.

      ‘Never start a war you can’t win’ – Sun Tsu, ‘The Art of War’

      ‘Never rub another man’s rhubarb’ – The Joker

      I would have been more pleased with Mr. Madison’s words if he had practiced what he preached.

      Have a good day!

  • TML

    “Among all those surveyed, 64 percent say the 1st Amendment does not go too far. But 52 percent of blacks and 50 percent of Hispanics say the amendment does go too far. That number drops to 29 percent of the white population.
    … …
    It has foisted upon the country, through court sanction, abetted by an ongoing propaganda campaign and against the wishes of the majority, homosexual marriage: a union that is anathema to Christian teachings.”

    Codifying religious beliefs/values which outlaw certain acts that do not harm anyone physically or financially, would be a violation of the 1st Amendment (Congress shall make no law respecting a religion) Granted this also means Congress cannot create laws which prohibit the free exercise of religion within the bounds of rightful liberty – meaning, churches should still retain the right to deny performing such same-sex marriages. It is in instances like this, those proponents of legislation like DOMA, indeed the Christian ‘right-wing’ or ‘white population’, might then also say that the 1st Amendment goes too far? There simply is no reason why the state should not recognize a given ‘contract’ between two consenting adults based merely on a moral approval or disapproval. Even a majority should not be allowed to ‘get what it wants’ when what they want is a violation of the Constitution, which would amount to nothing more than a democracy rather than a republic.

  • Alan

    This is what happens when less history is taught in favor of feel good BS. A good look at American history would show that the American revolution came about because of many abuses that are taking place now, under our current government. World history points out the mad dictators who ruled their countries with an iron fist under socialism and communism, such as Stalin and Hitler. History has been shown to repeat itself, if you dont study it you will fall prey to to the same type of crackpots. ( Many of those ideas are present in the WH today )

  • Marshall Watson

    Mr Livingston, any comments I would make about this article would be redundant. You have stated the obvious only too well. I do have a question that I sent to you via email not to long ago, that I will ask again. Given that the office of the president is occupied by a Communist, Islamist, fraud, and that a large portion of our elected representatives in congress are not fulfilling the will of those who elected them, how do we elect representatives with moral integrity, who cannot be bribed or coerced into voting with the establishment? I have made this statement before and I am not promoting myself as an ideal candidate for congress, but I do believe I could do a better job that most who are in office now. Please note that I said most, not all, I do believe there are some in congress who still have integrity, and believe in the constitution as written, not how the elitist liberals try to have it interpreted. But what about a group of men or women like myself, though not highly educated, well educated at least, who have integrity that can’t be compromised at any price, even the sacrifice of my own life and that of my family. Yes, you heard me right, because they all believe just like me that any sacrifice would be worth bringing our country back from the brink of total destruction or at the very least enslavement. How could we reach an audience large enough to speak the truth declare what we stand for and have even a minute chance of winning an election to congressional office so there would be enough honest votes to repeal the travesty of laws that are enslaving our country, stealing the wealth of the once middle class, and return our federal government back to what it was meant to be, the servant and protector of the people it represents. Enough said, your friend in Christian Liberty for all.

    • Bob Livingston

      Dear Marshall Watson,

      You write: “Given that the office of the president is occupied by a Communist,
      Islamist, fraud, and that a large portion of our elected representatives
      in congress are not fulfilling the will of those who elected them, how
      do we elect representatives with moral integrity, who cannot be bribed
      or coerced into voting with the establishment?” With the amount of money incumbents accrue to their war chests from their corporate sugar daddies and the amount of money available to those who “toe the line” from Congressional leaders, etc., the chances of electing “representatives with moral integrity, who cannot be bribed or coerced into voting with the establishment” are slim. While there are a couple currently in Congress who believe in liberty and small government, (see Justin Amash and Tim Huelscamp, ) they quickly become marginalized by leadership for bucking the system. But by all means run if you have the stomach for it. Look for an article by Michael Boldin tomorrow that provides some options.

      Best wishes,

  • Alondra


    Isn’t George Zimmerman a hero?

    Last week he rescued a family trapped in an over turned vehicle after a highway accident.

    I am wondering if the Kenyan FRAUD saved anybody’s life 35 years ago and after?


    • Guest

      Zimmerman is a murderer….a fact!

      • TheOriginalDaveH

        Your opinion!

        • Guest

          He killed someone….Should have got at least 20 years!

          Changed the terminology because it upset a few conservatives who believe killing african americans makes you a hero.

          • Bob Livingston

            Dear Reco2,

            You write: “He murdered someone.” Perhaps you have evidence not presented by the prosecutor? If not, you are simply babbling.

            Best wishes,

          • Vigilant

            If he has evidence not presented by the prosecutor, then he has committed a capital crime as well.

          • Reco2

            Ok…conservatives don’t consider stalking someone and then shooting them is “murder”… is self defense.

            Che didn’t murderer anyone also…he murdered Batista’s thugs and terrorists.

          • Alondra

            Che MURDERED honest FREEDOM loving Cubans.

            What Che Guevara did in the mosque in Damascus? He came to Learn how to murder “INFIDELS”?

          • Reco2

            No, he murdered supporters of the terrorist Batista regime which murdered 20 000 cubans in seven years. Those terrorists deserved what they got!

          • WTS/JAY

            Reco2: Those terrorists deserved what they got!

            So you condone murder?

          • vicki

            Conservatives didn’t make up stories so your point is point less

          • vicki

            Kill != murder

            Besides don’t the anti-gunners keep telling us that the gun did it?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Do you know the difference between kill and murder, Reco2?
            You can kill somebody without murdering them.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            What should you get for bearing false witness? Or should this be translated for you. Shouldn’t you get the punishment that you mean for Zimmerman for lying about him?

          • WTS/JAY

            Would you feel better had he killed a white-person?

      • Alondra

        I got it. You will NOT fight fro your life. You JUST will let the THUG beat you to death. Good luck with that.

        BTW, Angela Corey, Florida’s state attorney and the prosecutor in the Zimmerman’s case, has been INDICTED by a
        citizens’ grand jury for allegedly FALSIFYING AN ARREST WARRANT and the complaint that led to Zimmerman being charged with the second-degree murder of Trayvon Martin.

        The indictment accuses Corey of WITHHOLDING photographs of Zimmerman’s head after the incident. Also, Corey allegedly FALSELY SIGNED AN ARREST WARRANT UNDER OATH without including the pictures as evidence. There is a strong belief that Corey RUSHED the arrest warrant through
        because activists were rallying around the Trayvon Martin shooting, demanding that Zimmerman be charged with murder. Critics argue that Corey was attempting to secure a REELECTION with the support of the activists.

        Harvard Law Professor stated that Corey’s actions were UNETHICAL and ILLEGAL.

        And watching this interview you can see how STUPID prosecutors are.

        P.S. I have no doubt, If you had a son he’d look like Trayvon

        Keep mourning.

        • Guest

          Zimmerman got out of his car, stalked him and ended up killing him…..why are conservatives soft on crime?

          • JeffH

            Untrue as evidenced by the jury’s judgement – not guilty!

          • JeffH

            “…..why are conservatives soft on crime?”

            Proof by bald assertion!(TY vicki)

          • vicki

            You should probably look up libel pretty soon since you are committing it in multiple posts.

          • Reco2



            Do you think Martin had a heart attack….calling the president a Kenyen is libel and defamatory.

          • WTS/JAY

            Why, that’s where he’s from!

          • ibn insha

            Can you prove your claim?

          • TIME

            Dear R-e-c-o-

            Do you have any idea what evidence is?

            Or for that fact why evidence is used in any form of lawful exchange?

            Or are you perhaps someone who fits the title of this blog?

            Thus perhaps you should delve into the above questions and reflect on your response before your next post – that sadly tends to levy strong support for the “title of this blog.”


          • WTS/JAY

            Zimmerman was tried and found “not guilty” by a jury of his peers…why are you still going on about this?

      • Nadzieja Batki

        Jury found it otherwise. Too bad, so sad that you don’t like the verdict.

    • Deerinwater

      I don’t know if he is a hero or not ~ but he’s not a very capable security officer. ~ he Needs to go to the gym, school himself in self defense. ~ some study of the marshal arts ~ or at least learn how to use a night stick well.

      The occupation of armed security and handling unruly subject demands you be on your game if you plan to have a future in the profession and a long life. . ~ or just be a night watchman.

      There are “Watch Dogs” and there are “Guard Dogs” ~ With Watch dogs , teeth are optional.

      • Jeff

        Is he more Paul Blart or Barney Fife?

        • WTS/JAY

          I think he’s more like you, but with brains!

      • WTS/JAY

        I’m sure Zimmerman is not the only security-guard in history to have killed a person, Deer.

        • Deerinwater

          So true Jay ! Every few hours of every day. ~ I just wish he had been more on top of things and I know that we all do. ~ Or ~follow police instructions, maintained visual and waited for them.

          One man can be very hard to handle for one person especially if you are poorly prepared and they are accelerated ~ Too much TV easy take-downs instills a false reality about handling rowdy people.

          I had a 100 lb woman, ~(wheelchair and all ) almost whop my assets one time, ~ I had the badge, gun and club , they were no defense against this she-cat. ~ If I’d beat her to death , ~ I’d still be in jail. she like to have shredded me as I worked to restrain her without hurting her. ~ drugs ~

          • WTS/JAY

            In retrospect, i’m sure Zimmerman would have wished he had stayed in his vehicle, Deer. He could have saved himself all this trouble, and not have to live with the reality of having extinguished a life, however justified the reasons, or not; depending on one’s perspective! Unfortunately, Trayvon doesn’t have that option. I’m sure he is sorely missed as evidenced by the outcry from those who were close to him, and from those who view this as a miscarriage of justice…? But should have, could have…but didn’t, is immaterial, at this point. As the whole matter is over with, at least where i am concerned. If there be anything of value to glean/take-away from this tragedy, imho, it would be this; that it should serve as a learning tool, in what to do, and in what not to do, should some person(s) find himself/themselves in a similar situation…?

          • Deerinwater

            We are in complete agreement once again Jay ~ The criminal aspect had been decided and I accept it as justice served.

            For Zimmerman’s sake I hope he can dodge the civil court room. i think it unwise to peruse but ~ being wise was thrown out the window ~ when Trayvon wasn’t placed on a short lease by his family when he quit being that cute little boy depicted in all the media photos.

            And O needs to zip his lip or put a sock in and not be seen attempting to offer sway to the merits of the facts with inference statements. ~ I don’t care to hear such pandering talk originating from the 1st Chair.

            If Florida needs to change it’s protocol in addressing life threatening danger such as :”Stand your ground” ~ it’s for the state to do by consent of the people.

            Law enforcement has always works under such premise. Why a law abiding citizen might be denied this human right deserves a convincing explanation.

          • WTS/JAY

            Well said, Deer! Bravo!

  • mark

    It is not a good idea to insult the American voter. Mitt Romney did this with his 47% remark and he paid dearly for it. This kind of elitist attitude that we alone know the truth and the rest of the American people are all a bunch of easily-manipulated idiots have frequently led to major Democratic and Republican electoral defeats – and to the general irrelevancy of Libertarians as a political force in our society. Like it or not, superiority and condescension get you nowhere fast in American mass politics.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      mark says — “This kind of elitist attitude that we alone know the truth and the rest of the American people are all a bunch of easily-manipulated idiots”.
      So then, why do you keep trying to manipulate the reader with your nonsense, mark?

      • mark

        Actually, Dave you’ve provided a singular proof to my comment. Your Libertarian Party regularly gets around 1% of the vote in U.S. presidential elections. Its elitism is evidently not very appealing. Nor is the Von Mises Institute’s efforts to “manipulate,” (they would call it “educate,” of course) the American voter. That proof is all around you: the widespread rejection by Americans of laissez-faire capitalism. This is after all, something you lament everyday. Fortunately, very few others do.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          Actually, mark, you provide proof everyday that you are inferior. Why else would you continually resort to ad hominem attacks on Free Markets, Libertarians, Mises, and whoever else stands in the way of the Socialist society of your dreams?
          Libertarians seek Limited Government, that is Freedom. What do you seek, mark, but Big Government and non-Freedom? So who is the controlling person here? Not me.

          • Deerinwater

            So you don’t want Peace but submission?

          • Nadzieja Batki

            But a Leftists’ definition of Peace in real time is submission, they just leave it open end because they have no idea of who will play king of the hill at any given time or how bloody will be conflagration to create Peace.

          • Deerinwater

            No, ` that is your definition Batki. ~ You seem to understand it that way. ~

            Good News, ~ many Christian do as well ~ so that’s make you in good company.

            There is only one King, ~ by “submitting” to him and his teaching, his will indeed offer you a Peaceful life without “Fear” ~ without any need of kicking someone assets.

            Psalm 23:4

            Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me.

            Read Psalms 23 | View in parallel | Compare Translations

            Psalm 27:1

            The LORD is my light and my salvation– whom shall I fear? The LORD is the stronghold of my life– of whom shall I be afraid?

            Read Psalms 27 | View in parallel | Compare Translations

            Psalm 118:6

            The LORD is with me; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?

            1 Corinthians 16:13

            Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be men of courage; be strong.

            Hebrews 13:5-6

            Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, “Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you.” So we say with confidence, “The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?”

            Read Hebrews 13

            1 Peter 3:13-14

            Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear what they fear; do not be frightened.”

            Read 1 Peter 3 | View in parallel | Compare Translations

            1 John 4:18

            There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.

          • WTS/JAY

            Deerinwater quoting scripture? What’s up with that, Deer?

          • Deerinwater

            I’m a buffet Christian Jay ~ I take what I need. No more.

            as long as I can actually employ it, making good sense in serving God Will and some greater good.

            I love a good Jewish story ! and there’s few better then found in the bible. They are wonderful liars you know?

          • WTS/JAY

            Deer: I’m a buffet Christian Jay ~ I take what I need. No long as I can actually employ it, making good sense in serving God Will and some greater good.

            Hmm, i’ll spare you a sermon and just tell you that i actually can’t find any fault in that! (-:

          • Alfred Ferguson

            No shelter for atheists in this tent. I’m moving on. When the weather clears, I’ll meet you all outside for skittles and beer–beer, proof that god loves us, read that somewhere on a beer label.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            I like the one about loaves and fishes. Tried that with my bank account; couldn’t make it work.

            Never was much good at magic tricks; or getting people to believe that not seeing is believing.

            And that believing is not seeing.

          • Deerinwater

            Yea, ~ It is a great story. ~ My results with “believing ” things into existence has met with much the same barrier Alfred.

            “What you mean NSF”

            The story was one of a Wood Stock magical moment, were things just came together and there was fire on the mount and lighting in the sky. I have no question of it being a spectacular event and many were deeply touched that day.

            It is out of the love for a woman ~ many castles have been built. ~ Everything starts with an idea, a belief, a hope, a dream and then fueled by the passion of love. it was a great sermon, it was a great day.

            I’ve learned to be careful what I wish for as there is such a thing as lost dogs and mixed blessing. At 65, things I don’t have, obviously I don’t need. LOL! Actually ~ I have enjoyed great abundance only to turn around and lose it or just give it away. There is freedom in not allowing things to own you.

            That men might walk by faith and not by sight is probably one of the most highest of ambitions. While the way is so wide and the path so dangerously narrow , many might dare while so few ever really make it but for a brief instant.

            That “instant” can be very revealing and the sum of your life.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Deer, you’ve been at your Emerson again, I see: “Things are in the saddle and ride mankind.”

            “Self-possession is the rarest and most valuable possession of all that we may own.” . . .That’s not Emerson (far as i know); I just now made it up, I think.

            But the man’s thinking is so vital, it comes into one’s mind unbidden, and takes up residence for an indefinite stay.

            So you’re not sure whether or not what you think is your thought, or his.

            I sure do wish that you were my neighbor instead of this liberal turd that I have next door. He seems remote from any concern unrelated to his belly or his crotch. Why are liberals so f. . . ing dumb? So neanderthal.

            A metaphysical conundrum: “Are liberals dumb because they are liberals; or are they liberals because they are dumb. Or are the two conditions coterminous?”

            What great arguments (in the academic sense) we could have over a libation or two.

            The liberal dummy is limited to guttural grunts.

          • JeffH

            So you don’t want to be understood by your own babble?

          • Deerinwater

            Hello Brain Dead , ~ your ability to assassinate information is needed ~ somewhere I just don’t know where that is. ~ There is a place for everyone!

          • Jeff

            If you should ever need to create stationery using a swastika in the design, he’s your man. Excellent workmanship. It shows when you believe in something, even a half-wit can do good work.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            As usual the Liberal Progressives have turned the board into a name-calling fest.
            Didn’t I hear the recess bell?

          • Deerinwater

            More like returning hostile fire from a “drive-by”

          • Jeff

            Dave, we had a dialog of sorts until you started attacking me personally. I know you don’t remember it that way, but you can look at the posts. I tried to keep it to the level of ideas. The problem is your “idea” is that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow evil or corrupt.

          • WTS/JAY

            That wasn’t even close to coherent. Are you losing your touch, monkey-boy?

          • JeffH

            Sorry Deer, I don’t speak Jabberwock. Speak english?

          • Deerinwater

            LOL! You just keep coming back for more don’t cha ~ You probably should just stick with hand gestures and grunts a few more years Jeff. ~ you know? Before you try to jump out there and attempt to really communicate with anybody.

            Use what you know that works. We understand, we really do ~ it’s a complicate world and won’t fit in just one box.

          • JeffH

            The mirror Deer Bob, look into the mirror.

          • Jeff

            It’s so rare to find a picture of the people you’re posting with, but I found a recent picture of the H brothers. Dave must be the one talking.


          • mark

            Calling me inferior because I disagree with you on many political and economic matters is an ad hominem attack, Dave. You are intelligent enough to know this.

          • Deerinwater

            Oh! he treats all opposition that way Mark ~ character assassination, demeaning, debase and discount. ~ a real pussy cat actually ,that love to change the subject and then accuse you of changing the subject.

          • Jeff

            I used to think so. I’m not so sure anymore.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            I told you why I called you inferior. Are you also illiterate?

          • mark

            I think you know I am not, Dave. And thus this is just another ad hominem attack by you against me.

          • Dave

            DaveH is king of the ad hominems…. He will profess to the contrary all day. You cannot ever disagree with his sponsor’s theories… if you do, you get the wrath of DaveH, JeffH and the rest.

          • Louis Lemieux

            How can you have an ad hominem attack on Free Markets? Is Free Markets the name of a human being?

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            No, but the concept is the same — attacking the vessel rather than addressing the contents of the vessel.

          • Louis Lemieux

            That would be equal to calling a boat ignorant for the person in it!
            No hard feeling, we’re all ignorant but not of the same things.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            Ignorance is excusable, Louis. Purposeful ignorance is not. Even worse — encouraging others to be ignorant.

          • Louis Lemieux

            Purposeful ignorance? Humans are curious by nature, hard to believe they would make on purpose not to know something unless they feel it’s irrelevant. Encouraging others to be ignorant has the opposite effect: to pique their curiosity.

        • WTS/JAY

          mark: Actually, Dave you’ve provided a singular proof to my comment. Your Libertarian Party regularly gets around 1% of the vote in U.S. presidential elections.

          That’s because the majority of kool-aid drinkers keep voting for the same corrupt-establishment and wonder why their circumstances never change. You just can’t fix stupid, i suppose!

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          mark says — “That proof is all around you: the widespread rejection by Americans of laissez-faire capitalism. This is after all, something you lament everyday. Fortunately, very few others do”.
          Judging by the number of thumbs down you got for that remark, I’d say you’re wrong about that.
          However, among the general population there are a large number of people who associate laissez-faire negatively because they don’t know any better thanks to misinformers like yourself, mark, who have misled them.
          Ironically, the real world is 180 degrees different than the Liberal Progressives would have people believe. If people take the time to read and think, they will learn that Free Markets are the only way to stop Political Entrepreneurs from taking advantage of people. Whereas Socialist Markets play right into their hands.

          For those readers who would like to learn the advantages of Real Capitalism in a relatively easy-to-read form:

          • vicki

            Few of the people alive today have experienced laissez-faire (truly free market) Capitalism. What they see is crony Capitalism in all its ugly glory and understandably don’t like it.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Would you say that the most absorbing literary tribute to “free-market capitalism” is Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged”?

            I enjoy it as literature; I enjoyed Ms Rand as a person (I met her years and years ago). I have always regarded “Atlas Shrugged” as entertaining mythology–a realistic exposition of certain aspects of human nature, as is all mythology, and Ms Rand as a gifted mythologist.

            But not as a realistic blueprint for any functional, or fungible, human society–populated with the implacable imperfections of real people. Rather, a sort of “never-land”. A “somewhere-over-the-rainbow” land, that children may hear of “once in a lullaby”.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            “Laissez-faire” (French for “Leave it alone”) capitalism has not been a principal feature of our American economic landscape since our origin as a nation.

            One way or another, government has been involved, either as an assist or in a regulatory function.

            Human nature is too susceptible to selfishness, greed, and corruption for reality to yield any other consequence.

            Of course, that susceptibility introduces the real, on-going, potentiality for corruption amongst the governmental guardians of integrity. In other words, who shall watch the watchers?

            Thus the cause of despair and sense of futility amongst the governed, and the exhausted choice of absolutes, perhaps, of some. Of indifference, perhaps, amongst the many.

            So it goes.

    • Ibn Insha

      Obama would have won without Romney’s remarks anyway because we are, in fact, dumb or we would not have elected Obama in the first place let alone reelect him. McCain is not that bright either, but he was lesser of the two evils in 2008 elections but we did not chose him because Obama promised us everything for nothing. Romney is better (not necessarily good) than the two but he was not elected either in 2012. Gary Johnson is better than the three and he did not even make a blip on the radar screen in 2012 because he want people to earn their own living. Who wants that kind of honest man as their president.

      Your claim that that elitist attitudes resulted in Democratic and Republican electoral defeats further proves that we are dumb. Who, in his right mind, not vote for a candidate if the candidate had the right credentials. Only dumb people cut their noses to spite their face.

      We want politicians to be held at a higher standards. Politicians are reflection on society. They are only as honest as rest of the public is. No wonder we cannot get one honest politician.

      • Alfred Ferguson

        A bit awkward in verbal presentation, perhaps; but conceptually correct.

    • WTS/JAY

      mark: It is not a good idea to insult the American voter. Mitt Romney did this with his 47% remark and he paid dearly for it.

      No, actually, WE paid for it; not Romney. Romney is doing just fine, drinking Champagne and eating caviar while laughing at your pathetic sorry-life, and thanking his Mormon-god that he’s not living your sad little-life. But because of Romney’s goof-up, as you said, we ended up with an even worse elitist, Obama; remember? Mind you though, we would have fared no better under Romney, as he would be doing the exact same thing Obama is doing; selling our country piece-meal to the highest bidder! But its not because of the 47% remark that Romney lost the election, no no. Romney lost the election, because Romney is white! Conversely, Obama won the election, because Obama is, at least in appearance, black! And why do you suppose “black” was chosen as the color of the year? Simple; anyone who would dare criticize “black” would be labelled a racist and a bigot…surely you don’t think you could have done that with “whitey”, could you? Of course not!

  • ridge runner

    Marshall, most of the dumb fks in office have PHD’s, which stands for Perfectly Happy and Dumb. Look at the muslim m,arxist in the WH, dumber that dirt!!

    • John Cherish

      I knew a lot of so called PHD’s that couldn’t form complete sentences or do basic math and there are some PHD’s that are awarded solely on the amount of money someone contributed to a college. The same as the Nobel peace prize awarded to our communist leader, who has not done a thing towards peace if anything he fosters hate. His Nobel peace prize is not worth the paper its printed on sort of like our dollar

      • Deerinwater

        well yea ~ and they also work at NASA and MIT ~ doing things ~ beyond the average persons abilities. ~ so what is the point?

        Education is of little value to some people and the world would be a better place without educated people ?

        • WTS/JAY

          I think what John is saying is that, acquiring a “good-education…? doesn’t guarantee that the person will come equipped with common-sense and good character. One fine and irrefutable example of this, is our political-system, comprised of some of the finest-educated people/politicians on the planet; yet, these very same people…? are destroying our country right before our eyes! Are they educated? Absolutely, and to the nth degree. Are they morons? Most of them!

          • Deerinwater

            I see. ~ inside that context he comments makes more sense.
            Is a Law Degree a part of the Arts? ~ It’s not engineering.

            There is element in a Lawyer ~ you don’t find overly common in other people. It’s a profession of “Language” and salesmanship.

            In as far as our politicians goes, ~ I would come more thinking that they act as if they have too many masters as oppose to being not bright ~ for clearly they are. ~ Politics is artful mixture of many skills. I’m not sure just how much loyalty and conviction come into play, while you can expect a good sales job.

            Take Senator McCain for instance. While he was stumping ~ for the First chair position. ~ More times then not ~ The Real John McCain failed to show up. ~ but instead this mouse puppet that was wearing his cloths. I never understood that. ~ I wanted to support him, I did! ~ But Just could not vote for a mouse that was telling me how he and some leggy chick fresh out of the wilderness with a voice that could peel old paint was going to clean up the Hill. ~ yea ,~ Right!

            I could over look his history of reckless ways, his Hell Mary’s long and deep, Keaton 5, ~ leaving his 1st wife while she was still recovering in a hospital ( for what, i’m not sure) ~ to trade up. ~ Nobody knows what going on between a man and a woman. I’ll forego any judgement on such personal matters.

            But not being able to control his own campaign ~ for the lack of Karl Rove, Norquest and what other GOP operatives that had him by the ‘short hairs” and tongue ties to where he could not “be” John McCain but a mouth piece for the Party ~ left me cold on him.

            If he wanted the Presidency ~ he should had took it on his final nomination and ran his campaign the way he wanted to run. ~ What would rank and File do? ~ vote for Obama? ~ It never make any sense!

            Why? ~ because there were just too many masters. To many people behind the curtain pulling rope and pulleys , enforcing their will . ~

            It does make them look stupid ~ i’ll admit that.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            McCain was a large disappointment to me as well. I had thought that his career as a navy pilot–and his heroic behavior as a captive (not accepting the enemy offer of a release before others because he was an admiral’s son)–I had thought that this background augured well for future outstanding service in the political arena.

            But I was wrong, regrettably.

            I have a friend who lives in Scottsdale. He says that McCain’s wife is very wealthy–and very liberal.

            So perhaps she would not permit him off-leash.

          • Deerinwater

            Yea , looking from the outside in, ~ such things are hard to know for certain. Men and women have secrets and appearance to keep, rich, poor , ugly pretty, don’t matter, the money only makes it worse.

            But that said , his last week of stumping, it was John McCain the Tiger that showed up and why I feel he was allowing himself to be overly “Handled” ~ He didn’t have that huge Garrison of people messing with him and following him about.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            You’re probably right. His “handlers” mishandled him. They were, as the Brits say, “too clever by half”.
            One week of electioneering will not a victory make, not even by an authentic American hero.
            (I suppose it is “mis-ogamistic” to blame his wife.)

          • Deerinwater

            Hmm? ~ ~~~a~ Hmm , ~ well, ~ like the Eagles song goes ~ “She can’t take you anywhere, ~ you don’t already know how it go”.

            This “Adam’s defense” ~ is worn a bit thin in my mind.

            A man must come to terms with his behavior, ~ without need of a crutch.

            Women are the gift ~ the color in his day or the still ,silent darkness in his night.

            I just wanta ride till the bell. a good ride is noble, no fault, no fowl.

            You really can’t control women and don’t ever allow them to control you. For they are smarter then you are in a most non abrasive way. You will lose her if she gains full control or lose a part of yourself.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Now you tell me. Where were you when. . . . Never mind.

          • Deerinwater

            Probably the same place you were ~ trying to figure out what Billy Joe McGallaster was throwing off the Tallahassee Bridge.

            McCain is alright, I suppose~ stay in Iraq for another 40 years and allow the American GI to breed into existence a new generation of more agreeable Iraqis is a rather long view. I just question if our goals and national interest would be well served as fossil fuel begins to takes a back seat to a new generation of fuels.

            The military complex would be pleased as would big oil.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            I don’t know the answers to much of anything, any more.
            Once-upon-a-happy time, just day before yesterday, I thought I knew quite a lot. But now, not so much–and, increasingly, less and less.

            As for “big oil”, I’ve made a little money from it; and I hope to make more. Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, and people gotta drive, from here to there. That much I do know. The “new generation of fuels” is going to have a lengthy birth process, I think.

            So zip on down to your local Exxon-Mobil, or independent (it all comes out of the same spout), fill ‘er up, and put a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of a penny into my pocket.

            And we thank you very much.

            P S. Do we really want to know what Billy Joe was throwing off Tallahassee Bridge? I don’t think so.

          • Deerinwater

            Oh No! Alfred , It sounds like you are just experiencing all the symptom of advancing stages of intelligence. That dumb stupid humbling feeling is only the side effects of achieving yet another level of understanding of the world and how we fit inside it. So you might well imagine the crushing weight of the humility that I endured to find out that it was actually Billy Joe that threw himself off of the Tallahassee bridge.

            As for any advancement in new fuels, there is much to be excited about. And of course, as you point out so well, you and I will be allowed to only seeing the early stages of this advancement as we shift away from combustion to do our heavy lifting as other things and other ways that takes it’s place. ~

            The idea of motorized personal conveyance came forward well before what we now call gasoline today. It’s been an amazing thing to witness. NAS Car that sprang into existence from the “need for speed” by moonshiners, to the the demands of war have all helped advance efficient and user friendly fuel products. A 150 year story, but a blink of an eye in the history of modern man.

            Myself, ~ as a child I always wanted a “Flying Capet” , it seems like a worthy concept. ~ I must have flown mothers “throw rug” that she used to cover up a unsightly floor blemish 10 thousand miles. It was comfortable to sit on, compact and i never had to worry with fuel and I could fly as high and as fast as I wanted to.

            If the middle east holds the secret to a reliable “flying carpet” , like McCain ~ I believe it a worth ambition to consider spending some time there. As a senior war vet, I learned that ~after 6 months those scrawny little foreign girls that couldn’t first compare with our American women start to become beautiful. If you can’t kill something ~ seeding it. Creating a new generation is a worthy option to consider ~ I always enjoyed it . ~40 years would make a good start.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Encouraging, and I hope you are right.

            I spent a few days in Morocco and Cairo. That was sufficient unto the day thereof.

            If I lead a righteous life, and with good luck, I shall never, never see the place again, and never, never have any dealings with anyone from there.

            We should have let Rommel and the Germans have the fly-blown place. Germans are clean, maybe they would have introduced cleanliness and good order.

          • Deerinwater

            Well , I admit that I harbor no Lawrence of Arabia tendencies. But for those that do, ~ it’s there , ~ in all it’s magical splendor. (I never liked sand in my crack)

            I hold no interest in camping out in some state park anymore either ~ or killing vicious man-eating doves. ~ But it’s there for those that do.

            I met a fine widow lady of 54 a few years back, she had this Motor Home ~ She never understood my lack of enthusiasm for the adventure of it. ~ It’s sort of hard to explain such things to people that have never lived a life of real adventure and danger. ~ I’ve spend my share of years working in some of the dirtiest places on earth. ~ now that I made it home with all my original issue ~ I’m done. It’s soft clean sheets and a soft woman with a kind and gentle voice from here on out.

            As for religion Alfred, ~ to communicate with other people it’s to anyone’s benefit to use words and ideas that they understand and have accepted. It’s not the words so much but the concept behind the words that are important and not the “words” themselves. ~ I use bible text to convey beliefs and accepted understanding for the sole purpose of reach out and communicating. ~ Not to convert or convince or attempt to pontificate some pompous and pious fashion but to reinforce values that we all share. ~

            I grew up in a large family that was steep in the “Faith” ~ to a point of obsession. ~ I had to live with those people in peaceful harmony ` until I could find an “exit”. At which time I dismissed myself. ~ I had to go find Jesus on my own. ~ It took some 20 years ~ but I made it. ~ Contrary to popular belief ~ It does not matter how you get “There” or what you elect to call “It” ~~ Just get there ~ and allow people to use the words that they understand without harsh judgement.

            The bible is primary a “Teaching Tool “and exactly like all other tools, it can be misused and abused by the clumsy, unskilled and less qualified as well as for just plain “evil”

            The bible does not instruct us to “Not Judge” we are instructed to judge as we would wish to be judged ourselves.

            If you have ever ended up on the harsh end of Judgement by some Christians, ~ I ask that you to forgive them. They are not “There” yet. ~ as I truly believe you are an outstanding human being, rich in character and refuse to check your intelligence at the church house steps in much the same way that I never could.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            OK. But they don’t need my “forgiveness”. I’m an easy-to-live-with sort of guy. Just as long as no one tries to hold me down and pour something down my throat and tells me that unless I swallow it I’m assured of eternal torment and so on and so forth.

            Then, i can get downright feisty. And words will be used redolent of those one might hear at the “You-all Come Back Soon” saloon in West Texas on a Saturday night when some cowboy’s main squeeze is made a play for by the feller with slicked-down hair and reeking of Old Spice after-shave from the next county over.

            Otherwise, I’m a peaceable and peaceful fellow. Live and let live. (But keep your powder dry and your peace-maker handy.)

            I’d love to continue boring you but I must peruse the list and determine which of the ten commandments is next–for shattering. After the terminus, I start over.

          • Deerinwater

            Right! They don’t need your forgiveness but something else, ~ it’s for you. ~ It’s for your heart and be completely free of whatever is was in their mind and not carry their foolishness and insanity or simply flawed thinking. Only in forgiving or “overlooking” can you do that.

            It’s a normal human response to “react” to other peoples words and actions. And even more so if “offense” has been taken.

            One cannot soar with Eagles and fly around with a bunch of Turkeys while they are both birds that can fly.

            But you know all of this ~ I only offer validation. ~ I appreciate validation and hope you might find it welcome.

            Hasn’t life been grand? While i’m unsure if I’d want to do it again.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Yep. One ride on the “Merry-go-round” is enough for me. Been there done that seen that. Up and down, and all around. People wonder what “hell” is like. Well we know what it’s like, do we not? It’s just like earth. Over and over and over again.

            Only, you don’t have any memory of how awful it could be for most, perhaps all (for I have always suspected those “smiley faces” of one of two conditions: oblivious, or demonically unconcerned).

            When i woke up this morning it was 85 degrees inside, climbing to 105 outside eventually.

            There was a time when I was young and full of-you-know-what that I considered air-conditioning a sign of weakness, of giving in, of Nietzschean (why does my spell-check say that is incorrect?) weakness, of a daffodil will.

            (To hell with spell-check.)

            But no longer. When i was a child, i thought like a child–but now, like a wuss. It’s a good feeling.

            And when a child, of 10 or so, my best pal Sammy and I would go out to a farmer’s unharvested wheat field in heat like this “to pull rye”; we got a penny for each 10 stalks. Good grief.

            And we spent it on ice-cold Dr. Pepper’s at Shorty McGee’s sometime filling station and sometime whore-house (during harvest, itinerant-crew season).

            We were hooked on Dr. Pepper. Don’t ask me why.

            We were also hooked on Shorty, called that because he had a wooden leg, the original issue blasted off by, it was said, ATF (as it is now known) guys on a raid against bootleggers. We thought that was exotic, and supplied a frisson of danger to the man.

            One time one of the whores at Shorty’s asked me to sit on her lap–I was a blond-haired blue-eyed boy, the mien of lad that people liked to put their hands on. (On complaining to mother, she said, “Don’t worry Sunny (that was my nickname then; because I was such a happy kid), it won’t last.”)

            And so it didn’t.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Why did Billy Joe do it? Oh, I bet I know: a lost or fractured love. “Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou?”
            Nothing ever changes. Nothing.

          • Deerinwater

            Right On ! A poem of love lost.

          • Bob666

            Yo Deer,
            I like John McCain as a person (hot wife as well) and believe him to have character. I was very excited to see him run for president and even wrote a couple of significant checks.

            So you can understand how disappointed I was when he picked the pin-head as his VP. You called it right regarding his being handled on the campaign. If he had campaigned in the fashion of his concession speech-he might have won in spite of the bimbo VP choice.

          • Deerinwater

            yea, it was disappointing stretch of bad road Bob. It was McCain’s to lose and he did in spades.

            While I do think that the job would have been very hard on McCain had he won it. He would have required much help, help that I just didn’t see him having, clearly not looking in the right places. There is just so much OJT I’m willing to accept in critical top administration positions if given the choice.

            Even his slogan sucked. , “Country First” Who came up with that? ~~ after American’s had , lost jobs by the hundred thousands, young men basically finding themselves unable to support and insure their young families finding military service the only way out of a bad situation by filling our military ranks. For other American families, their credit cards maxed , their saving exhausted and attempting to just hold on. Young Graduates facing 30 thousand in debit and feeling lucky to finding minimum paying jobs . American’s losing their pension and no Calvary coming to their defense while our government engaged in two unfunded wars predicated on false pretense and bailing out the biggest bank in our nation with federal tax dollars to support some twisted notion of Capitalism, by Privatizing Profits and Socializing Losses. After American’s swallowed that camel GM was a gummy bear.

            I think ~ that anyone that might believe for one minute that our Nation and our National Government was not being been “put first “by the American people needed their head examined.

            That was a perfect example of “How out of Touch” the GOP was at that time ~ and as far as I can tell , “Still Is” .today in the upper chambers of government.

            To offer credit where it is due ~ Some GOP supporters “have” finally recognized the flawed way the GOP has conducted it’s self. and want to change it ~ it is this appeal that attracts some Tea Party support, while the rest have other motives less benign.

          • Bob666

            Yo Deer,
            A couple of very good points, but I have to disagree with you on the GOP. Yes, some have sobered up and acknowledged their dysfunction, but others have dug in their heels.

            As many on this site claim, McCain was not conservative enough? Personally, I believe you win elections by appealing to the mass population. I don’t care whose numbers you look at, most Americans are mainstream, not left, not right, but mainstream.

            The Tea Party is anything but and they will continue to cost the GOP more national elections on their current path. Sarah Palin & Michele Bachmann are living proof.


          • Deerinwater

            Agree completely ~ Bob ~ but I know personally people that have been taken in by the Tea Party that are naive ~ not really up on the issues ~ have not devoted the time to explore but willing to take things at face value. The Tea Party offers pleasant “curb appeal” ~ It’s being packaged and marketed on a wholesale level.

            People will buy a keg of rust nails ~ Bob ~ if you can package it well. ~ This is not the first time ~ bait and switch has been employed on voters of many countries over the years. ~Attitudes, feeling , notion can be seeded, cultivated grown and developed for a single purpose.

            Like David H , he is a devoted disciple of Libertarian ideology. It’s been package and sold to him. he’s bought it! and now his purpose is to sell it to someone else.

            Bob, I can’t even hire an Attorney ~ without great concerns that my legal adversary has attempted to buy him off to milk me dry and then sell me out at a most critical time in the legal process. ~ If trust can be bought, then it can be sold. ~ my trust comes slow , our eyes and ears are easily fooled.

            ~ I don’t and you don’t trust the Tea Party leaders~ but some people do.

          • Bob666

            Yo Deer,

            I see the “devoted” Libertarian mentality. Just like religion, I tend to be Leary of anyone who is “devout” to any ideology -political or religious. I consider myself to be a Libertarian, but I also consider myself to be a realest about life. If left unchecked-the free market will consume itself and we all become economic serfs-History has proven this. But I also believe the government that governs the least-governs the best.

            There is a great deal that I do not know at 71, but I do believe that Life is about balance Deer. Nature is about balance and left alone, Nature does a pretty good job at maintaining balance. It is man who generally screws the balance of life up and organized religion and politics will be part of that process..

          • Deerinwater

            Evidently, ideology supersede mathematics as these “Born Again’s” attempt to “wish” things into existence.

            Which is okay by me if they cannot come forward and offer this nation sound and able leadership based on rational thinking and what is best for the majority of Americans and not based on the needs of a select few.

      • Jeff

        In case your wife forgot to remind you today, you are a very stupid person.

        • WTS/JAY

          Stop humping the guests and get back in your cage, Jeff; bad doggy!!!

    • Alfred Ferguson

      I have a PhD. I am not “perfectly happy”. But I am, relative to many and to much, “dumb”. But you, Mr Runner, are, I should imagine, a member of Mensa.

      (Although, i would imagine few of that group would deploy an adjective for a conjunction. And aren’t two letters missing from “fks”? Last time that I had need of visiting a public toilet, I observed that the word was differently spelled. But English spelling is, historically, a fluid and changing and organic excretion of communication.)

      The “muslim m,arxist”[sic] in the WH, although I loath him, is actually highly intelligent.

      We underestimate our enemy at our peril–Lao-tzu, “The Art of War”.

      • Bob666

        Yo Alfred,

        I would be willing to bet that Ridge Rat has never read the Art of War by General Tzu and would not because he was Chinese-several hundred years ago. And I am sure that Mensa does not come to this site looking for members.

        Please keep posting as you bring a fresh approach that I have come to appreciate.

        • Alfred Ferguson

          Thank you.

  • Guest

    Why do conservatives celebrate a killer of a young african American but condemn Che Guevera for killing rapists and murderers…utter hypocrisy.

    • Deerinwater

      I can’t speak for every case ~ but in this case ~ the media attempted to cloak the true character of the “dearly departed” with too much Left and omissions. And for the record, he was an American, never been to Africa.

    • ChuckS123

      Trayvon attacked Zimmerman and could have killed him by pounding his head onto the sidewalk. Zimmerman was defending himself.

      Zimmerman obviously wasn’t ready to use his gun, since he let Trayvon jump him. If he had his gun in his hand, or had his hand near his gun, he would have stopped Trayvon, or scared him away. Obviously he wasn’t gunning for Trayvon, or even ready to shoot him when attacked.

      A bare-handed man can certainly beat and kill a man with a gun, if the man with the gun doesn’t get it into his hand. According to the FBI, 801 people were killed by hands, fists, feet, pushing, etc, in 2009.

      • Dave

        If only Martin had a gun and used it…. He could have felt threatened by Zimmerman could he not? Just a question… A man following you, looking suspicious, you tell him to stop, he doesn’t… you pull your gun… kill the follower because he ‘twitched”. Should have been Martin with the gun, would Martin be within his right to shoot Zimmerman?

        • ChuckS123

          If Martin pulled a gun, Zimmerman probably would have backed off and Martin could have left. Preferably Martin should have said something like “leave me alone.”

          Incidentally, one of Martin’s tweets said something like “a white person calls the police and a black person calls a cousin.”

          This was not a a stand your ground case, since Zimmerman couldn’t havbe gotten away. However, black people have used the SYG defense more than whites – about 1/3 of the SYG defenses in FL were blacks. I’m sure this doesn’t include cases in which the police let the person go without charging him.

    • Barack Embalmer

      So you learned a little bit about Che Guevera did you? Well I guess you didn’t learn he was a COMMUNIST AHOLE!!

    • WTS/JAY

      Reco2, you mentioned the ethnicity of the deceased, but not the ethnicity of the shooter…are you a racist?

  • Deerinwater

    Mchael Shreve;  and how exactly is this accuracy confirmed? ~ What I see is “regional” sentiment seems to prevail. ~ Orange California being a perfect example ~ or Denver Colorado. ~ to avoid a bias any canvassing would have to be conducted by a indifferent party. ~ How would we know that this has been done?

    Like this Zimmerman /Tyrone trial for example. ~ a judgement was made on the merit of the evidence presented. ~ Any unflattering Character evidence or traits that were not germane to the incident was not allowed to be exposed ~ While the media took it up on themselves ~ to pick and choose what was and what not exposed to the general public. ~ That Tyrone was not cooperative with Zimmerman or that Tyrone enjoyed a popular subculture cocktail made for a over the counter citrus drink and Robitussin that affects one reasoning abilities was never brought forward in the trial.

    Understand that there are people and institutions out there that WANT you to BELIEVE certain things ~ They are funded, ~ they have ambitions ~

    Mr. Livingston ~ is using these finding to bring forward the lacking in knowledge that many American’s have about our Constitution then preceding to lay blame and fault at various door steps.

    The problems we seem to have with knowledge, ~ is that you can’t buy it in a bottle. Institutions do offer study in Constitutional law. I have not attended one. While as I understand it , our Current President actually taught Constitutional Law and violates it often. ( if you wish to believe some people) ~ So I don’t know if taking a Course in Constitutional Law would serve you well or not in a random survey.

    While at the same time ~ If someone catches me out ~ somewhere and I’m blind sided into some random survey ~ regardless what the servery ~ I might not offer a solid answer either depending on my demure at the moment. ~ I don’t normally respond openly to strangers. ~ What should I? ~ People can and will use your thoughts against you. ~ Why give anyone something to beat you up with? ~ As seems to be the case here. I might tell you anything ~ just to make you disappear off my radar.

    • Protonius

      Deerinwater –

      His name was “Trayvon”, not “Tyrone”.

      • Ringgo1

        The name or person doesn’t matter to Deerinwater, as its’ interest is in supporting the O regardless of fact(s).

        • Deerinwater

          Horse manure ~ ! ~ unworthy father comment.

        • Deerinwater

          I’m not supporting “O” on this turd ~ Ringogo1 ~~ understand?

        • Alfred Ferguson

          The possessive form of the neuter pronoun does not require the apostrophe. And when the apostrophe is applied to the contraction for “it is”, the form is “it’s”, with the apostrophe substituting for the omitted “i” in “is”.

          But you are to be congratulated on spelling “regardless” correctly.

          Most ignorant persons would have said “irregardless”.

      • Alondra

        He is a Deer in the mutkey water, so it does not make any defference for him. Next time he’ll write Tom/Jerry

        • Deerinwater

          Yea, and you are a Creep ~ ~ now that the name calling has been address ~ can we move on or would you like to continue ~ ~I have a truck load ~ Poster boy for birth control.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            “Poster boy for birth control.” Wish I had said that. I think I will. (Not copyrighted, is it?)

          • Deerinwater

            i don’t think so ~

        • Alfred Ferguson

          I do not understand this comment. Mainly, I suppose, because I do not know what “mutkey water” is.

          “For him”? Did you mean “to him”. There is a difference.

          In English, prepositions are significant in conveying the relation of one substantive to another.

          And “Tom/Jerry”? Who–or what–are you talking about?


      • Deerinwater

        Thank you ~ forgive me ~ I didn’t pay much attention to this , this debacle and political freak show. ~ I was not amused with either party or resulting media coverage. ~ and I don’t live , eat, and breath TV coverage of any sort.

        Tyrone , Tierod, Trayvon ~ he’s Toast, got his ticket punched, met the wrong guy, at the wrong place at the wrong time and reacted badly.

        Tray-von ~ that’s pretty!

      • Alfred Ferguson

        I thought it was “Treyvon”. But, actually, who gives a darn? Shouldn’t we be out fighting crab-grass? Or just sitting in the shade, watching interesting cloud formations?

    • Ringgo1

      Who the h+// is “Tyrone”? Why are you such a racist? Nevermind…we know.

      • Deerinwater

        Racist? ~ apply to spelling? ~ I thought his name was Tyrone ! ~ I think that you are way off base with such a comment?

        Explain yourself Please.

        • Alfred Ferguson

          Natural, normal mistake. “Tyrone” is a common Anglo-Saxon name. That’s why the person in question was not named “Tyrone”, but “Treyvon”, which never has been nor ever shall be in the index of Anglo-Saxon given names.

          See, as was explained to me by a person of color I know, a successful lawyer and a neighbor, the commonalty amongst persons of color–generally less well-educated–want to be as remote as possible from what they’ve been told by black racists are “white-devils'” namesakes.

          Thus, you’ve got such odd-sounding names, like “Beyonce” and “Treyvon” and so on, ad infinitum.

    • vicki

      There was at least one character trait of Mr Martin that was germine to the case. It to was covered up. Mr Martin’s use of dangerous drugs. Specifically the mixed drink called “lean”.

  • Protonius

    The relatively minor, and seemingly incidental, item that I am about to add here may seem “off topic” at first, but, IMO, it isn’t:

    Rather, IMO, it is of MAJOR significance, and, it would appear, is “part & parcel” of how this Administration — apparently with an all-too-willing Congress backed by a largely unresponsive mass media and an all-too-ignorant-of-what’s-happening public– appears to be on a grand march to grab away people’s privacy and freedoms on a global scale.

    But where do we see THIS aspect, of how our privacy and freedoms are being removed globally, being headlined in our country’s major media or by our “representatives” in Government?

    Specifically, according to the 6 June 2013 edition of the English-language Swedish-news website “THE LOCAL” (at ), there’s an item headlined “Swedish email subject to US surveillance: report”.

    The report states that “Emails sent to the Swedish state and government authorities can be accessed by the US security services, according to a report by the Computer Sweden daily. … Several Swedish state agencies have their email systems linked to companies allegedly connected to the recently revealed Prism surveillance system used by the US National Security Agency (NSA). …”

    The report goes into additional detail, and also includes this very telling statement:

    ” ‘If you do not want to send information that could end up in US government hands, well then you should not communicate with these authorities,’ Stefan Thelberg, CEO of IT security firm Stay Secure, said to the newspaper.”

    Sweden just happens to be one of the most democratic, free, privacy-protecting (except for a recent law known as “FRA”), and politically open, countries around — but now people are to have to worry that any internet (or other?) communication that a person might wish to have with various Swedish GOVERNMENT AGENCIES might also be channeled to, and accessed by, agencies of the U.S. Government?

    But wait — there’s more. In the 16 July 2013 issue of THE LOCAL (at ), there’s THIS headline:

    “US government authorities are set to be given access to Sweden’s national fingerprint register according to an agreement which is about to become law.”

    The article goes on to discuss (but, IMO, without requisite depth) some concerns regarding this development, also noting that “The law will enable US agencies easy access to fingerprint records of Swedes. The agreement is reciprocal and intended to increase cooperation between the two countries with respect to criminal investigations, such as terrorism”.

    I would HOPE that it’s all on the “up-&-up”; but where are the unbreakable GUARANTEES that the system will not be abused?

    And, if little lonely Sweden, a relatively FREE country, is allowing all this to happen at the behest of the U.S., then I wonder what about OTHER countries are similarly being drawn into the same loop — and how many (and to what extent) of THESE developments are hitting the headlines and airwaves and public consciousness here at home?

  • Ibn Insha

    My thoughts, but articulated better than I could.

  • TIME

    Dear Bob,

    You cover all of the evidence very well, what I think your not quite clear on is why is it that we face this rather absurd period of TIME.

    Lets start with the schools are broken, thus a broken education system that fails to teach any form of science math or REAL history, nor do these schools teach how to investigate and research issues. Let alone Comprehension skills,

    Next we have a really broken “moral code” system, of what has failed in all respects.

    Next we have the fact that our social constructs are off base as in our cosmology is based on sports that sublimate for learning anything of true value.

    Next we have all taken for granted all the FREEDOMS that were fought for as well countless some lives lost to defend, with the mindless thinking pattern that some how we are immune to breaking.

    That’s sadly just the tip of the ice burg in creating mindless sheep, who will follow a TEAM leader straight off the cliff no matter how malicious or pernicious that leader may be.
    In a way its the true story of the Pied Piper and the flock of lemmings played out in real TIME.

    How sad.

    Peace and Love May The Christ bless you.

    • Deerinwater

      Hmm? ~ “It’s” not “broken” Time ~ For it’s not an “It” , there are many wonderful schools putting out excellent scholars of moral fiber.

      And good moral ~ are taught by example , some school supply it and some don’t . It’s not a curriculum in public schools that i am aware of.. If curriculum could be formed without invoking a deity , i would have no objection.

      The purpose of education is to teach people “HOW to Think” ~ and not what to think. ~ Some student get it ~ and some simply don’t. ~ try as you may. ~ You can’t put anything in a full cup ~ it will not accept anymore. Students that come to school full will leave school full of what they arrived with and little more.

      To blame teachers and schools for a poor crop of student has as much validity as blaming doctors and hospital for sick people. ~ There is a small gain of truth to the charge. ~ But the term “Broken” to define institutions for failing to instill discipline and morals ~ in student that were not receiving or enforcing these virtues at home ~ is just another brazen attempt to deffer some sense of personal responsibility on to someone else.

      To imply that you don’t want government in your home and then blame government for failing rotten sorry students is a bit of a stretch to attempt to understand what you really want from government.

      I do not think that any government can satisfy your “wish list”.

  • oledriller

    In 2008, the Intercollegiate Civil Studies Institute did their own survey. College graduates on average failed their civic literacy exam,
    The·ISI surveyed over 28,000 undergraduates from over 80 separate colleges, and the average score on our basic 60-question civic literacy exam was about a 54%, an “F.”
    At elite schools like Yale, Cornell, Princeton, Duke, Georgetown, and Johns Hopkins, their freshmen did better than their seniors on the same test, what ISI dubs “negative learning.”
    Among adults, those with a college degree also failed on average ISI’s civic literacy test, scoring little higher than their peers with a high school diploma.
    College-educated adults were particularly ignorant of the Founding and Civil War eras, constitutional themes, and the essential features of a market economy.Proof that todays colleges produce a passive set of voters who are more inclined than non-graduates to identify with liberal social causes and political movements.
    And finally FYI, out of all the people tested who identified themseves as Republicans scored an average of 56% while those who identified as Democrats scored 42%.
    Which might explain perfectly how Obama and his congressional libtard drones were voted into office.

    • Alfred Ferguson

      The ISI is reliable. Their survey results match my academic experience. It is disparaging that they do not know.

      But more disparaging still: they do not care that they do not know.

      Ignorance about something or other is universal to all; and Ignorance is never beneficial, of course.

      But the ascendent malignity is not caring that you do not know.

    • Proteus1946

      Here is a link to the ICS Naturalization Test:

      Can you pass this test? There are no ‘trick’ questions – its all pretty straight forward. Any student in a High School ‘Civics’ class should be able to pass this test with a better than 90% grade. Can you?

      NOTE: The naturalization self test is a study tool to help you test your knowledge of U.S. history and government. The actual civics test is NOT a multiple choice test. The civics test is an oral test. During your naturalization interview, you will be asked up to 10 questions from the list of 100 questions. You must answer 6 out of 10 questions correctly to pass the civics portion of the naturalization test.

      ANOTHER NOTE: The oral test is given in ENGLISH, so the applicant must have a working knowledge of the ENGLISH language.

  • samurai

    Here is an article showing who really supports Obama bin Laden and hiw evil cronies.
    Of course there is Alinsky, libturds, progturds, and other 5thn columners. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
    You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot.
    “All efforts of the abolitionists are calculated to lead to the most alarming and dangerous consequences, and all such efforst have an inevitable tendency to diminish the happiness of the people.”
    James Buchanan
    15th President of the U.S.
    1856 Democratic Platform
    (Also a demonic Mason)

    • Alfred Ferguson

      Tom Paine was an atheist, and a patriot. Ben Franklin was a Deist, as were most of the “founding fathers”: their “faith in God” was principally, and conventionally, “pro forma”– neither definitive nor absolute.

      By what criteria are you judging Masons as “demonic”? What is your background in American history? American Studies? American Literature?

      What is the language displayed in symbols? Why is your idea not expressed in English? Your name, “samurai” suggests that you are Japanese. Are you a citizen of the united States?

      Are you well-read in American history, American literature, American cultural history? Clearly, English grammar is a challenge for you–perhaps it is a second language for you?

      • Dave

        Alfred, Samurai is a conservative…. Unless you are exactly like him, you are not a patriot apparently. Thankfully he is not in charge, otherwise the new NAZI party will be in charge. They felt that if you were not a certain way, you were not patriotic either. Its just one of many areas of hypocrisy for conservatives unfortunately.

        • samurai

          No response possible due to lack of intellectual content. FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
          You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.

          • Dave

            Non-intellectual context means believing that a man lived in a whale… or that Adam and Eve were kicked out of paradise for talking to a snake and eating an apple… or than a man built a boat that house every animal species on the planet and not one of the meat eaters ever got hungry… Or repeating an old pagan and Egyptian tale about a non-sexual conception, then that boy growing up to heal the sick, getting killed then rising from the dead.
            Those stories and many like them are devoid of any intellectual content.

          • WTS/JAY

            It is one thing to be scholarly-critical of a “literary-works” that is held dear and cherished by millions, Dave. It is quite another to be critical of said “works” with the intent to deliver maximum-insult to the listener with whom you are engaging in debate. I have read many of your posts in regards to matters of religion, and i can tell one thing; a theologian, you are not! However, and to your credit, you do possess a healthy level of scepticism, in the overall. My only wish is that your scepticism be tempered with a good measure of respect! (-:

          • independent thinker

            Unfortunately Dave seems to have respect for only his own mostly invalid opinions.

          • Dave

            IT, you show once again why neither words that you use for your name here apply to your posts. If respect is given then respect is returned. Is that clear enough for you?

          • Dave

            Respect? Oh you mean the respect the writers here and conservative posters here give me, liberals and progressives?
            I will have to work on that.
            I’ll make a deal with you. When the writers here are more even handed, when posters here stop lying and saying that I am or anyone else that disagrees with them, a socialist, communist, not a patriot or Marxist. Then I will act in kind, but until then. I will shove the conservative BS back in each of your faces.
            Sorry if you do not like your own tactics used against you.

          • Dave

            BTW Jay, I studied all the world’s religions, I do not proport to be an expert in any one religion but I do know how people use religion and that religion was started by man. I know this from my spiritual journey I went on in my late teens and early 20’s. I am smart enough not to buy into the religious dogma of the organized religions and their followers as well as the certainty in which atheists claim that their is no god even though they cannot prove that god doesn’t exist any more than the religious can prove god does exist. This is why “faith” and “fact” have different meanings.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            To “respect” the disrespectful is an exercise in futility–rather like being honest to the dishonest.

          • TheOriginalDaveH

            or believing that Socialism is a beneficial political policy even though it has failed miserably everywhere that it has been fully implemented. And even though it goes against the nature of man or woman so it must be Forced upon the citizenry.

          • Dave

            When have I ever advocated pure socialism DaveH has a economic and political philosophy? Can you not lie about what I believe and I have posted on every post of yours DaveH? It would be a wonderful change of pace for you.

          • Deerinwater

            All things fail David ~ it is not in the design of the Universe for one stone to stand atop another through out infinity. Some simply move about quicker. ~ 10 generations is but a blink of an eye in time. ~ You are not getting out of here alive ~ sorry ~

            If you wish to endure longer ~ become a tree.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            I’ll say. Just returned from a trip to the Redwood Forest (Northern California). I was told that some of those guys were saplings about the time of Christ.

            When one of those trees was my age it was just getting started.

            No wonder my Scots ancestors were tree-worshiping pagans.

            Like all good Scotsmen, they knew good and lasting value when they saw it.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            What do the arcane symbols symbolize? Demonic possession?

          • Deerinwater

            No ~ it’s Japanese or Chinese ~ Sam is married to Soky Young ~ sorry I’m not spelling that correctly SUKY ~ still not right. Sorry ~ a distinguished Asian lady ~

            She appears from time to time. Much more even tempered then Sam Yong or Young

          • Progressive Republican

            So, can a Muslim who loves this country be a patriot?

          • ctroop

            while I also find your delivery somewhat toxic, and the Korean letters totally meaningless and irrelevant to those who don’t know Korean, I find it interesting that not even one of these “enlightened” and intellectually
            superior liberals have given you any thing close to an intelligent response. They (like ALL liberals … but
            especially atheists) have only questioned your academic credentials, insulted your character and ridiculed your values and your Christian religious beliefs. If we could take everything these guys really
            knew and understood about the Bible and New Testament Christian doctrine, and put it into a capsule, we could stuff it … NO … we could DROP IT … into the
            rectum of a gnat. What would be so funny about these overeducated clowns (if it were not so pathetic) is how they pretend to be so tolerant – “…we don’t care about a person’s religion, or even if they have a religion…” – Oh the hell they don’t! These are the typical liberal hypocrites whose only free speech they give a damn about is their own.

          • ctroop

            while I also find your delivery somewhat toxic, and the Korean letters totally meaningless and irrelevant to those who don’t know Korean, I find it interesting that not even one of these “enlightened” and intellectually
            superior liberals have given you any thing close to an intelligent response. They (like ALL liberals … but
            especially atheists) have only questioned your academic credentials, insulted your character and ridiculed your values and your Christian religious beliefs. If we could take everything these guys really
            knew and understood about the Bible and New Testament Christian doctrine, and put it into a capsule, we could stuff it … NO … we could DROP IT … into the
            rectum of a gnat. What would be so funny about these overeducated clowns (if it were not so pathetic) is how they pretend to be so tolerant – “…we don’t care about a person’s religion, or even if they have a religion…” – Oh the hell they don’t! These are the typical liberal hypocrites whose only free speech they give a damn about is their own.

        • TheOriginalDaveH

          What does that have to do with hypocrisy, dave? Please explain.

          • Dave

            Sure DaveH,

            Conservatives like you, Samurai talk all day about “Freedom” and “Liberty” yet if conservatives like Samurai had his way you would be kicked out of the patriots club because you are an atheist. Liberals do not care what religion you are or if you have one at all, you can still be a patriot.

            If Samuari had his way, blastphemers like you would be shipped out in favor of a 100% Christian “god-fearling” population, then in their minds we can get back on the “moral” path as if we were somehow on it from the beginning. Liberals have an adult relationship with this country. We understand we are not perfect and we want to strive to make this country better. Conservatives on the other hand view America as a child would their parents at a young age. America was “perfect” at this undetermined point in history that you, Bob, samurai and the rest can’t seem to lock down.
            Conservatives are loaded with hypocrisy and you are too far gone drinking their kool-aid to realize the damage conservatives have done to this country.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            OK. I get it–I get him, now, Dave. The guy is a religious nut case. Nothing conservative about that. That’s just far-out radical extremism. The radical “mentality” is rather like a fragmented heap of iron filings: attracted to the stronger magnetic force.
            If chance and contingency had so apportioned his attraction, he could just as handily have become a raving. . .whatever.

          • Deerinwater

            Well Samurai considers it (religion or being religious) as applied “Conservatism” ~ with great zeal and fanfare much like Muslim’s blends their politics and faith into one cohesive single ball. That they have at least two or three variations of Islam to work with ~ they have these three big Islam balls that can’t agree so they go about downsizing the opposition’s ball on a regular bases ~ “Death to the infidel ! ”

            Cleaver No?

            ~ Such Christians would be no different ~ if given their way as demonstrate by Samurai ‘s crass and mean spirited demure on a regular bases here on these forum ~ and God only knows elsewhere.

            Samurai ‘s cup is full and runuth overuth ~ and will never accept any~ more. uth. .

        • Alfred Ferguson

          He just seems like a troubled little man. Not like any conservative I know –or have ever known.

          Certainly, I would not be comfortable knowing of a belief or sentiment held in common with such a curious, troubled individual.

          I should imagine Barry Goldwater or Bill Buckley would regard him as a curiosity–the sort of predictably unpredictable person one edges away from in a crowded venue.

          • Bob666

            Yo Alfred,

            Believe it or not, He claims to have a masters degree in history. The history of what is not very clear.

            Little Sammy is an enigma-no doubt.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            And from where? A variety of places have such degrees on offer–some not very creditable.

          • Bob666

            Yo Alfred,
            I believe he made reference to Indian U one time and I don’t know anything about the school. He loves to tangle with me because he believes Freemasonry is a sect of the devil, so he is easy to piss off. I almost look at it these days like a sport in spite of the fact that dealing with him is like picking on the kid who gets off of the short bus.

            Tried to have a constructive dialog with him on several occasions and he always pulls the Jesus card-I have little tolerance for the self righteous.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Maybe he meant Indiana University–Bloomington, I don’t know. If he meant Indiana U., that’s a good school (beautiful campus, too). Friend of mine earned his Doctorate there. It’s a tough school, as well. No dummies need apply. I did. Didn’t get in (Doctorate level). GRE score was accepted, and acceptable. But undergraduate grades missing a link or two: graduated “Magna cum Lager”–the admissions’ people were unamused.

            Had to settle for Minnesota (Mpls). There, they understand beer-swilling Vikings.

            I doubt his credentials.

            Oh, and i just figured out “short bus”. Witty. Well I never said that I was the sharpest tool in the shed.

          • Bob666

            Yo Alfred,
            My guess has always been a combination of mental health issues and low IQ. He does remind me of several mid-westerners who come from small communities in the Bible Belt who take the gospel as well-gospel. He is very rigid and dogmatic in his approach and has a submissive Asian wife to boot. Profile made?

            On a forum like this-one never knows for sure.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Yeah, I guess so. But, in response to those who may ask, “Why are you dolts spending so much time on this critter?” It’s because he is, repellent though he be, an exotic life-form. No entry for him in our taxonomic data base.

            What the hell is this creature? Pity that poor “Asian wife”.

          • Bob666

            Yo Alfred,
            “an exotic life-form”, hardly. I see Sammy about as exotic as a bowl of vanilla ice cream and a loaf of white bread.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Well, maybe. But those items are wholesome; this guy is toxic–and narcissistic. And maybe crazy as well. The type who when he farts in the bathtub bites the bubbles.

          • Deerinwater

            Yes ~ I would say that he is one of a kind ~ but he has a lot in common with my Father ~ all Transmitter and no Receiver. ~ They can only talk AT you.

      • samurai

        Thomas paine was an atheist, but he became a christian while living in Paris. None of our founders were deists, but they were Christians. I suggest that you learn more about our history and stop ranting. You ask about my background in certain things, but what is yours? Obviously not very much. The other language I used is Korean and it says, “FOR GOD AND COUNTRY!” in Korean. Unlike you, I’m a natural born citizen of the U.S. You know, born in the U.S. or its territories, of 2 parents that are American citizens. I’ve never seen your name before and you sound like some ignorant ranter that I have had the displeasure of knowing. looks like maturity, morals, and ethics are a challenge to you. Since you cannot prove me wrong with credible sources, I have nothing to worry about with you. Here is an article about what you were saying about your second language of English.
        FOR GOD AND COUNTRY! 하나님하고 나라를 위해서!
        You need both love of country and faith in GOD to be a patriot. This leaves you out.
        “Whatever makes men good Christians, makes them good citizens.”
        Daniel Webster
        American statesman
        “Defender of the Constitution”
        Devout Christian

        • Dave

          “I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church” (Age of Reason).

          “All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit” (Ibid.).

          “Each of these churches shows certain books, which they call revelation, or the word of God. The Jews say that their word of God was given by God to Moses, face to face; the Christians say that their word of God came by divine inspiration; and the Turks say that their word of God, the Koran, was brought by an angel from heaven. Each of these churches accuses the others of unbelief; and, for my own part, I disbelieve them all” (Ibid.).

          “But some perhaps will say, Are we to have no word of God, no revelation? I answer, Yes; there is a word of God; there is a revelation.

          “The word of God is the creation we behold … It is only in the creation that all our ideals and conceptions of a word of God can unite. The creation speaketh an universal language, independently of human speech, or human language, multiplied and various as they be. It is an ever-existing original, which every man can read. It cannot be forged; it cannot be counterfeited; it cannot be lost; it cannot be altered; it cannot be suppressed. It does not depend upon the will of man whether it shall be published or not; it publishes itself from one end of the earth to the other. It preaches to all nations and to all worlds; and this word of God reveals to man all that is necessary for man to know of God.

          “Do we want to contemplate his power? We see it in the unchangeable order by which the incomprehensible whole is governed. Do we want to contemplate his munificence? We see it in the abundance with which he fills the earth. Do we want to contemplate his mercy? We see it in his not withholding that abundance even from the unthankful. In fine, do we want to know what God is? Search not the book called the Scripture, which any human hand might make, but the Scripture called the creation” (Ibid.).

          “What is it the Bible teaches us? — rapine, cruelty, and murder. What is it the Testament teaches us? — to believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married, and the belief of this debauchery is called faith” (Ibid.).

          “It is the fable of Jesus Christ, as told in the New Testament, and the wild and visionary doctrine raised thereon, against which I contend. The story, taking it as it is told, is blasphemously obscene” (Ibid.).

          “As to the Christian system of faith, it appears to me as a species of Atheism — a sort of religious denial of God. It professes to believe in a man rather than in God. It is a compound made up Chiefly of Manism with but little Deism, and is an near Atheism as twilight is to darkness. It introduces between man and his Maker an opaque body, which it calls a Redeemer, as the moon introduces her opaque self between the earth and the sun, and it produces by this means a religious, or an irreligious eclipse of light. It has put the whole orbit of reason into shade” (Ibid.).

          The intellectual part of religion is a private affair between every man and his Maker, and in which no third party has any right to interfere. The practical part consists in our doing good to each other. But since religion has been made into a trade, the practical part has been made to consist of ceremonies performed by men called priests … By devices of this kind true religion has been banished, and such means have been found out to extract money, even from the pockets of the poor, instead of contributing to their relief” (Letter to Camille Jordan).

          “No man ought to make a living by religion. It is dishonest so to do” (Ibid.).

          “Who art thou, vain dust and ashes, by whatever name thou art called — whether a king, a bishop, a church, or a state — that obtrudest thine insignificance between the soul of man and his Maker?” (Rights of Man).

          “Any system of religion that has anything in it that shocks the mind of a child, cannot be a true system” (Age of Reason).

          • Progressive Republican

            Thank you. This level of insight is appreciated and sorely needed.

          • WTS/JAY

            It is most absurd, therefore, to maintain, as some do, that religion was devised by the cunning and craft of a few individuals, as a means of keeping the body of the people in due subjection, while there was nothing which those very individuals, while teaching others to worship God, less believed than the existence of a God.

            I readily acknowledge, that designing men have introduced a vast number of fictions into religion, with the view of inspiring the populace with reverence or striking them with terror, and thereby rendering them more obsequious; but they never could have succeeded in this, had the minds of men not been previously imbued will that uniform belief in God, from which, as from its seed, the religious propensity springs. And it is altogether incredible that those who, in the matter of religion, cunningly imposed on their ruder neighbours, were altogether devoid of a knowledge of God.

            For though in old times there were some, and in the present day not a few are found, who deny the being of a God, yet, whether they will or not, they occasionally feel the truth which they are desirous not to know. We do not read of any man who broke out into more unbridled and audacious contempt of the Deity than C. Caligula, and yet none showed greater dread when any indication of divine wrath was manifested. Thus, however unwilling, he shook with terror before the God whom he professedly studied to condemn. You may every day see the same thing happening to his modern imitators.

            The most audacious despiser of God is most easily disturbed, trembling at the sound of a falling leaf. How so, unless in vindication of the divine majesty, which smites their consciences the more strongly the more they endeavour to flee from it. They all, indeed, look out for hiding-places where they may conceal themselves from the presence of the Lord, and again efface it from their mind; but after all their efforts they remain caught within the net. Though the conviction may occasionally seem to vanish for a moment, it immediately returns, and rushes in with new impetuosity, so that any interval of relief from the gnawing of conscience is not unlike the slumber of the intoxicated or the insane, who have no quiet rest in sleep, but are continually haunted with dire horrific dreams. Even the wicked themselves, therefore, are an example of the fact that some idea of God always exists in every human mind.

            All men of sound judgement will therefore hold, that a sense of Deity is indelibly engraven on the human heart. And that this belief is naturally engendered in all, and thoroughly fixed as it were in our very bones, is strikingly attested by the contumacy of the wicked, who, though they struggle furiously, are unable to extricate themselves from the fear of God. Though Diagoras, and others of like stamps make themselves merry with whatever has been believed in all ages concerning religion, and Dionysus scoffs at the judgement of heaven, it is but a Sardonian grin; for the worm of conscience, keener than burning steel, is gnawing them within. I do not say with Cicero, that errors wear out by age, and that religion increases and grows better day by day. For the world (as will be shortly seen) labours as much as it can to shake off all knowledge of God, and corrupts his worship in innumerable ways. I only say, that, when the stupid hardness of heart, which the wicked eagerly court as a means of despising God, becomes enfeebled, the sense of Deity, which of all things they wished most to be extinguished, is still in vigour, and now and then breaks forth. Whence we infer, that this is not a doctrine which is first learned at school, but one as to which every man is, from the womb, his own master; one which nature herself allows no individual to forget, though many, with all their might, strive to do so.

            Moreover, if all are born and live for the express purpose of learning to know God, and if the knowledge of God, in so far as it fails to produce this effect, is fleeting and vain, it is clear that all those who do not direct the whole thoughts and actions of their lives to this end fail to fulfil the law of their being. This did not escape the observation even of philosophers. For it is the very thing which Plato meant (in Phoed. et Theact.) when he taught, as he often does, that the chief good of the soul consists in resemblance to God; i.e., when, by means of knowing him, she is wholly transformed into him.

            Thus Gryllus, also, in Plutarch, (lib. guod bruta anim. ratione utantur,) reasons most skilfully, when he affirms that, if once religion is banished from the lives of men, they not only in no respect excel, but are, in many respects, much more wretched than the brutes, since, being exposed to so many forms of evil, they continually drag on a troubled and restless existence: that the only thing, therefore, which makes them superior is the worship of God, through which alone they aspire to immortality.

            -John Calvin

        • Bob666

          Well Sammy,

          I see that you read the Book on “How to Win Friends and Influence People”

          “I’ve never seen your name before and you sound like some ignorant ranter that I have had the displeasure of knowing. looks like maturity, morals, and ethics are a challenge to you”

          Well Sammy-been looking in the mirror again???

          Just Saying………………….

          We can continue to try and clean up the gutters all over the world and spend all of our resources looking at just the dirty spots and trying to make them clean. Or we can lift our eyes up and look into the skies and move forward in an evolutionary way.

          Aldrin, Edwin E. “Buzz”


          Astronaut, second man to walk on the moon.

        • Alfred Ferguson

          Good grief. More than likely, you really are a (mentally) ill little man.

        • Charlie

          YO YO 666,,, how did you and A F become Psycho experts ? What Big House did you graduate from ???

      • WTS/JAY

        Before his arrest and imprisonment in France, knowing that he would probably be arrested and executed, Paine, following in the tradition of early eighteenth-century British deism, wrote the first part of The Age of Reason, an assault on organized “revealed” religion combining a compilation of the many inconsistencies he found in the Bible with his own advocacy of deism, and calling for “free rational inquiry” into all subjects, especially religion.

        About his own religious beliefs, Paine wrote in The Age of Reason:

        I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by theRoman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by theProtestant church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church. All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.

        Though there is no evidence he was himself a Freemason, upon his return to America from France, Paine also penned “An Essay on the Origin of Free-Masonry” (1803–1805), about Freemasonry being derived from the religion of the ancient Druids. In the essay, he stated that “The Christian religion is a parody on the worship of the sun, in which they put a man called Christ in the place of the sun, and pay him the adoration originally paid to the sun.” Marguerite de Bonneville published the essay in 1810, after Paine’s death, but she chose to omit certain passages from it that were critical of Christianity, most of which were restored in an 1818 printing.

        While never describing himself as a deist, Paine wrote:

        How different is [Christianity] to the pure and simple profession of Deism! The true Deist has but one Deity, and his religion consists in contemplating the power, wisdom, and benignity of the Deity in his works, and in endeavoring to imitate him in everything moral, scientifical, and mechanical.

        And again, in The Age of Reason:

        I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life. I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creatures happy. -Wikipedia

        Clearly, this man was anti organized-religion, and this is not necessarily a bad thing, imo. However, i do question his ability to differentiate between organized-religion and Christianity, as his assessment of Christianity seems to have been born out of his having observed only organized-religion, or the business of religion!

        • laura merrone

          One half of the signers of the Declaration of Independence were Christian ministers. Washington was baptized in the Delaware by a Baptist minister. Ben Franklin supported the efforts of George Whitfield during the Great Awakening. The separation of church and state was always supported by Baptists. So even though some were deists, some were also Christians and some were atheists. Similar, really, to the nation we have today but I think we’re drifting away from our Christian roots.

          • WTS/JAY

            Very well put, Laura! Thank you!

          • laura merrone

            Thank you for a nice comment! I don’t get those too often. I do read some American history so I know a little bit…I think the main difference back then was they all got along with each other and tolerated their various views. I don’t think we do that as well any more.

          • Bob666

            Laura & Deer

            It’s not Capitalism or the Free Market that is the problem, but the character or lack there of behind Capitalism or the Free Market that is the problem.

          • Deerinwater

            Well, ~ Capitalism and Christianity are an odd mix. It seems that Capitalism is winning out with Christianity being modified to accommodate .

            To bear “false witness” seems to seen as a virtue anymore.

          • laura merrone

            Capitalism and Christianity are incompatible. But free enterprise and Christianity are not. Socialism and Christianity would work for a while until you ran out of “other people’s money.” Then you and them would be “broke” and have to go back to plowing your own piece of land which would be free enterprise. Capitalism is when you raise capital to open factories, hire people, etc. That leads to trouble, too, eventually. Free enterprise is a mom and pop business…sometimes they succeed sometimes they don’t but the fault is only your own if you don’t succeed. I speak from experience, of course.

          • Deerinwater

            Well placed words ~ Laura

            It’s the inherent of both Government and Church to grow and encroach. ~ Both require constant attention and a occasional pruning which of course is met with resistance and outcry.

            As a small businessman, I am actively engaged in Capitalism everyday. ~~ I am at the mercy of my decisions and the powers that be. ~ It’s for me to hedge my bets and not government. ~ There is no one coming to my rescue except maybe family and old friends. I am blessed with both.

            To accepts ones own loses ~ “such be” a part of the winning experience if you intend to engage in Venture Capitalism.

          • laura merrone

            You’re right. I guess depends on what kind of capitalism.

  • Dave

    If only conservatives had more power…. if only women had less power, minorities knew their places… If only captains of industry can bleed this country dry (oh wait, they are doing that now)… If only the powerful made ridiculous sums off the poor… (wait that is happening as well)…
    How far should be go back Bob? Should be go back to when blacks couldn’t vote? Women could not vote? How about when America decimated the native populations… were we moral then?
    Slavery… there is a fine “god-fearing” institution you conservatives were once proud of….
    I love conservatives when they laughingly talk about moral degradation as if there was some point in our history that existed where things were “nice”. Maybe for us white folk when everyone else knew their places and women were not so uppidy… But as a country, we were FAR from the ideals set in the US Constitution. We have actually moved closer to the US Constitution’s ideals thanks to LIBERALS not conservatives.

    But you are correct about one thing, we are a nation of ignorants… We have middle class and poor people who call themselves Republicans. We have a severe distain for any other language but English. We also have a wonderfully ignorant view of education. We call people who are well educated “elitists”. We prize ‘folksy” over intelligence and judgment. We allow corp interests to write our trade laws, tax laws and environmental laws. We are not supposed to talk about politics at work, in bars or at just about any other gathering because of possible “disagreement” (Oh my). We cannot talk about the one thing that affects all our lives… the political direction of the country. That is crazy to me. We spend much time and effort telling people to be afraid of our Gov when in reality, it should be the other way around. We have the ability to fire our government if we choose to take that power. Too many vote the status quo and in the age of big money in politics, that is stupid.

    • TheOriginalDaveH

      You have the gall to blame the Slavery of the past on living people who had nothing to do with it, while at the same time you are currently enslaving people by helping yourself to their money (earned by their labor) and dictating your choices to them — the very essence of slavery.
      What’s it feel like to be such a colossal hypocrite? You might be able to fool those people around you, dave, but your can’t fool yourself. You know what you are and you can’t hide from that. Maybe you can drown your conscience in drugs or alcohol. Or maybe you don’t even have one:
      You have no credibility, dave.

      • Dave

        I am sorry DaveH if you hate the rich history of oppression, brutality and ignorance the conservative movement has put forth. But it is on records for all to see… Even today with the conservatives trying to prevent same sex marriage. Their stupidity is out there for people to see. You can dodge, weave and lie all you wish but it was social conservatives of their day that wanted to keep slavery as the law of the land… It was conservatives who opposed civil rights and women’s rights and it is conservatives today that oppose marriage equality.
        Deal with it my little conservative child.

        • Progressive Republican

          Nicely done. Both times. “What’s it feel like to be such a colossal hypocrite?” Look in the mirror there, TODH.

        • Alfred Ferguson

          I’m a conservative. (And I am not a “child”.) I don’t want to oppose or prevent same-sex hook-ups (marriage, whatever).

          I go along with my favorite country-western singer: “Same-sex-attracted folks are entitled to the same misery as opposite-sex-attracted folks.”

  • Alondra

    BREAKING NEWS: His name is HYPOCRITE. Any surprise?

    Via John Fund, we learn that Barack Obama, as a state legislator, co-sponsored a bill that strengthened his state’s 1961 Stand Your Ground law. The legislation Obama sponsored in 2004 broadened the state’s Stand Your Ground law by shielding the person who was attacked from being sued in civil court by perpetrators or their estates when a “stand your ground” defense is used in protecting his or her person, dwelling or other property.

    The bill sailed through the Illinois Senate. The vote was 56 yeas, 0 nays, and 0 present. “Present,” you will recall, was Obama’s preferred voting option when he opposed a bill but was too gutless to go on record with his opposition.

    In this case, there was no reason, political or merits-based, to oppose strengthening Stand Your Ground.

    • Louis Lemieux

      “Illinois’ 2004 SB2386 was passed by a unanimous vote in the state Senate. It amended a self-defense law first passed in 1961. Alarm bells should be ringing at this point, because Florida was pretty famously the first state to pass a “stand your ground” law, a year after this Illinois bill. Have reporters been blowing that story? No: “Stand your ground” is substantively different than what Obama backed in Illinois. He backed a tweak to the “castle doctrine,” which reads like this:
      A person is justified in the use of force against another when and
      to the extent that he reasonably believes that such conduct is necessary to prevent or terminate such other’s trespass on or other tortious or criminal interference with her real property (other than a dwelling) or personal property, lawfully in his possession or in the possession of another who is a member of his immediate family or household or of a person whose property he has a legal duty to protect.

      “Stand your ground” takes the concept of the castle doctrine and turns it into a traveling force field of sorts. Here’s Florida’s language:

      A person who is not engaged in an unlawful activity and who is
      attacked in any other place where he or she has a right to be has no duty to retreat and has the right to stand his or her ground and meet force with force, including deadly force if he or she reasonably believes it is necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. — by David Weigel

  • trugrits

    The takers are no more guilty or ignorant than those they vote for. The politicians are the real ignoramus mind set. Both are actually the same as they both are for themselves. Both are to stupid to realize what is happening in Detroit will eventually be the norm for this whole country. Eventually other peoples money is not there anymore. The government has taught the lazy that they should be able to have the same benefits and rewards of those that actually applied more of themselves and worked for it.
    The government while getting near majority on the government tit will not have enough to go around and that is when the SHTF happens. Eventually the takers will look to who is not paying them to be poor anymore. Like I said watch Detroit become the poster child for government future promises it never even contemplates how it will pay twenty years from now.
    Local State Government employees were paid lower than average wages because the tax base couldn’t pay more. So they were promised to be able to retire early age at or near their working salaries. Now the local governments are actually paying probably 2 retired for every 1 working. The tax base isn’t there to pay 3 wages for 1 worker. The government was not concerned with today back twenty years ago. Not even enough to put those funds in a retirement fund. Of course they couldn’t as they barely had enough to pay the working back then. Some how they would magically cross that bridge if and when they came to it. Well the bridge IS NOW in front of them.
    A judge has the lack of intelligence to believe Detroit can’t go bankrupt because their State Constitution says Michiganit can’t let it. Like the state of Michigan is in any better financial position to bail out Detroit. Same old ignorant belief money appears out of nowhere or just steal it from someone else.
    Never in history have whole neighborhoods been bulldozed down like has been happening in the last few years.
    So Detroit looks to the State and the State will look to the Federal government to bail it out. Not one of any three has a savings account to help anyone. Detroit just might get its own printing press for an answer just like the Fed uses. It’s called funny money for a reason. The only people that paper has value to is the Federal Reserve because it is an IOU with interest. So the Fed prints paper backed by nothing which it will be required to be paid back out of the public’s pockets as though the funny money was actually worth something. The people are not even getting the funny money. The banks are getting it to do as they please to make more money for themselves and the FED. The public never gets bailed out. They are only told that they have been bailed out to stop what eventually and inevitably will happen. SHTF
    The government is trashing everything that has to do with country pride,history,religion,ethics,Constitution or bill of rights. People still think this is all just conspiracy nonsense that our government would never do this and this country has always bounced back. The only thing bouncing is the check now. They will not admit there is a problem till their cushy life is gone.

    Expect 2014 to be the awakening. The only way it might get a postponement is if Obamacare is totally trashed which I do not expect to happen.


    Why Do Americans and Brits Have Different Accents?

    In 1776, whether you were declaring America independent from the crown or swearing your loyalty to King George III, your pronunciation would have been much the same. At that time, American and British accents hadn’t yet diverged. What’s surprising, though, is that Hollywood costume dramas get it all wrong: The Patriots and the Redcoats spoke with accents that were much closer to the contemporary American accent than to the Queen’s English.

    It is the standard British accent that has drastically changed in the past two centuries, while the typical American accent has changed only subtly.

    Traditional English, whether spoken in the British Isles or the American colonies, was largely “rhotic.” Rhotic speakers pronounce the “R” sound in such words as “hard” and “winter,” while non-rhotic speakers do not. Today, however, non-rhotic speech is common throughout most of Britain. For example, most modern Brits would tell you it’s been a “hahd wintuh.”

    It was around the time of the American Revolution that non-rhotic speech came into use among the upper class in southern England, in and around London. According to John Algeo in “The Cambridge History of the English Language” (Cambridge University Press, 2001), this shift occurred because people of low birth rank who had become wealthy during the Industrial Revolution were seeking ways to distinguish themselves from other commoners; they cultivated the prestigious non-rhotic pronunciation in order to demonstrate their new upper-class status.

    “London pronunciation became the prerogative of a new breed of specialists — orthoepists and teachers of elocution. The orthoepists decided upon correct pronunciations, compiled pronouncing dictionaries and, in private and expensive tutoring sessions, drilled enterprising citizens in fashionable articulation,” Algeo wrote.

    The lofty manner of speech developed by these specialists gradually became standardized — it is officially called “Received Pronunciation” — and it spread across Britain. However, people in the north of England, Scotland and Ireland have largely maintained their traditional rhotic accents.

    Most American accents have also remained rhotic, with some exceptions: New York and Boston accents have become non-rhotic. According to Algeo, after the Revolutionary War, these cities were “under the strongest influence by the British elite.”

    • Deerinwater

      interesting ~ I love such history jay.

      Going though Boot, ~ being a Winkler, I found myself beside a Wintuh from Bo’ston often. ~ For the the lack of “FunnY” , Winter’s supplied it. Horse was Hus ~ being gifted “south at the mouth” myself ~ we destroyed the English language together. I still think about him and a pig farmer from Kansas named Jim Betts.

    • Alfred Ferguson

      New words: “rhotic” and its negative “non-rhotic”. (by imitation and not by imitation, I reckon) dictionary unhelpful.

      “Hahd wintuh”! Do I really want to know anyone who says “hahd wintuh”? Well, maybe. But it’s going to take a lot of getting used to, and a heap of toleration. Where did the “r” go, and who took it? And why? And if it is gone, how is “rhotic” to be pronounced?

      In college I dated a (rich) girl from Boston. She asked me, “Does everyone talk like you, where you come from?” But I never heard her say “hahd wintuh” because it was summer school, and the romance was short-lived (she discovered I was just a hard-scrabble farm kid–a nobody from nowhere). She asked me, early on, “And where did you prep?”

      • Deerinwater

        I don’t know ~ I enjoyed the “difference” that I find in people that I’ve met over the years. ~ I come away feeling enriched by the encounter and sometimes blessed that it not I.

        “And where did you prep?” ~~ good question ~ So what was your answer Alfred? My answer would be the “University of Hard Knocks” and hold a Masters in Mistakes.

        Did Susanne take down by the water and fed you tea and crumpets that came all the way for China?

        I got a good story for you. ~

        I was new on this tiny island and didn’t know my way around. I met up with this young lady that was cooking at a diner. She was what they called a local and had lived on the island for some years and i hoped that teaming up with her I could fast track my knowledge of the island . ~ I want to eat the heart out of the melon and find it quickly as not having a lot of time to waste bumping around blindly among all the “pitfalls” and backwater.

        After she got off , we went to several places, ~ before going into this one place, she turns to me and says, ” These people in here are not use to seeing me out with older men” ~ Well , that statement caught me by some surprise. I said “Okay” ~ but what I was thinking was , “Yea well , ~ I understand , ~ people are not use to seeing me out with a woman with just one front tooth but it’s okay, we can do this.”

        • Alfred Ferguson

          Why, oh why, didn’t you say what you were thinking? But, on the other hand, maybe not. One of my favorite dramatists (next to W. S.) is Moliere. His comedy “The Misanthrope” is about a man who goes about, in every context, saying “exactly what he thinks.”

          • Deerinwater

            sounds like many of the posters here.

            I’ll be on the search for him.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            And you shall, if the performance is capable, have the time of your life (originality is not my curse, as you have no doubt observed).

            The performance mostly hinges on the capability of the person playing the lead, the misanthrope. If he is good, the whole production is carried; if not. . . .

  • Don Berry

    …and…the right wing continues to push for cuts to education. What’s wrong with this picture? BTW, nice of Bob Livingston to drag all the right wing talking points into an article about stupidity. From a progressive’s perspective, it seems somehow…fitting.

    • TFJ

      Cuts in what education? Our public education for which there is no Constitutional authority has been eroded into a system of indoctrination not education. Do some homework on it. It’s not right or left wing, it’s reality.

      Who cares that we don’t throw more money into education? Certainly not a rational person. Look what our educational system is producing. A nation of dummies submissive to the State and looking for Mommy government to feed them solutions instead of acting like adults and producing their own solutions. The Federal government should be taken out of education not given more money and influence in our system.

      Math and science which we once led the world in has generally declined in this nation from when we had less government influence. Now, we have less education and significantly more violence and less respectful kids.

      From a progressives perspective? Progressive is the new euphemism for socialist of one kind or another as we watch our economy implode under the weight of socialist programs like Socialist Security, Medicare and Medicaid by far and large our largest Federal liabilities as they suck more and more money out of the Federal budget.

      Medicare alone is larger than our war expenditures that your ilk complains about at $846 Billion vs. $621 Billion for war with Social Security at $802 Billion. So much for the socialist schemes of nation building as it is guaranteed to get far, far worse as baby boomers in the millions qualify for SS and Medicare in the coming years and our tax base (including SS pay ins) lessens due to a stagnating economy.

      And what is the progressive solution? Spend more money. Not return to a free market and local educational systems but let’s get even more in debt (which stands at nearly $16.9 Trillion as I write this) and throw more money into a system that has more money in it than ever and is getting worse, not better.

      Oh, and BTW, student loan debt stands at over $1 Trillion now and is deepening. Meanwhile, graduates are coming out with no jobs to go to burdened with heavy debt. Student loans, by law, cannot be forgiven through bankruptcy BTW. The banking cartel loves that nice little touch thanks to your ilk.

      From a logical person’s perspective, progressives are dim wits. Must be that wonderful public education and leftist university finishing school that left them with no capacity to observe reality and learn from it but rather to tow the government fed propaganda line and be a good lil member of the herd. From an objective observers point of view, it seems somehow…..fitting.

      • Alfred Ferguson

        Do you ever feel like the passenger in a “speeding” YUGO (a flimsy commie-country auto “manufactured” (more or less) in one of the Commie-countries under Russia’s thumb–the thing would disintegrate if left out in a hard rain. Of course, to use the term “speeding” and “YUGO” together is an oxymoron. Only on a steep down-hill descent. Then it gave every indication of flying–into pieces.)

        That’s what we feel–what everyone should be feeling–about our nation’s economic realities today.

        And so “progressives” just wanna go faster, and faster still. Nuts. Just plain nuts.

        And no, since we’re all trapped in this up-coming wreck-to-be together, it “aint fittin'”. Not at all.

        • Deerinwater

          I don’t think most progressive want that Al. ~ sure some do. ~

          You are telling us that it’s about spending money ~ while I come near things is not about the money but who is spending it and how. The GOP want to spend it to making friend and influence people and outcomes in other countries. ~and the DNC wants to spend it at home.

          I will gladly counter every exception that you can bring forward.

          So shall we look back into recent history and see who spent the money and how? ~ If the GOP has changed in this behavior ~ that’s wonderful news ~ I just wished that I could believe it.

          but you are right ~ I have felt like a passenger on a run away freight train for 33 years. ~ I’m beginning to get use too it. ~ That the bridge is out down track does not deter either party from spending money.

          I’ve down sized to 940 sg, ft , can’t afford a wife or dog ~ but my neighbor has both and I wouldn’t trade with him.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            You may be right. I’m just feeling, more and more, like a passenger (in steerage. of course) on the Titanic. . .a passenger who knows, intuitively, that there’s danger ahead.

            But one who has no input or control over anything affecting his destiny–except within a very small sphere of very short radius. (I drive carefully; try not to spend money recklessly or crazily–I’ve done both, and even now am feeling the magnetic pull of a new Corvette, like a satellite planet to a black hole.)

            Nuts, you see. Just plain nuts. I don’t mind. I’ve gotten used to “crazy” over the years (but at least I’ve never voted for Obama).

            And I think Bill Buckley, in whom I’ve always believed, is sitting at the right-hand of God, in whom I don’t.

            Although i guess you do. And that’s His best recommendation that i know of at present.

            “Keep on keeping on.” (WFB)

          • Deerinwater

            Well, certainly there is always danger ahead and always will be, ~ I don’t believe there is a person alive or since dead that can make that go away. I’m sure the labor force working in the mud pit in Egypt enjoyed the same uncertainly in regards to their tomorrows.

            That Moses came along and offered them an option and they took it was their decision to make. To die on an extended camp out in the wilderness or under the harsh non-union conditions imposed by Pharaoh’s ambitions and tax masters. ( or that is the way the story is told ) Things have come to light, that suggest, ~ the term “Bondage” has been sort of misapplied ~ as many Jews , half staved had stumbled into town looking for work. ~ What slaves that might have been in the mix were conquest of war or sold into slavery in much the same way King David’s older brothers sold him.

            As for any “Right hand of God position” ~ That is a Christian metaphor I never could come to terms with,. The whole streets of gold bit ~ never made sense. ~ but if there be one, William would be in contention for the slot. A very disciplined and metered man that I sorely miss.

            and of course you are right, ~ McCain lost the election with appealing to too few voters. And unless the GOP can pull a rabbit our of it’s hat, ~ it’s going to happen again.

            I haven’t seen the new Corvettes but GM does make some fine quality products. I’m sure you’d look very good in one Al. The Camero looks like it’s doing 120 mph parked.

            I’m more of a pickup man myself. ~ They just make the new ones too tall to work out of these days. I’m 6′ 1″ so they are too tall for just about anyone. Whenever I bail out of this 89 dodge and buy one, I will have it lowered 4 “. I’ve already been looking into it as i know Flying Carpets will still not be available on the open market by then.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Well, yes. But metaphors aren’t meant to be realistically perceived, but understood like poetry–a lie that embodies a deeper truth. The Bible is replete with them, as I’m sure you know: “And on the Seventh Day He Rested”.

            Or, like my mother (and I’m sure yours) would say: “If I’ve told you once I’ve told you a million times, ‘Pick up your dirty socks and underwear and place them in the laundry basket! And don’t make me tell you again!'”

            The only serious whipping i ever got as a child was when Mother said, once more, for the millionth time, “You make me sick. . . [and I finished her sentence for her] “. . . and tired”!

            Poetic invention, at that juncture, was unappreciated
            by my auditor.

            Pickups are great for all sorts of things you can ‘t even think about doing with a Camaro convertible.

            Although, there is a hilarios scene in Erskine Caldwell’s “Tobacco Road”: Jeeter (Lester) has just bought a new Ford convertible.

            He has a load of wood to be taken into town for selling, but the mule has gone lame. So, he and his dim son, Luke, decide, “Well heck, lets us jist load up this here new Ford”; and so they begin throwing in the wood. Of course, they end up tearing the leather interior, scarring and battering it horribly.

            “Oh well”, they say to one another, “that don’t hurt the runnin’ of it none!”

            Before that, when they had gone to town to the Ford dealership, Jeeter asked the salesman: “How much is that there pretty one?” (pointing to the Maroon Ford convertible).

            “Well,” the salesman asked, “How much you got?”

            “We has 849 dollars and 72 cents!”

            “Why, why! That’s simply amazin’! That’s exactly how much this here fine vehicle costs!”

          • Deerinwater

            As long as you and i know that, ~ what other’s might believe really doesn’t matter ~that much.

            I don’t see how ” stealing their thunder” affords me any benefits. ~

            A good business man ~ learns to use what people wish or choose to believe. ~

            Clergymen have been doing this since they were called shaman magic men. and witch doctors. ~ They used it for power, leadership positions and all the trappings associated with the position.

            Well ~ mothers have a big job to do and the ones that are actually very good at it ~ work their self to death, ~ always giving ~ no end to the giving. ~ I don’t recall mother laying a hand on me. ~ It was grandmother and her peach tree switch.

            I hold women in the highest of regard. ~ I’m glad that I’m not one. ~ I wouldn’t be any good at it on any level.

            I am a reasonably good cook and it ends there.

            Bob Livingston says , “These and other rights are pushed aside and thrown into history’s trash heap. They’ve disappeared with hardly a whimper.”

            Well Mr. Livingston, ~ that’s only because it not exactly so ~ but you can claim it as being so ~ by offering examples of extenuating circumstances where it is true.

            BL says, “The Barack Obama regime has targeted Christian-owned businesses for special persecution by requiring, through the unConstitutional Obamacare deathcare system, the inclusion of birth control and abortion services in their employee healthcare plans in direct contravention of their religious beliefs against them..

            You lost me with “death care” ~ unless you are referring to
            care provided to patients entering the final stages of death. ~ then yes ! ~ It’s is offered and provided. ~ It took my father 2 and a half months to die. once it was obvious he wasn’t going to never get up again. ~ I was thankful for all the people that made his “passing” as comfortable as they could. ~ as well as all the help and support that was provided to my family by the medical community. ~

            It was decided that farther would not die in a strange room. ~ We bought him home. ~ Leased a hospital bed and placed it next to the kitchen in the common living area , in the center of activity. ~ we had 3 different professional care givers coming and going 3 times a day and sometimes 4,

            Come bedtime his first night home from the hospital, “Dad says to me, “Well ~ I guess I’ll sleep here tonight” ~those words broke my heart. ~ “yea, ~ probably a good idea dad” .

            It wasn’t all that long ago that it was not uncommon for seemingly healthy women to die ~ from complicated reproductive issues. ~ we have come a great ways since then. ~ I fail to see how turning back the clock as good thing for woman or child.

            This access to medical care for any woman with needs ~ where they can afford it or not ~ should be seen as important to all of us ~ and not just women.

            We do women and ourselves a great disservice to not address these special needs.

            Any question of moral ethic allow the individual and the church to address one instance at a time ~ no strict blanket policy ~ like some sort of a “one size fits all” situation.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            You did the gracious thing–for your father. The gracious and loyal thing.

            Increasingly, I think there must be more honest and straight-forward discussion when people get to my age, 80, as to how we might exit this existence with a minimum of fuss and bother.

            It’s ridiculous how more and more of us drag our weary and well-worn protoplasm through year-after-year with no real alternative–except some hideous act of self-administered violence. It’s ridiculous, hideous, and barbaric.

            There is a scene in a fine film, “Soylent Green”, starring Edward G Robinson and Charleton Heston. Robinson, weary of life, goes to a clean well-lighted place of peaceful rest.

            He goes there, but he doesn’t leave. He is shown to a private room wherein he is treated to a lovely picture-panorama, accompanied by a sound track of the Symphony #7 by Beethoven (you can have your choice of selections–I would have chosen the “Miserere” by Allegri, I think).

            And so, escorted by peace and beauty, he drifts off in a peaceful sleep–from which he never awakens.

            As the planet becomes increasingly more crowded and more of us live increasingly longer unproductive lives of continuous consuming, as resources concomitantly become more and more scarce–I think something on that order will be in store.

            In the meanwhile, there’s the Camaro convertible to think about.

            Do you suppose there’s some state or federal law about being buried in your car?

          • Deerinwater

            LOL! A Viking departure ceremony? ~ I’m sure that it could be arranged with proper contingencies. ~ Maybe a volunteer fire department standing by as witness and containment.

            It is true that the Health Care industry has elected to groom personal and staff on end of life health care giving. ~ They see it everyday, understand it, know the progression of events.~ The need is there. It is performed to offer comfort and retain some, ~ some of sense dignity in death for those left to only lay there and stare up at the ceiling, too weak to move.

            I’m not sure what my family would have done without it.~ Not knowing what to expect next ~ and given no time to reconcile and prepare.

            Yes, I too enjoyed Solient Green, and Blade Runner as well.

          • Alfred Ferguson

            Thanks for mentioning Blade Runner. Been intending to order it from Netflix, keep forgetting.

            The mind is going. I just hope that I exit stage-right before it does–completely.

            Oh, and my answer to her question, “And where did you prep”? –“the Kansas State Reformatory for Wayward Boys.” She accepted that answer; except I don ‘t think she completely grasped the meaning of “wayward”.

            That’s a two-syllable word. Beverly had money all right, but a vocabulary neither large nor apt.

            We were lying under a tree on campus, my head in her lap, before Dr. Leone’s terrifying Zoology II class, and I remarked, “I really love these refulgent spring days after the winter we’ve had.” (I had just been reading Emerson.)

            She replied, “Huh? Do ya know you really talk funny sometimes, ya know?”

            I helped her pass Leone’s next terrifying exam with a “C”; after that she was cool and distant.

            Lesson learned: “After they get what they want, they are cool and distant; if they don’t get what they want, they are cool and distant.

          • Timothy Sullivan

            It was Josephs older brothers..not Davids.

          • Deerinwater

            Good eye Timothy, ~ Thanks for taking the time for proofing and correction.

      • Deerinwater

        Quote; “From a logical person’s perspective, progressives are dim wits. Must be that wonderful public education and leftist university finishing school that left them with no capacity to observe reality and learn from it but rather to tow the government fed propaganda line and be a good lil member of the herd. From an objective observers point of view, it seems somehow…..fitting.”

        Is that what you are calling “conservative objective logic”? ~ it sound strangely subjective to me. ~ I would concede to there being found small grains of truth in your conservative bucket of manure. As you seem to be most willing to discount the fact that we have conducting the business affairs of this nation in a democratic socialist manner for 100 of it’s 270 years. ~ that for that first hundred was spent carving out a wilderness, fighting indigenous hostiles, disease, bad men , pestilence and drought.

        The question of anything surviving at all took a huge collective effort so even then socialism was alive and being employed out of pure necessity. ~ It was considered and referred to as Christian ethics applied at that point in time. ~

        It’s only in the lean and hardest of times ~ that the squawker’s and squealer’s among us raise their head to look around and see if they are getting enough while their bellies still full.

        The only pension that they give a Flock about is theirs, Only when threaten and fear of someone undeserving might get something that socialism becomes a bad idea. ~ But it wasn’t socialism that caused or created these problems of shortages and cash flow~ but a damn thief the hen house and squandering of funds in poor investments ~ and smoke and mirrors.

        This game of musical chairs ~ is fun until the music stops and you are the only person left standing. Someone keeps removing a chair when a chair such be added as more players play the game. ~ Who said that a chair must be removed? ~~ It was not a socialist ~ sounds more like the foul deed of a capitalist void the venture. Someone that knew before hand when the music was going to stop.

        LOL! funny stuff ~ So you believe that the educational systems have turned against us. ~I think Cambodia went though a similar little revolution, ~ They decided it was a good idea to kill off their scholars ~ in fact anyone that even worn glasses. ~ Would you like to take it that far? ~~ Well tell us where do you plan to stop?

      • Timothy Sullivan

        The Department of Education should be abolished. It is the Department of Indoctrination which says implicitly “we will teach you what we what you to learn.

      • Robbie

        “Kids today….” the lament heard from every generation since pre-historic times!

  • Katrael

    Good article Bob

  • PatCindyCunningham

    It really isn’t the peoples fault, at least 100%. The Schools in America should require American History and they don’t. Of course Liberals have tainted American History to a place it is unrecognisable form when I studied it. Also, the Nation seems to be hooked on Reality TV. Every cable station you have is loaded with them.

    Even the main Stations are using them. I wonder if this a Communist plot? Ha! For those who don’t know your History in the 50’s and 60’s everything was a Communist plot. Trouble is, it was. Now we are reaping the reward. Communism is a live and well and living in the USA.

    The Democratic party is now the Progressive or Liberal party but in reality (another reality!) it is the American Communist party. if you check on some of the supporters, they admit it. Every step the American Communists wanted as there goals, they have achieved.

    Of course the American Public, has no clue. A lot of registered Democrats don’t even realise they are now part of the Communist Party, they vote locally, and have no idea that Communism is the main goal of it’s leaders. Considering the fact Communism was the result of way over 100,000,000 People dying and that was in piece time.

    It is time that the ones who know tell those who don’t. it will be a big task but if not done, we loose everything our Founding Fathers fought and died for. An education is a terrible thing to waste and we simply do not know anything, anymore.

    • Robbie

      It’s clear from your comments that you don’t know what Communism actually is.

      • PatCindyCunningham

        Well then why don’t you enlighten me Troll? Either that, change your name and continue on being foolish!

        • Robbie

          You claim that Communism is alive and well and living in the United States but give no evidence to support that contention. Of course the thought of America being communist is totally groundless. You clearly don’t know what Communism is but if you have some evidence to explain your notion please put it forward in your next posting.

          • PatCindyCunningham

            Arguing with a Liberal is a total waste of time. You will just bring something in that has nothing to do with the question. Everybody knows the Democratic Party is rife with Communism. It is a known fact even they admit. You running around acting foolish, doesn’t help your cause.

          • Robbie

            I have never heard any prominent Democrat say that their party is communistic. Please supply a name or a quotation or any kind of evidence that “even they admit” that they are communists. I’m willing to bet you can not supply this information. You are simply running at the mouth.

          • Douglas W. Rodrigues

            So how do you explain the “Progressive” Caucus? The term Progressive was used by the American Communist Party in the 50’s, and in the 20’s the Communists refered to themselves as “Progressives.” They didn’t call themselves Communists, but that’s what they were. They were all about Big Government running everything: businesses; health, your own personal affairs…about what Barack Obama’s ideas are.

          • Robbie

            I only hear the term Progressive used on this site and I never use it or think about it other than the fact that the word progress is kind of positive and forward looking. Mind you here in Canada we had our most conservative party calling itself the Progressive Conservatives which I guess to the likes of you would be totally confusing and illogical. In any case I rather doubt too many people know or care that some communists called themselves progressive back in the 1920’s!!! Anyway it’s just a word. Look to actions and current policies to define things for you – not old defunct words with multiple meanings. And, by the way, President Obama and the Democratic Party are certainly not communists!

          • ctroop

            Robbie, twice she asked you to enlighten her, and all you can do is pull your little string so the same basic comment comes out: “…you don’t know what communism is…” So, why don’t you tell her what communism is Mr. political science professor? I’m pretty sure we all understand that you think she doesn’t know. Now justify your hot air with some substance … tell her what communism is. If you know.

          • Robbie

            There would be at least two way of approaching this. Firstly the standard definition of communism is that all the means of production in a state (i.e. the entire economy) is owned or controlled or run by the government for the benefit of the people all of whom are totally equal and that the system is directed according to Marx’s famous dictate: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” Is this how the United States operates? Hardly. In fact not at all.

            A second approach might be to compare the U.S. with well known communist states such as the old Soviet Union or The Peoples Republic of China of a decade ago or so which had the state running just about all aspects of the economy and in addition to that were more or less police states with virtually no human rights. Is the United States like any of that? Certainly not.

            Personally I have never heard or read anything to support the contention that the Democratic Party is actually the Communist Party. But if the original poster of that nonsensical suggestion has ANY shed of evidence I’d certainly be glad to hear about it. Thank you.

          • ctroop

            Thanks. That was all I asked for, and you are quite correct. I am a constitutional conservative NOT a laissez-faire capitalist type and I think calling a democrat a communist makes about as much sense as a liberal calling a conservative a Nazi. Both insults reveal a very limited intelligence. Now it’s Pat Cindy Etc.’s turn to provide you the evidence you asked for.

  • chrisnj

    A sadly all-to-accurate analysis. The legacy of a land of the free and home of the brave paid for with the blood of patriots, has been both squandered by the short-sighted and deliberately undermined by the hostile, in what seems to be almost a societal death-wish.

    Ronald Regan was all too prescient when he said, “.. freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn’t pass it on to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children … what it was once like in the United States where men were free…”

    One of the greats – Washington, Jefferson, Coolidge, and Reagan. Not too many others worth mentioning, and more than a few others deserving contempt for having failed to live up to the public trust bestowed upon them.

  • Joe Chernicoff

    Cheee…so what else is new? This condition grew in strength beginning at the end of the 1950s, and has grown worse as too many adults are no longer the grown-ups we need for a strong society.

  • KennyLLC

    The problem in disproportionate numbers of blacks and Hispanics lies not in their disagreement toward the 1st Amendment, rather in their reading comprehension skills.
    However, with the Hispanics, it could be more of a transliterary issue.
    The public education requirement for them to speak only mere broken English only contributes to that factor.
    It’s just so cute the way they talk, and all, ya know ?

    Even Obama called the constitution “A document of negative rights.”

    He has no excuse, as the aforementioned populace though, because he is an educated self-identifying African American, and a constitutional lawyer.
    What a joke !

    And YES, the Amendments are part of the U.S. Constitution (before I hear any minority objections, just to clarify)

    But then, of course there is the alternate explanation for minority groups thinking that the 1st Amendment goes too far with it’s rights, that being(excepting religion)…:

    1)The right to free speech is too much, because they don’t want anyone squealing on them when they commit their highly disproportionate crimes compared to that of the majority.
    2) The right to freedom of the press, because they don’t want their crimes printed in the paper, nor their mugshots out their in public.
    3)The right assemble,unless it is the NAACP or the Brown Beret’s, any other form is called “racist terrorism”.
    4)The right to request redress from the government. In other words…”Who da M’Fer” dat called da cops ?”


Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.