Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Democrats And The Politics Of Envy

April 19, 2010 by  

Democrats And The Politics Of Envy

(Part one of a two-part series)

Democrats have long practiced the politics of envy. They preach that their policies help the working man (or woman) whereas the Republicans are the party of the rich.

They like to try and pit the poor against the rich. They promote the notion that if someone earns more than whatever Democrats consider a “living wage” (a despicable term) then that person is somehow evil. And many Americans have fallen for it.

Well, truth be told, both parties have done much more to benefit the rich than the poor. Some of the reasons for that are outlined here.

But how Democrats have managed to maintain the myth that their policies are beneficial to Average Working-class Joe (or Jane) is one of the great mysteries of all time—ranking up there with quasars and how Joe Besser ever became one of the Three Stooges. For Democrat big-government policies have been devastating to the “working” man.

Consider the actions of the 28th President of the United States, Woodrow Wilson. With the help of a Democrat-controlled Congress, Wilson established the Federal Reserve in 1913 and instituted an income tax which necessitated the establishment of the Bureau of Internal Revenue—the precursor to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

These agencies began the stealth system of “legal” theft from the American people and put us on a fiat paper money dollar system. This means that all who earn dollars and save dollars have depreciating currency with depreciating assets.

This system hurts the poor more than it does the rich. How? As the Federal Reserve prints more and more money, the currency depreciates. Depreciating currency (inflation of prices) slowly reduces the value of their savings and their standard of living. The poor—and the middle class—who often find themselves living hand-to-mouth see a rise in the prices of the things they buy. Since a greater portion of their wealth is spent on living expenses, inflation affects the poor and middle class far more than the rich.

The purpose of fiat paper money is a tax on the population which doesn’t have to be collected or enforced. The state simply has to inflate the currency by printing more paper money. The people are slow to realize the sinister purpose of inflating the currency.

Inflation or depreciation of the currency is a monetary plague that attacks the spenders and the savers. Your wealth is taken without a gun to your head.

Writing in his book, End the Fed, Ron Paul quotes from data from the Federal Reserve of St. Louis that shows how money has depreciated:

“One only needs to reflect on the dramatic decline in the value of the dollar that has taken place since the Fed was established in 1913. The goods and services you could buy for $1.00 in 1913 now cost nearly $21.00. Another way to look at this is from the perspective of the purchasing power of the dollar itself. It has fallen to less than $0.05 of its 1913 value. We might say that the government and its banking cartel have together stolen $0.95 of every dollar as they have pursued a relentlessly inflationary policy.”

That’s the tax that doesn’t have to be collected. The one that is collected is just as insidious.

According to U.S. Census data, the average annual income in 1915 was $687. That year—as in 1913 when the income tax was enacted—there were just seven income tax brackets. The marginal tax rate was 1 percent for people making up to $20,000. The highest rate was 7 percent on income above $500,000.

In 2008, according to Leslie Carbone in her book, Slaying Leviathan, The Moral Case for Tax Reform, a married couple filing jointly paid 10 percent on the first $16,050 of their taxable income, 15 percent on the remainder up to $65,100, 25 percent on the remainder up to $131,450, 28 percent on the remainder up to $200,300, 33 percent on the remainder up to $357,700, and 35 percent on the rest.

That means that if you work and you are one of the 53 percent of Americans who actually pay income taxes, you spend somewhere between one to three hours each day working to pay your tax burden.

The Great Depression And The New Deal
The Roaring ‘20s were arguably the most prosperous decade in American history, writes Robert P. Murphy, Ph.D., in his book, The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to The Great Depression and The New Deal. It wasn’t just that people grew richer. Their lives changed with the growth in the automobile and the spread of electricity and invention of gadgets and appliances that ran off it.

Meanwhile, the Fed was flooding the credit markets with cheap money which led to a speculative bubble that burst in 1929, according to Murphy. On Oct. 28, 1929, the stock market lost almost 13 percent of its value. The next day saw a drop of almost 12 percent. The Great Depression was on.

Unemployment soared, surpassing 28 percent in March 1933. Annual production dropped 27 percent. Republican President Herbert Hoover’s policies didn’t help. Murphy writes:

“The shocking unemployment rates of the Hoover years were a direct, if unintended consequence of his high-wage policy. Hoover urged businesses to maintain wage rates, even though profits were plummeting and prices in general were dropping. With firms desperately trying to cut costs to stay afloat during the Depression, Hoover insisted that the relative price of labor increase. It is no wonder then that this period witnessed the sharpest pullback in demand for workers in American history. FDR continued these policies.” [Emphasis in original text]

Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt, like Hoover before him, thought the Depression was caused by underconsumption, according to Murphy. So he sought to raise wage rates (rather than put a floor under them) and he pushed industrial and labor policies through Congress that limited competition and raised labor bargaining power.

Murphy writes:

“One of these policies was the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) (1933-35). This act created the National Recovery Administration (NRA), which provided a vehicle for the major players in each industry to create a so-called ‘Code of Fair Competition.’ In reality, these codes were anti-competitive rules that forbade industries from lowering prices. In short, the NRA worked by fostering giant cartels, which made products artificially expensive and punished small businesses trying to compete against big businesses. As a condition for being allowed to form such a cartel, Roosevelt insisted that each participating ‘industry [raise] wages and [accept] collective bargaining with an independent union.’ By 1934, over 500 industries had adopted such codes, covering almost 80 percent of private, nonfarm employment. With these ‘voluntary’ codes in place, big producers could raise prices without fear of losing market share, because the federal government itself would punish any ‘unpatriotic’ upstarts who dared try to undersell large firms.” [Emphasis in original text]

With small businesses unable to set their own prices lower, not only were they unable to compete with larger business, but poor and middle-class citizens were unable to shop around for a good price or purchase as much as they needed.

In 1935 the Supreme Court threw out the NIRA as unconstitutional so Roosevelt used the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) to achieve his goals, according to Murphy. The NLRA granted unions incredible bargaining power by forcing businesses to accept collective bargaining. As a result, union membership more than doubled and the number of “strike days” doubled in one year—from 14 million in 1936 to 28 million in 1937. This surge in union strength—and the high wages it brought—was an important factor in the persistently high unemployment rates of the 1930s. In other words, FDR’s pro-union policies helped prevent people from finding jobs.

Other “highlights” of FDR’s policies that hurt the poor and middle class*:

  • The four-day banking holiday closed all banks—even those that were sound—denying depositors access to their own money. It was mostly small regional banks that failed and they did so mostly because of government intervention in the banking system. The “solution” did not correct the fundamental problems with the banks, but instead took away bank clients’ incentives to monitor bank solvency by saddling taxpayers with losses.
  • The executive order requiring American citizens to surrender all gold certificates and gold, except for rare gold coins, in exchange for Federal Reserve Notes was outright theft. The government compounded the problem when it tied the dollar back to gold—changing the exchange rate from $20.67 per ounce to $35 per ounce (a 40 percent depreciation).
  • Under government coercion, sellers destroyed food in order to raise prices (as depicted in scenes from John Steinbeck’s Grapes of Wrath). While hundreds of thousands of poor and unemployed people went hungry, farmers were plowing their crops under, or leaving them to rot in the field, and slaughtering livestock to comply with the Agriculture Adjustment Act. “[While Agriculture Secretary Henry A.] Wallace was paying out hundreds of millions to kill hogs, burn oats, plow under cotton, the Department of Agriculture issued a bulletin telling the nation that the great problems of our time was our failure to produce enough food.”
  • The Works Process Administration (WPA) hampered the economic recovery. By giving the unemployed an option that paid well enough, the WPA siphoned workers away from truly productive tasks that would have restored the economy to a long-run sustainable condition. In other words, the government paid them not to find a job.

There are many New Deal programs that still exist to this day, though few of them really help the “working man.” One of the worst is Social Security. In Slaying Leviathan, Carbone writes:

“Former Social Security Commissioner Stanford Ross criticized the founders of Social Security for generating public support by advancing the fictitious belief that a worker ‘pays for’ benefits with ‘contributions’ rather than taxes, and has an ‘earned right’ to particular benefits. Ross advised Americans to reject the ‘myth’ that Social Security is a pension plan and accept it as a tax on workers to provide for the ‘vulnerable in our society’.

“Senator Patrick Moynihan went further, calling Social Security taxes ‘outright thievery’ from young working people.”

All in all, Democrat policies during the first half of the 20th Century did much more to hurt the working poor or middle class than to help. This is not to absolve Republicans of responsibility. They were complicit in that they didn’t do enough to try and stop the practices before they were implemented, nor have they done much to try and repeal them. Republicans like big government as much as the Democrats.

The fallacy is that either party, the Democrats in particular, have been able to position themselves as the party of the “working” man.

* From The Politically Incorrect Guide™ to The Great Depression and the New Deal, by Robert P. Murphy, Ph.D.

(Editor’s Note: This is the first of a two-part series on Democrat big government policies and how they hurt the people they are supposed to help. Next week will focus on Lyndon Baines Johnson’s Great Society and the policies of Barack Hussein Obama, including Obamacare and the coming value-added tax.)

Bob Livingston

is an ultra-conservative American who has been writing a newsletter 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 “Democrats And The Politics Of Envy”

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 newstips@personalliberty.com

  • JeffH

    The Democratic Party has become the Lawyers’ Party. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are lawyers. Bill Clinton and Michelle Obama are lawyers. John Edwards, the other former Democrat candidate for president, is a lawyer and so is his wife Elizabeth. Every Democrat nominee since 1984 went to law school (although Gore did not graduate.) Every Democrat vice presidential nominee since 1976, except for Lloyd Bentsen, went to law school. Look at the Democrat Party in Congress: the Majority Leader in each house is a lawyer.
    Who was the last Republican president who was a lawyer? Gerald Ford, who left office thirty-one years ago.
    The “Lawyers’ Party” sees these sorts of people, who provide goods and services that people want, as the enemies of America. And so we have seen the procession of official enemies in the eyes of the Lawyers’ Party grow. Against whom do Hillary and Obama rail? Pharmaceutical companies, oil companies, hospitals, manufacturers, fast food restaurant chains, large retail businesses, bankers and anyone producing anything of value in our nation.
    Perhaps Americans will understand that change cannot be brought to our nation by those lawyers who already largely dictate American society and business. Perhaps Americans will see that hope does not come from the mouths of lawyers but from personal dreams nourished by hard work. Perhaps Americans will embrace the truth that more lawyers with more power will only make our problems worse.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/03/the_lawyers_party.html

    • TIME

      Jeff,
      Not all that strange when you look at the WWII War Crimes logs, 90% of the SS Gestapo were Lawyers prior to being good little Nazi SS Gestapo guys.

      You just gotta love them, – well not!

      • JeffH

        Ironic isn’t it!

        • denniso

          On the one hand Dems are accused of using the ‘politics of envy’ and on the other they are accused of being too close w/ Hollywood stars…Which is it? If Dems actually envied the richest of Americans and used envy to divide the country,why would they pal around w/ the stars?
          Answer…they don’t envy the rich or play the ‘politics of envy’. They
          don’t begrudge people their wealth,they just want everyone to be able
          to live a decent live and not have to die w/o things like healthcare or good nutrituion for kids.

          • Charles

            What are you talking about. The war on ppoverty has seen a transfer of wealth of over 1 trillion dollars. Has it stopped poverty. Not one bit. I guess my 60% of my earnings that go to the government aren’t enough. And you wonder why people don’t have enough money to buy things wich causes loss of jobs. Can you explain to me what country that has taxed and spent ever had a great economy. The answer is none. All have failed. I am sick of government, taxes, regulation, and wateful spending. But it is people like you that continues to exasparate the problem. Sad isn’t that the governfment can steal, print money but i can’t. Wars are started because there are people like you who think you can defy history but are proven wrong over and over. Sad!

          • Charles

            Hey deniso! Answer these questions for me. 1)How are the dems helping your working poor with all the taxes on gasoline. The so called working poor do drive cars. So consquently the redicuolus taxes most certainly hurt them. 2)The dems won’t allow for energy production in many areas of the US and refineries are not being allowed to be built to keep up with demand. This causes prices to go up. So again how is this helping the working poor. 3)Many inner cities have high sales taxes, high property taxes and all kinds of so called fees that are really taxes. Many of the working poor pay these kinds of taxes like you said. So how does that help them get out of their situation. How about all those taxes on our phone bill, our cell phone bill, energy bill, cable bill. This is not hurting the rich but is hurting millions and millions of Americans each day. That means less money in our pockets to save for our kids education, buy a new car, go to the movies, etc. I have already cut back on many of these things as have many Americans. The result is loss of jobs. But you dems don’t want an economy that expands, because it is unfair. You say you want everybody to live a good life, but you want to control every facet of how when and wear. You even want to decide wether or not if it is fair. Do you understand how we are all different. Some people love making but loads of money. Some people want to make enough to live a good life. Some people love to shop, others want to go vacation, some like me love to compete in bicycling events. Why do you see taxes and government intrusion as good. Dude, it has never worked and it will not work here.

          • shasta

            have your hand out denniso do ya? so again, us middle class that bust our arse for you lazy dems end up paying for your beer, cigs and drugs at the end of the day! YOU want those things you talk about, GO TO WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • laura

            Dear Shasta,
            You sound like-how I felt yesterday. LOL

            GOD BLESS

          • eyeswideopen

            Charles, if you are paying 60% of you earnings to the government, you are the only one who is. Get a tax lawyer and practice being rich…lol

          • Bob

            You need to get out of the fog your in, if you think Obamacare is going to give you better health care and help your children, you deserve him. Lets see how you feel in four years.

          • momof4

            denniso,
            Because just like Hollywood, they are immoral pukes!!!!

          • denniso

            Charles…taxes on gasoline are a very small part of the cost of a gallon of gas, and you ask how those taxes help the poor? The taxes go to building roads and bridges and allow for commerce and jobs that even the poor engage in. Cut those taxes or don’t let them keep up w/ inflation and see what happens to our market system and the jobs that keep all of us going.

          • http://donthaveone Beberoni

            They pal around with the Hollywood stars, because they both share common ground, in being that they are both so out of touch with reality and the common man, that they bond together. They both think of themselves as better than everyone, so they bond together. They both have no morals, so they bond together. They both think screwing everyone and anyone is a good thing, so they bond together. Any more questions?

          • ToolGirLisa

            Healthcare is a privelege, not a right. If you can’t feed ‘em don’t breed ‘em. Ever watch the morons on Maury> Maybe you do come to think of it. Get a job.

        • Normal Guy

          JeffH – Time

          Jeffy – so the logic is lawyers bad – right.

          Here is a list of Lawyers who signed our Constitution:

          Alexander Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, James Wilson, Charles Pinckney, John Rutledge, Roger Sherman, William Samuel Johnson, George Read, Richard Bassett, Rufus King, Jonathan Dayton, William Livingston, William Paterson, Jared Ingersoll, Gunning Bedford, David Brearly, John Dickinson, John Blair

          So the arguement you are making is what? That lawyers involved in politics has destroyed the nation? Is that it, so all these guys, our founding fathers, these evil lawyers are the problem? Really?

          • JeffH

            Today, we are drowning in laws, we are contorted by judicial decisions, we are driven to distraction by omnipresent lawyers in all parts of our once private lives. America has a place for laws and lawyers, but that place is modest and reasonable, not vast and unchecked. When the most important decision for our next president is whom he will appoint to the Supreme Court, the role of lawyers and the law in America is too big. When lawyers use criminal prosecution as a continuation of politics by other means, as happened in the lynching of Scooter Libby and Tom Delay, then the power of lawyers in America is too great. When House Democrats sue America in order to hamstring our efforts to learn what our enemies are planning to do to use, then the role of litigation in America has become crushing.

          • Normal Guy

            Jeffy

            What?

            Got any data to back up any of the stuff you claim in both responses to me – lots of opinions, zero facts, do you think I can find thousands of legal cases at every stage of this nations history, do you think that maybe law is a great way to create disciplined thinking and thats why lots of intelligent people take law?

            You know that the supreme court justices are the interpreters and the guardians of the constitution right?

            The Marshall Court 1801-1935 declared the Court to be the supreme arbiter of the Constitution (see Marbury v. Madison) and made several important rulings which gave shape and substance to the constitutional balance of power between the federal government and the states. In Martin v. Hunter’s Lessee, the Court ruled that it had the power to correct interpretations of the federal Constitution made by state supreme courts Both Marbury and Martin confirmed that the Court was entrusted with maintaining the consistent and orderly development of federal law. This is paraphrased from Wikipedia, but is accurate.

            What is it with all the extreme absolutism on the site. All layers are evil, lawyers are the reason th

          • Bob

            The problem isn’t with lawyers, the problem is we have taken God out of our goverment. We need Godly people in goverment like the people who signed the Constitution.

          • Normal Guy

            Bob

            Do some research on your beliefs; the founding fathers were not in favour of religious influence on our government. Jefferson’s response to the Danbury Baptists defined the separation of church and state.

            “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man & his god, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof, thus building a wall of separation between church and state.”

            Other founding fathers were not all pro religion, especially read Jefferson on this but here are a few appropriate quotes.

            “Lighthouses are more useful than churches” – Benjamin Franklin
            “This would be the best of all possible worlds if there were no religion in it” – John Adams
            “Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man” – Thomas Jefferson

          • Jana

            Normal Guy,
            No one said anything about putting religion back in our government, he said to put God back in. The Founding Fathers did believe in God.

          • Jana

            Normal Guy,
            Also John Adams signed the Proclamation of Fasting and Prayer in 1798 of which the following is just a part of:

            “This is the text of President John Adams’ March 23, 1798 national Fasting and Prayer proclamation; as printed in the The Phenix/Windham Herald, April 12, 1798.
            I HAVE therefore thought it fit to recommend, that Wednesday, the 9th day of May next be observed throughout the United States, as a day of Solemn Humiliation, Fasting and Prayer; That the citizens of these states, abstaining on that day from their customary worldly occupations, offer their devout addresses to the Father of Mercies, agreeably to those forms or methods which they have severally adopted as the most suitable and becoming: That all religious congregations do, with the deepest humility, acknowledge before GOD the manifold sins and transgressions with which we are justly chargeable as individuals and as a nation; beseeching him, at the same time, of his infinite Grace, through the Redeemer of the world, freely to remit all our offences, and to incline us, by his holy spirit, to that sincere repentance and reformation which may afford us reason to hope for his inestimable favor and heavenly benediction; That it be made the subject of particular and earnest supplication, that our country may be protected from all the dangers which threaten it; that our civil and religious privileges may be preserved inviolate, and perpetuated to the latest generations; that our public councils and magistrates may be especially enlightened and directed at this critical period; that the American people may be united in those bonds of amity and mutual confidence, and inspired with that vigor and fortitude by which they have in times past been so highly distinguished, and by which they have obtained such invaluable advantages: That the health of the inhabitants of our land may be preserved, and their agriculture, commerce, fisheries, arts and manufactures be blessed and prospered: That the principles of genuine piety and sound morality may influence the minds and govern the lives of every description of our citizens; and that the blessings of peace, freedom, and pure religion, may be speedily extended to all the nations of the earth.
            And finally I recommend, that on the said day; the duties of humiliation and prayer be accompanied by fervent Thanksgiving to the bestower of every good gift, not only for having hitherto protected and preserved the people of these United States in the independent enjoyment of their religious and civil freedom, but also for having prospered them in a wonderful progress of population, and for conferring on them many and great favours conducive to the happiness and prosperity of a nation.
            Given under my hand and seal of the United States of America, at Philadelphia, this twenty-third day of March, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and ninety-eight, and of the Independence of the said States the twenty-second.
            JOHN ADAMS”

          • Bob Wire

            After reading much of these comments, I feel as if I’m at a tractor pull event and sharing moments with people with green teeth.

            Most all politician are attorneys! for christ sakes. Government has “everything” to do with Laws.

            Where did you people come from? and how did you find your way to town?

            That the “rich” only has their “one vote” just like everyone else, they are placed in a position to “entice” people to vote a wealthy man vote, to vote what in “his” best interest.

            This an fine and good if it’s in everyone’s best interest, and often it is.

            But just as often it is not! ~ There is long term gains and short term gains and losses to consider.

            Example; The Health Insurance Providers should be pleased with “more” customers. But they are not! They enjoy anti-trust immunity and was working on short term gains. To heck with tomorrow, tomorrow will take care of itself. ~ But in truth, it wasn’t taking care of “today” much less tomorrow.

            But that all depends on “WHO” was being taken care of doesn’t it?

            So the wealthy employee people to represent them and their self interest. They buy politician, Media of all kinds, to get the word out to all us little people and help us make up our minds. The power of money is very, very effective. It’s propaganda, grains of truth, hidden in buckets of mature.

            If you feel you need to defend the wealthy and vote their vote, that’s your business. For the last 30 years that’s what we have enjoyed. Remember tax cuts to the wealthy generate wealth and more “JOBS”!

            I personally will vote “my” vote and let the wealthy struggle along for himself. From the most recent earnings reports out, I don’t see that he needs anymore help then what he’s already bought and paid for.

            You folks need to be careful about what you swallow.

            Where is William Buckley when you really need him? ~ I miss him.

          • Normal Guy

            Jana

            This practice was very close to violating the constitution.

            Issues of government involvement with religion are often disputed because of the Establishment clause in the First Amendment. While the free-exercise clause allows for this type of event to be organized by non-governmental bodies, the U.S. Congress may not pass any laws enforcing religious observances.[

            Thomas Jefferson comment on Adams proposal. On January 23, 1808 he wrote:
            “Fasting and prayer are religious exercises; the enjoining them an act of discipline. Every religious society has a right to determine for itself the time for these exercises, and the objects proper for them, according to their own particular tenets; and right can never be safer than in their hands, where the Constitution has deposited it. …civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.”

            In 1822, James Madison wrote:

            “There has been another deviation from the strict principle in the Executive Proclamations of fasts & festivals, so far, at least, as they have spoken the language of injunction, or have lost sight of the equality of all religious sects in the eye of the Constitution. Whilst I was honored with the Executive Trust I found it necessary on more than one occasion to follow the example of predecessors. But I was always careful to make the Proclamations absolutely indiscriminate, and merely recommendatory; or rather mere designations of a day, on which all who thought proper might unite in consecrating it to religious purposes, according to their own faith & forms. In this sense, I presume you reserve to the Govt. a right to appoint particular days for religious worship throughout the State, without any penal sanction enforcing the worship.”

          • denniso

            Janna and many others don’t understand that a belief in God IS religion. All religions have a belief in some god or ‘deity’…that is what religion is. Many people are confused in thinking that religion is only Catholic,Protestant,Hindu or Muslim,etc, and it’s only specific types that the constitution and the founders wanted to keep out of gov’t. No, religion is a belief in a god or other deity that can’t be seen or touched or identified absolutely or has to be taken on ‘faith’,and is often only accessible through appointed leaders,ministers,priests,shamans…

            Religion is prohibited from the gov’t by the constitution..simple…

          • Jana

            Normal Guy,

            I am answering this because of your statement and I quote,” Do some research on your beliefs; the founding fathers were not in favour of religious influence on our government.— When in actuality they were not in favor of any organized RELIGION to be imposed on the public.

            Of course Congress may not pass any laws enforcing religious observances. And, Thomas Jefferson was correct in this. He NEVER stated he was against any religion, he stated, “ civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.”

            You are taking this to think that he was AGAINST religion even in the Government.

            While Jefferson was Governor of Virginia, the Continental Congress sent a circular to the state executives recommending a day of public thanksgiving.[1] Jefferson sent the circular to the Virginia House of Delegates which wrote out the actual proclamation and sent it for his signature.[2] Jefferson signed this proclamation for a day of “Thanksgiving and Prayer” to be held on December 9, 1779. It must be remembered that the governor of Virginia at this time was a relatively weak office. The General Assembly formulated policy, not the governor. This proclamation did not establish a permanent annual observance.
            When Jefferson was President, he expressed some hesitancy to endorse proclamations of this sort. Jefferson wrote in a letter to Reverend Samuel Miller on January 23, 1808, in response to Miller’s proposal that he “recommend” a national day of fasting and prayer: “I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline, or exercises…Certainly no power to prescribe any religious exercise, or to assume authority in religious discipline, has been delegated to the general government. …But it is only proposed that I should recommend, not prescribe a day of fasting and prayer. That is, that I should indirectly assume to the United States an authority over religious exercises, which the Constitution has directly precluded them from…civil powers alone have been given to the President of the United States and no authority to direct the religious exercises of his constituents.”

            Normal, you must be careful not to take his hesitancy to mean rejection.

          • http://donthaveone Beberoni

            Lawyers are like the unions. They were both good ideas at the onset, but they both went the wayside of crookedness, greed and debauchery. Now they both suck.

          • ToolGirLisa

            Yep. “Modern Day Lawyers!” Ya think???

          • iowaheretic

            To Jana: Thomas Jefferon also said “Question with boldness even the existence of a god, because if there is one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear and faith.” And he also said “Our civil rights have no dependence on our religious opinions any more than our opinions on physics or geometry.” And he also said “The christian god is a being of cruel,vindictive,capricious and unjust character.” And his BEST QUOTE by far is “To talk of immaterial existences is to talk of nothings. To say that the human soul,angels,god,are immaterial,is to say they are nothings, or that there is no angels, no god, no soul. I cannot reason otherwise…without plunging into the fathomless abyss of dreams and phantams. I am satisfied, and sufficiently occupied with the things which are, without tormenting or troubling myself about those which may indeed be, but of which I have no evidence.”

      • Normal Guy

        Time

        Lawyers who signed our Declaration of Independence:

        Caesar Rodney, Edward Rutledge, Francis Hopkinson, George Read, George Ross, George Walton, George Wythe, James Smith, James Wilson, John Adams, John Penn, Richard Henry Lee, Richard Stockton, Roger Sherman, Samuel Chase, Samuel Huntington, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Thomas McKean, Thomas Stone, William Hooper, William Paca

        • JeffH

          We cannot expect the Lawyers’ Party to provide real change, real reform or real hope in America. Most Americans know that a republic in which every major government action must be blessed by nine unelected judges is not what Washington intended in 1789. Most Americans grasp that we cannot fight a war when ACLU lawsuits snap at the heels of our defenders. Most Americans intuit that more lawyers and judges will not restore declining moral values or spark the spirit of enterprise in our economy

        • ted crawford

          Have you ever heard of a man named John Jay, Normal? He was our first Supreme Court Justice. He clearly stated his beliefs when he said ” The Law was ment to serve man, man was not ment to serve the Law”
          It’s very obvious that the Lawyers of that day were far, far different than the Lawyers governing us today!

          • Normal Guy

            Ted

            So the law is enforced inappropriately today compared to how law was enforced in the past. Care to show any evidence on how our rule of law has been eroded? How is the statement ” The Law was ment to serve man, man was not ment to serve the Law” not appropriate today.

            The position that all the lawyers today are corrupt is just plain ridiculous. I happen to think that most Americans are good people, I don’t think that everyone who is a lawyer is a subclass, or that all politicians are a subclass.

            This one dimensional position like most opinions expressed on this site show a great deal of Naivety, do some work confirming your position because frankly it is childishly ignorant.

          • denniso

            Without thousands of lawyers willing to fight gov’t abuse of our rights over the centuries we would look like Nazi Germany by now or be continually involved in bloody revolution…of course, many rightwingers seem to enjoy the prospect of bloody revolution and could get their wish someday if they restrict what lawyers can do in fighting for our rights every day.

        • Average Joe

          Normal Guy says:
          April 20, 2010 at 10:29 am

          Not a problem,Here you go:

          Historical Outline

          1st: Martial Law is declared by President Lincoln on April 24th, 1863, with General Orders No. 100; under martial law authority, Congress and President Lincoln institute continuous martial law by ordering the states (people) either conscribe troops and or provide money in support of the North or be recognized as enemies of the nation; this martial law Act of Congress is still in effect today. This martial law authority gives the President (with or without Congress) the dictatorial authority to do anything that can be done by government in accord with the Constitution of the United States of America. This conscription act remains in effect to this very day and is the foundation of Presidential Executive Orders authority; it was magnified in 1917 with The Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917). and again in 1933 with the Emergency War Powers Act, which is ratified and enhanced almost every year to this date by Congress. Today these Acts address the people of the United States themselves as their enemy.

          2nd: The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 created a “municipal corporation” to govern the District of Columbia. Considering the fact that the municipal government itself was incorporated in 1808, an “Organic Act” (first Act) using the term “municipal corporation” in 1871 can only mean a private corporation owned by the municipality. Hereinafter we will call that private corporation, “Corp. U.S.” By consistent usage, Corp. U.S. trademarked the name, “United States Government” referring to themselves. The District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 places Congress in control (like a corporate board) and gives the purpose of the act to form a governing body over the municipality; this allowed Congress to direct the business needs of the government under the existent martial law and provided them with corporate abilities they would not otherwise have. This was done under the constitutional authority for Congress to pass any law within the ten mile square of the District of Columbia. Follow this link to see the effect of the District of Columbia Act of 1871.

          3rd: In said Act, Corp. U.S. adopted their own constitution (United States Constitution), which was identical to the national Constitution (Constitution of the United States of America) except that it was missing the national constitution’s 13th Amendment and the national constitution’s 14th, 15th and 16th amendments are respectively numbered 13th, 14th and 15th amendments in the Corp. U.S. Constitution. At this point take special notice and remember this Corp. U.S. method of adopting their own Constitution, they will add to it in the same manner in 1913.

          4th: Corp. U.S. began to generate debts via bonds etc., which came due in 1912, but they could not pay their debts so the 7 families that bought up the bonds demanded payment and Corp. U.S. could not pay. Said families settled the debt for the payments of all of Corp. U.S.’ assets and for all of the assets of the Treasury of the United States of America.

          5th: As 1913 began, Corp. U.S. had no funds to carry out the necessary business needs of the government so they went to said families and asked if they could borrow some money. The families said no (Corp. U.S. had already demonstrated that they would not repay their debts in full). The families had foreseen this situation and had the year before finalized the creation of a private corporation of the name “Federal Reserve Bank”. Corp. U.S. formed a relationship with the Federal Reserve Bank whereby they could transact their business via note rather than with money. Notice that this relationship was one made between two private corporations and did not involve government; that is where most people error in understanding the Federal Reserve Bank system—again it has no government relation at all. The private contracts that set the whole system up even recognize that if anything therein proposed is found illegal or impossible to perform it is excluded from the agreements and the remaining elements remain in full force and effect.

          6th: Almost simultaneously with the last fact (also in 1913), Corp. U.S. adopts (as if ratified) their own 16th amendment. Tax protesters challenge the IRS tax collection system based on this fact, however when we remember that Corp. U.S. originally created their constitution by simply drafting it and adopting it; there is no difference between that adoption and this—such is the nature of corporate enactments—when the corporate board (Congress) tells the secretary to enter the amendment as ratified (even thought the States had not ratified it) the Se3cretary was instructed that the Representatives word alone was sufficient for ratification. You must also note, this amendment has nothing to do with our nation, with our people or with our national Constitution, which already had its own 16th amendment. The Supreme Court (in BRUSHABER v. UNION PACIFIC R. CO., 240 U.S. 1 (1916)) ruled the 16th amendment did nothing that was not already done other than to make plain and clear the right of the United States (Corp. U.S.) to tax corporations and government employees. We agree, considering that they were created under the authority of Corp. U.S.

          7th: Next (also 1913) Corp. U.S., through Congress, adopts (as if ratified) its 17th amendment. This amendment is not only not ratified, it is not constitutional; the nation’s Constitution forbids Congress from even discussing the matter of where Senators are elected, which is the subject matter of this amendment; therefore they cannot pass such and Act and then of their own volition, order it entered as ratified. According to the United States Supreme Court, for Congress to propose such an amendment they would first have to pass an amendment that gave them the authority to discuss the matter.

          8th: Accordingly, in 1914, the Freshman class and all Senators that successfully ran for reelection in 1913 by popular vote were seated in Corp. U.S. Senate capacity only; their respective seats from their States remained vacant because neither the State Senates nor the State Governors appointed new Senators to replace them as is still required by the national Constitution for placement of a national Senator.

          9th: In 1916, President Wilson is reelected by the Electoral College but their election is required to be confirmed by the constitutionally set Senate; where the new Corp. U.S. only Senators were allowed to participate in the Electoral College vote confirmation the only authority that could possibly have been used for electoral confirmation was corporate only. Therefore, President Wilson was not confirmed into office for his second term as President of the United States of America and was only seated in the Corp. U.S. Presidential capacity. Therefore the original jurisdiction government’s seats were vacated because the people didn’t seat any original jurisdiction government officers. It is important to note here that President Wilson retained his capacity as Commander in Chief of the military. Many people wonder about this fact imagining that such a capacity is bound to the President of the nation; however, When John Adams was President he assigned George Washington to the capacity of Commander in Chief of the military in preparation for an impending war with France. During this period, Mr. Adams became quite concerned because Mr. Washington became quite ill and passed on his acting military authority through his lead General Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Adams was concerned that if war did break out Mr. Hamilton would use that authority to create a military dictatorship of the nation. Mr. Adams averted the war through diplomacy and the title of Commander in Chief was returned to him.
          (See: John Adams, by David McCullough, this book covers Mr. Adams concerns over this matter quite well. Mr. Adams was a fascinating man.)

          10th: In 1917, Corp. U.S. enters W.W. I and passes their Trading with the Enemies Act.

          11th: In 1933, Corp. U.S. is bankrupt, they force a banking holiday to exchange money backed Federal Reserve Notes with “legal tender” Federal Reserve Notes the Trading with the Enemies Act is adjusted to recognize the people of the United States as enemies of Corp. U.S.

          12th: Some time after 1935, you ask Social Security Administration for a relationship with their program. With the express purpose of generating Beneficiary funds to United States General Trust Fund (GTF) the Social Security Administration creates an entity with a name (that sounds like your name but is spelled with all capital letters) and an account number (Social Security number). They give you the Social Security card and let you know that the card does not belong to you but you are to hold it for them until they want it back. If you are willing to accept that responsibility over the card you activate the card by signing it, which gives you the ability to act as the fiduciary for the cards actual owner Corp. U.S. and you can use the card’s name and number to thus transact business relations for the card’s actual owner. You are also to note that though the card verifies its agency (you as the single person with authority to control the entity so created) it is not for use as identification. On review: notice the Social Security Administration was the creator of the entity, they offered you the opportunity to serve its Trustee capacity (by lending it actual consciousness and physical capacity), they gave you something (the card) that does not belong to you to hold in trust and they reserved the actual owner of the thing (Corp. U.S.) as the beneficiary of the entity—by definition, this only describes the creation and existence of a Trust. More importantly: the name they gave this Trust is not your name, the number they gave the Trust is not your number and your lending actual consciousness and physical capacity to this Trust’s Trustee capacity does not limit you or your capacity to separately act in your natural sovereign capacity in any way—what you do, when you do it and how you do it is still totally up to you.

          13th: In 1944, under the Bretton Woods Agreement, Corp. U.S. is quit claimed to the International Monetary Fund, and becomes a foreign controlled private corporation.

          14th: In 1962, considering the states were forced to carry out their business dealings in terms of Federal Reserve Notes (foreign notes), which is forbidden in the national and State constitutions, out of the necessity the states began protecting themselves from the people by forming corporations like Corp. U.S. Accordingly, those newly formed corporate state administrations began adopting Corp. U.S. suggested uniform codes and licensing structures that allowed better and more powerful control over the people, which thing the original jurisdiction governments of this nation had no capacity to do. Our Constitutions secure that the governments do not govern the people rather they govern themselves in accord with the limits of Law. The people govern themselves. Such is the foundational nature of our Constitutional Republic.

          15th: By 1971, every State government in the union of States had formed such private corporations (Corp. State), in accord with the IMF admonition, and the people ceased to seat original jurisdiction government officials in their State government seats.

          Now, having stated these historical facts, we ask you not to believe us, but rather prove these facts for yourself. We then ask you to contact us and share your discovery with us.

          When you find there is no error in this historical outline, then remember these simple facts and let no one dissuade you from the truth.

          The Bottom Line: when you speak about these private foreign corporations remember that is what they are and stop calling them government.

          Further, it is very important that we cease to attempt to fix them. It is far more important that we learn how to reseat our original jurisdiction government and spread the word about the truth. By reseating our State and national governments in their original jurisdiction nature, we gain the capacity to hold these private foreign corporations accountable. They owe us a lot of money, in fact they owe us more money than there is available in the world. In fact it is impossible for them to pay and that gives us the leverage we need to take back our nation and put things right. The process is a simple one. The difficulty is in getting our people to wake up to the truth. That’s why we ask you to prove the truth for yourself and contact us with your discovery.

          That means that you must stop acting and communicating like you are anything other than the sovereign that God created you to be. And, stop referring to Corp. U.S. or the STATE OF ‘X’ as anything other than the private foreign corporations that they are. And, finally, stop listening to the Bigfoot Patriot Mythology that is espoused by those that only give these facts lip service.

          It’s time to wake up and follow the truth, time to repent and become a moral and honorable society instead of lauding our Piety while we stand guilty of:
          a) not knowing the truth;
          b) not living the truth;
          c) believing God will save us even though we have the tools to know the truth the ability to use the tools but we refuse to live by the truth and use the tools we have to save ourselves and thereby become free.

          The biggest problem with those that get all excited about uniting against the tyranny of Corp. U.S. is that they are blind to the truth having no remedy so they bail out of “the system” hell bent for a rebellion even the scripture says cannot be won with conventional weapons of war. Would that we could instead follow the admonition of the King of Kings and unite with truth to legally, lawfully and peacefully reseat our original jurisdiction government thereby taking back the control our nation in accord with law.

          BTW..the “we” described above is us…patiently waiting for your response…good luck on finding any fault in the timeline of events…and please dont just read for 15 mins and tell us you researched…..we want factual evidence (source material). You come here often, you spew your beliefs…now is your chance to pt up or shut up. Any reply that you make should be in regards to the material presented to you…anything else will be ignored (As you are only trying to skirt the issue). have fun.

          • Normal Guy

            Dim Joe

            Well now that I have stopped laughing and gotten off the floor, you really think that this idiotic cut and past from rightwing, lack of intellect sights, are worth anyone’s time. This pile of trash has been floating around for a long time, it really should just be flushed.

            Joe, Joe, Joe you need to learn that having read something does not make it true, before you post ridiculous garbage and challenge people to disprove it verify whether it is true or not. This crap is beyond idiotic, it is very funny that you think it carries any weight at all.

            Oh just for the fun of it here are a number of pieces disproving point one.

            In the United States martial law must be ordered by the President as commander-in-chief and must be limited to the duration of the warfare or emergency. It cannot result in a long-term denial of constitutional rights, such as habeas corpus, the right to a trial, and to free press. Constitutionally suspending Habeas Corpus requires congress to approve.

            When President Abraham Lincoln and the Union army used Martial Law in various states to restrain behaviour by civilians both in the war zones and eventually in areas far removed from battle such as Ohio and Indiana. This virtual independence of military courts from supervision by civilian courts raised troubling questions; after the war, the U.S. Supreme Court in Ex Parte Milligan (1866) severely limited its application by the federal government and precluded it where civil courts functioned.

            Justice David Davis, a Lincoln appointee and a longtime friend of the slain president ruled that the administration’s course had been wrong after all. “Martial law cannot arise from a threatened invasion,” but only from a real one. “Martial rule can never exist where the courts are open, and in the proper and unobstructed exercise of their jurisdiction.” This had clearly been the case in Indiana in 1864, as even the government’s lawyers admitted.

            The key to Martial Law is the suspension of Habeas Corpus, this is where your rights to be brought before justice is revoked, it was restored in 1866 with the Milligan decision.
            Just so you are not confused, after the Civil War the implementation of Martial Law was challenged and the courts ruled that it was unconstitutional, this declaration alone would suspend martial law. This incidentally is why Lincoln would not respond to Justice Taney regarding the Merryman case in 1861, if the court was allowed to rule they could have challenged Martial Law and Lincoln felt that it could result in succession succeeding.

            The courts imposed restrictions on Martial Law after Milligan making Martial law much more restricted. In short we are not living under Martial Law. You are funny – in a pitiful kind of way Joe.

          • Average Joe

            So, in other words…you didn’t do the research…and cannot prove me wrong….your “opinion” has nothing to do with facts…period.In the future…as you tell everyone here….do the research…show me your sources….or continue to talk to people that actually believe your factless bantor…As usual…you spout off with nothing to back up your claims….everything in my post can be verified …unlike your post…..skirting the issue…just as I predicted… you call people names and insult thier intelligence….while having none of your own…nice job….. I guess if that is the what you have to do to feel better about yourself, go right ahead.I have come to the conclusion that you…are a waste of my time…a valuable commodity that can never be replaced…I feel robbed

          • Normal Guy

            Dim Joe

            So I guess that you did not read where I completely disprove point 1 regarding Martial Law. Sorry I guess more than one paragraph is beyond you. I’m sure that your time is to precious to read for more than two minutes. $6.00 an hour?

          • Average Joe

            Normal Guy says:
            April 20, 2010 at 10:30 pm,

            Mr. Knowitall has spoken again….bow down all yea unworthy to wash his feet. I have noticed that you answer everyone here with you usual condesending attitutde. You my friend (Term used loosely…very loosely) are a legend…in your own mind.
            Actually I make considerably more than that as a Registerd Land Surveyor.Should I venture to guess that you are either a lawyer or someone in banking? That would explain your beliefs….you know everything about everything and the rest of the world are complete idiots…..go pound your chest in front of the mirror…maybe you’ll feel better about yourself.Some of us ain’t buying the BS…Narccism is a sickness….seek help….Go ahead…I know as usual…you have to get the last word in….

          • Average Joe

            Normal Guy says:
            April 20, 2010 at 10:30 pm,
            BTW, You know as well as I do that there hasn’t been a constituionally recognized court in this nation ( except in Hawaii) since 1938 (Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64 (1938), was a decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in which the Court held that federal courts did not have the judicial power to create general federal common law when hearing state law claims under diversity jurisdiction. In reaching this holding, the Court overturned almost a century of federal civil procedure case law, and established the foundation of what remains the modern law of diversity jurisdiction as it applies to United States federal courts.
            Of course this was done in reponse to our NEW colorable money….since Article 1 sec. 8 did not appy to fiat currency. We must have colorable law to deal with colorable money. All actions since 1938 have been dealt with under “public policy”…not Law. Please tell us what three types of courts are recognized by the constitution?
            Next, tell me what type of courts exist in the US at this time. Good day sir…..May you someday find the peace you seek.

          • Normal Guy

            Joe

            Where did you find this little gem of misconstrued conclusions?

            The case exists of course but your linkage to “no federally recognized court in the land”??? Fiat currency had nothing to do with this case or this decision. What does your nonsense sentence mean?? “All actions since 1938 have been dealt with under “public policy”…not Law”. Come on Joe this is beyond naive, who told you this?

            I have had enough of your ridiculous statements and questions just go and do you own research. Erie simply redefined how the federal courts deal with the law. The result state laws of the location the court sits in, I understand what this means you clearly don’t – go look it up it has nothing to do with fiat, there are federal courts this just applies to diversity cases (go look this up, hint it means that if the litigants are not from the same state). Just to show you, again how ridiculous what you state is, the Erie case was about an injury, Harry Tompkins was hit by an object projecting from a train, diversity applied and The district court, following the federal law at that time, applied neither New York nor Pennsylvania common law, but instead applied federal common law, the decision was that that was wrong.

            Therefore, the federal court was required to apply the law of whichever state it was sitting in, as though it were a state court of that state. Of course, this was a very difficult decision for the Court because overruling Swift (the previous precedent) meant a huge number of opinions by the lower federal courts were no longer valid law.

            However, the Court did not declare the Rules of Decision Act itself unconstitutional. Instead, it reinterpreted the Act so federal district courts hearing cases in diversity jurisdiction had to apply the entire law, both statutory and judge-made, of the states in which they sit.

            Thus, although the Erie decision itself does not identify specific provisions of the Constitution violated by Swift, the language of the decision implies that Swift had stolen powers reserved to the states, in violation of the Tenth Amendment.

            Now I have a business to run and as much fun as it is to see all these completely unfounded fears based on complete misunderstanding and, sorry Joe, but ignorance, I have to go. See you later.

      • Normal Guy

        Time

        Lawyers who signed our Constitution:

        Alexander Hamilton, Gouverneur Morris, James Wilson, Charles Pinckney, John Rutledge, Roger Sherman, William Samuel Johnson, George Read, Richard Bassett, Rufus King, Jonathan Dayton, William Livingston, William Paterson, Jared Ingersoll, Gunning Bedford, David Brearly, John Dickinson, John Blair

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          Ok, so you know some old history, good for you. You can look things up, Im proud of ya. Lawyers who screwed things up and got it all wrong – Marvin Miller, Johnny Cochran, F.Lee Bailey, and many more. How many murderers did these guys set free? How many millions of dollars must we pay our atheletes, to where I myself cannot afford to go watch a game? Lawyers, the armpits of society. One hundred of them at the bottom of the ocean – Well thats a good start.

          • Normal Guy

            B.

            What is your point? All lawyers today are bad. Is that it, so what should we do all lawyers up against the wall?

            What is it you are saying?

            All the laws of the land are wrong. No one to interpret the constitution, etc. maybe we should leave all the legal stuff up to you, sounds to me like you are the genius that could make it all work. No courts, no contracts, no lawsuits… easy right. You can make it all better, I feel so much better now.

    • Mike In MI

      So-o-o right, JeffH,

      It sort of puts the old saw about, “We are a nation of laws,” in a new – dark – light. I propose that we should demand a law that Congress be able to meet no longer than six months from May to October. The less they are allowwed to be in session the less damage they can do.

      • denniso

        ‘Politics of envy’??? No, the Dems and liberals believe that we shouldn’t have a society(like most 3rd world countries)that has a small percentage of extremely wealthy people at the top and a large
        percentage of working people scraping out a subsistence living at the bottom. A huge income gap w/ millions living in poverty does not result in a healthy society,even for the few at the top. Violence, expence for prisons,court systems and larger police forces all visit themselves upon the entire society as well as the rich.
        So no, it isn’t class envy that drives us to work toward a more fair and just system, it’s pragmatism about what can work for all and concern for those much less fortunate than most of the rest of us.

        • TIME

          I will take this one;

          Dennis, oh dear Dennis, what do you call the middle class, are they the ones scrapping out a living?

          I think not, but are going to be – as thats what your sweet little BarryO wants to do to us in the Middle class, {as in remove us.}

          Think of it as – so there is a “Working Class” thats the nice way of saying “SLAVES” to the State, and the Ruling class, thats your sweet little BarryO’s gang of marxist.

          Thats your two class man you think is so special, per your post day after day about BarryO’s ~ NESS.

          But be that as it may – The facts are that at this point in time the Government is the single largest employer in the United States.

          Yet these employes make an average of $129.900.00 per year, thats more than the persons working in the privet sector with an average of $49.500.00 per year.

          let alone the fact that Government employes have an average benift package of $41.900.00,
          YET – the persons working stiffs in the privet sector have an average benift package of $4,250.00.

          Now the whats and whys;
          The PRIVET sector pays the TAX’S so that the Government can hire employes. Yet the persons who are working in that area are making less than Government employes in both yearly wages and benifit packages. So hows that going work out in the long run? Its not!

          So your bud – BarryO wants to increse Government jobs, the question is who is going to pay for them?

          You rail on and on about the wealthy, yet the “wealthy in the US have less money than the mass combined sum of the Middle class” in the US.

          As in if you were to take every cent that the wealthy have it would not cover the “Governments payroll for a single year.”

          And as for all the special entitlement gang, well I have said this before and I will say it again, {90% of them if you gave them a million dollas} – “they would be broke in less than 12 months”.

          So rather than the Vitriol you post – day in and day out, please learn of what you speak.

          • Harold Olsen

            I’ve never been sure exactly what was middle class. I always thought I fit into that category, but I guess I don’t. I make around $25,000 a year, give or take. I noticed that, here in Seattle anyway, if you make less than $40,000 you qualify for low income housing. So, I guess that means I am low income–in other words, poor. However, during the Clinton years, it was pretty much established that there was no middle class,only wealthy and poor–though he did raise taxes on the middle class and then blamed the Republicans for “forcing” him to do it. If you had a job and paid taxes, then you were wealthy. The poor were those who didn’t have a job or pay taxes. One member of his administration defined it even more. The wealthy was anyone making twenty thousand dollars or more.

          • shasta

            THANK YOU TIME, Well said!

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Time,
            One thing missing from your post. How many of those government employees got laid off last year? I’m not talking city government, I’m talking national government. How many millions from the private sector got laid off last year and took a lower paying job and by doing so, are helping pay the salaries of these government workers?? Why should these people be the only ones immune to being laid off???

          • Claire

            JoeH– I thought this info was interesting– 6 IDOT employees were fired because they had porn on their computers at work. They deserved what they were dealt, especially since I am a taxpayer.

        • John

          But it is politics of envy and a pandering to a progressive populist notion that the system is somehow not fair. I’m sure glad that the people who built this great nation weren’t restricted with such socialistic ideas. Why are the rich rich, and why are the “less fortunate” as you call them such? In America anyone can be what they want to be given our freedoms, but those are freedoms with responsibility. If one is responsible and has the drive, there is no reason they can’t have what they want. Your Utopian view destroys incentive and innovation, why strive if we all are to be equal? We all have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but there is no guarantee of equal results. Thomas Jefferson said, “Everyone has a natural right to choose that vocation in life which he thinks most likely to give him comfortable subsistence. No thanks denniso, I”ll rely on myself to determine my lot in life.

          • denniso

            You’re just repeating the same old simplistic mantra of Repubs and it’s essentially meaningless. The rich? Something like 1/2 of the wealthy in this country are so through inherited money,not hard work.

            You want to rely on yourself? No one, Bill Gates nor anyone else creates their wealth in a vacuum. W/o the structure of the whole society that has been paid for by most Americans, you couldn’t create wealth. Roads,police protection,courts,national defense,the labor pool,education,hospitals,university research and more all create a reasonably civil,educated and safe society that allows for us all to work,save and create some degree of wealth. Almost all of the wealthy
            like Gates and Buffet say exactly that.
            Think about it rather than just condemn the point out of hand.

          • John

            denisso, I doubt that you realize it but you proved my point. The points you make about our society being open to anyone to “create some degree of wealth” certainly doesn’t sound like the socialist model you propose. Wealth in this country was indeed created, not in a vacuum as you implied I said, but by the hard work and responsible actions of those wanting to make a better life for themselves. I have to wonder how the “less fortunate” made it back during America’s early years? They worked and created wealth without government intervention and brought to this land a country that the world envied. As in any society, there are those who progressives label as “less fortunate” who would rather exist off the labor of others, the “doers”, “the evil rich” of our society. It’s not some political mantra I cite and your attempt to paint with broad strokes is very revealing. It rather comes from viewing life from my personal perspective. Through the years I have watched as the government has become more intrusive, demanding more from my labors to give away to those who feel entitled to my modest wealth. I’ve worked hard all my life and am proud of what I have accomplished, and it galls me to see others reap from my labors through yet another entitlement. Instead of being determined to be accountable for my own life, perhaps I should just lay down and become another entitlement leach. There would be parity if everyone were to do that, but America as we know it would be long gone. No incentive, no innovation. Take the easy road and live off the rich mans wealth until his money is gone or he leaves the country. Call everyone “Comrade” and stand in line with them for my government hand out. I believe that has been tried before…

            The Soviet Union has fallen, not through military action but rather economic action. Communist China is becoming more capitalistic by the day. Europe and the Euro is in shambles because of socialistic economic policies. Look at the states within our country who are failing. California, New York, Michigan to name a few. All having been governed for years by Democrats who have overloaded the system with entitlements and excessive taxation to pay for those entitlements, all in the name of “fairness”. Social Security is broke, Medicare is beyond repair, progressive programs…

            Take away the incentive and you break the will to succeed. Poor people cannot hire anyone, and that parasitic segment of our society which you call “the less fortunate” are fast becoming more numerous thanks to the very entitlements you and progressives hold dear. My question to you is are we really helping them or shackling them with the yoke of a repressive government in the long run? No shackles for me denisso……

          • MikeC

            Great post, John!

          • laura

            John,
            Very well said.

            GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • denniso

            John…you don’t sound like a ‘compassionate conservative’. You begrudge the pittance of a handout to the poor and imagine it shackles them to a repressive gov’t.I’ve asked this of ‘conservatives’ before w/ no rational response,but I’ll ask again.
            Do you complain about and brand as a shackle the billions of $$ of your and my tax dollars going to corporate welfare? Rich ranchers and farmers,defense suppliers,airlines(all of whom wouldn’t exist w/o gov’t subsidies),giant mining corporations who get our land and minerals for virtually free,nuclear power plants that get cheap liability insurance,again w/o which they wouldn’t exist since private ins would be prohibitively expensive….

            No, you and all ‘conservatives’ don’t complain about the billions in corporate welfare, because it’s subsidizing business and corporations,the lifeblood of ‘conservatives’. But you sure can complain and scream about a repressive gov’t shackling people when it tries to help them and their kids live a slightly improved life w/ the hope the kids will escape the actual shackles….deep poverty and no ‘American dream’.

          • Average Joe

            denniso says:
            April 20, 2010 at 9:49 am
            John…you don’t sound like a ‘compassionate conservative’.

            It is just that most of us believe that charity comes from the heart….not from the barrel of a gun (figuretively speaking). Most of us do not belive in corporate welfare. Most of us believe that a man should be able to start a business and build it without any interference from anyone and then either succeed or fail based soley on how he runs his business. What the *government? does , is to stifle business and inovation by “leveling” the playing field…you cannot compete if everyone is playing handicapped.We would just as soon they stay out of the private sector and allow the state and local governments handle “regulation” of business. At least that way…if you aren’t happy doing business where you are…you can always relocate to someplace better suited. When regulation happens on a national level….there is no place to go….because everyone has to play by the same rules…Federal=Bad=Stagnation…….State and Local=Good=innovation/competition. I don’t know about you, but I would rather see my “tax” dollars spent locally, on local projects rather than have the Federals allotting a portion of it back while keeping the rest for themseves….how about cutting out the middleman…the Feds…..Then after we have taken care of our own, we can send them the scraps…instead of the other way around…..
            Get involved locally, elect constituional people in your city…county…state etc……work from the inside out if you truly want to see change in this nation…the answer is a near as your next door neighbor….spread the word! Try looking into Sheriff Richard Mack and the Oathkeepers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLJgPuNAh60

          • denniso

            Average…you want voluntary charity,OK, then how about we make it voluntary to donate to the military if we feel like it? How about voluntary charity for police protection? Maybe voluntary payments to medicare and social security?
            Most gov’ts have decided after centuries of experimenting and trial and error that it makes practical sense to help the poorest people
            in order to have a healthy society that benefits all…lower crime rates,lower drug use,lower costs for prisons,and a generally stronger and more productive society.
            It isn’t rocket science…societies have figured this out way before you started complaining about it. If we leave too many people at the rock bottom of society living in slums and ghettos and raising kids
            who repeat the pattern, it comes back to bite us all in the butt…not to mention the Christian ideal of helping the poor,and voluntary charity has never been enough help.

          • JeffH

            A system of morality which is based on relative emotional values is a mere illusion, a thoroughly vulgar conception which has nothing sound in it and nothing true.

          • Average Joe

            denniso says:
            April 20, 2010 at 8:55 pm,
            I believe that if you READ the U.S. Constitution, you will find that Defence of the Nation is covered in that document. As for police,firefighters etc….they are paid for with your local taxes…or are these things of which you know not? Medicaid and medicare are TAXES…which believe it or not….the government has the right to impose (what if I do not wish to participate in medicaid and medicare?….I still have to pay the tax…whether I use the services or not, because it is a tax). When you are talking healthcare….you are in a whole different ballgame. Nowhere in the Constitution is congress given the power to force anyone to purchase anything that they to not wish to purchase. Nowhere in the Constituion is the congress given the power to decide your health care choices and nowhere in the Constituion does it say that you have the right to health care or the right to someone elses labor. But of course I can’t expect the hopey feely left to understand the difference between “Rights” and “Needs”. Everyone NEEDS health care, but no one has a RIGHT to it…unless they pay for it.Does everyone have a right to free carcare? Free Gas?(after all we are guaranteed the right to travel).When you force someone to buy something under threat of fine, jailtime or both…that amounts to coersion…AKA Strong armed robbery… which would be a crime for most of us…that is NOT charity.

        • JeffH

          Time & John, so eloquent and direct. I suspect that you both will be met with a barrage of negatives, with talk of Bush, Reagan and the party of “NO” and quite possibly Cheyney and Palin. I doubt, though, that there won’t be any negative remarks about the Marxist or the Democratic Socialist Party’s intent to destroy free markets, demonize anyone and anything that doesn’t get on their their bandwagon, government expansion, bank takeovers, control of industry and the control of the nations health care with 1/6th of the nations economy, 400% rise in out of control spending and, last but not least, bankrupting America and Americans. I realize these points could be meaningless to some here and the attitude that two wrongs “DO” make a right.

          • Chaos Factor

            I laugh everytime I hear the talking point” I want to go back to our founders constitution”…. The constitution of our founders said Black people and women were not allowed to vote or be in politics….in other words rights weren’t equal…

          • laura

            C.F,
            I’m not understanding your point!!!
            You speak of a different time where people thought differently.We do not think that way now and yet you keep bringing up the very distant past, for what?

            GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • http://naver samurai

            CF (certain foolishness) here we go again. What would be wrong with getting back to the ways of our founding fathers? What’s the matter? Would your monthly welfare checks stop coming and you would have to work for a living? I’ll tell you what, if you can give me a factual source to back up what you’re saying I’ll believe you.

          • ted crawford

            A thought, perhaps worth your consideration Chaos. Our Founders were intelligent men, they did their best to establish a quality government to meet the needs of the people. They weren’t, however, narsasstic! They understood that they would not be able to anticipate all future needs of the society,so they included Artical 5. As a result of their vision we have 27 amendments to their original document. All of the issues you mention were corrected by these amendments. This is the proper way to address any grievance we have.

        • Mike

          The big falacy in this assessment is that the slices of American society by income or wealth is not static as presented as dogma by the left.

          The low tax, free market model that has served the US so well over the decades has in fact resulted in lots of migration among the 3, 4 or however many “classes” of society the left like to propose. Immigrants come here not to go no the dole, they take great risk to make the trip from Vitenam, Peru or whereever, for a chance to build wealth for themselves.

          Buffet and Gates are Democrat supporters so like Soros they pitch a different view but for the real story just look around you. There are countless Vietnamese and Hispanic immigrants in your communities who in one generation becaame successful small business oweners, as a minimum. Look at your own families. For some of us the first guy off the boat didn’t even know english and showed up with the equivalent of a backpack and no ticket home. Read the book titled the Milionnaire Next Door. It blows away the myth that we live in the stratified society pitched by the left.

          The escalator in a free economy goes both down and up. Its almost a cliche that some of the children of hardworking wealthy parents never learned the lessons of hard work, thoughtful risk taking and frugality that led to their parents success. So, in another generation or two that wealth has been dissipated foolishly and these individuals now are counted in a much lower “class” than their parents. They are also likely to be leftists wanting to be taken care of by those like their parents who lived productive lives. Poverty to wealth then back to poverty in 3 – 4 generations.

          OK, let’s use the Death Tax to confiscate the wealth of the hardworking family to prevent it from being passed on to undeserving children. Don’t you love that one – the central government is doing something the Founders never envisioned stepping in to protect children from their parent’s generosity.

          No wonder the notion of Death Panels can be envisioned as the end state of Obamacare. It makes such good sense. . . unless you grew up in America.

          • John

            Well said Mike…

          • TIME

            Mike, Some very strong points.
            If you don’t have a “Dream and DRIVE” or “the very will to make it” no one will or can make it.
            When you do the work and earn the reward it makes it all the better. You also have to know that its a 50/50 and anything can happen.

            You have to see the big picture, you have to find something that you do well, something you LOVE to do, and work it.
            If you work it hard and stong, you will get your slice of the pie.

            Never envy anyone. Just DO IT on your OWN.

          • Claire

            Time– I agree with what you say. If a person has the determination, and they are doing something they love to do, then the sky can be the limit. It will take some work, but it will be worth it in the end. A person only lives once, and it is up to that person to be the best they can be, and live life to the fullest. Enjoy the beauty and majestic grandeur of the earth and all that God has given us. Material things mean nothing, it is “life” that is so important and once it is over, it is over. I thank God for my precious husband who has been by my side for 50 years, for my son and daughter, for my family, my friends, and my dogs. (Can’t leave out my dogs) I am able to look back and think “Thank you God, for my life and all you have given me. I am not the richest person in the world moneywise but I am rich in the things that count in life.

        • Rob Alexander

          3rd world countries are NOT “3rd world” because their governments don’t redistribute wealth – they are like that because their governments DO – and as ALL governments who are allowed to do this do, including ours, they progressively redistribute more and more of it to themselves and their cronies.

          The worst off countries are simply the ones whose governments redistribute the most wealth, and the best off ones are the ones whose governments redistribute the LEAST – and protect the RIGHTS of their citizens the most – especially their right to live free and right to own what they secure for themselves (property). For clarity’s sake, that’s rights as in “the right to live unimpeded by others as long as you do not impede others”, not entitlements to receivership.

          Even in the best case scenario, there will always be a very small wealthy class comprised of the most successful, sometimes lucky, and innovative people – AND there will always be a very poor class comprised of mentally ill and incompetent people…. and EVERYONE ELSE ~should~ be middle class – not rich, not destitute, but able to live comfortably through some kind of productive work.

          Before the socialist Democrat** policies of over-regulation, wealth redistribution and racial warfare took hold, America had the largest and most prosperous middle class in the world – in terms being used here, this means a very high percentage of those who SHOULD be middle class actually WERE “able to live comfortably through some kind of productive work.” **The RINO class of Republicans are just as responsible for this as democrats.

          Now, that trend is reversing and gets worse with every new redistribution they come up with. It’s high time for intelligent people to recognize this clear and obvious pattern and reverse their thinking. Redistribution of wealth simply DOES NOT WORK and actually has the complete opposite effect of what is claimed – it redistributes people who WOULD be middle class on their own into the poor class. The only thing that works and has ever worked is when the government enforces contracts, and protects rights to person and property and otherwise stays out of the way – THIS is when societies as a whole become richer.

          • denniso

            3rd world countries have an extreme gap between the very few wealthy and the vast majority who are very poor,living in slums. How is it that wealth is distributed to the slum dwellers yet apparently not enough to get them out of those slums and scavenging in landfills for their living…you’ve got to be kidding w/ your little theory.

          • Rob Alexander

            It’s not a theory, doll….

            If you look at the biggest ****hole countries of the world, for example in Africa and the middle east, their governments DON’T redistribute wealth to the slum-dwellers, they steal and redistribute most it to themselves and their cronies…. Which is really where most of the redistribution in all countries, including ours, actually goes – ours obviously steals less than the worst of them do, but both the percentage of our incomes they steal AND the percentage of what they steal that gets diverted to “other recipients than the claimed purpose” has gone up and continues to, while our standard of living goes down.

            Ask yourself “why do the countries that redistribute the most have the worst standards of living, while the ones that tend to leave the people alone and simply provide a ‘safe and predictable environment’ for them to help themselves have the highest standards of living?”… This is an absolutely rock solid, provable correlation – not a theory – the only question even worth asking is “why is it that way?”…. Another worthwhile question you should ask is “how and why did the country whose government had the least power over its citizenry of any in the world surpass every other country in wealth, technology, and overall standard of living in WELL under 200 years?”.

            Really, it’s pretty ridiculously obvious to anyone who actually THINKS about it openly.

          • denniso

            Rob…haven’t you ever looked at a list of countries and where they are on quality of life? Look it up if you haven’t. America lags behind all the more ‘socialistic’ countries in all measures…life span,infant mortality,murder rates,rape,drug use,mental health,environmental protection,child murders and more. Sure we lead
            the world in overall economic activity, we have the 3rd largest population and a large country w/ huge natural resources. Not surprising that we lead the world in money made.

          • Rob Alexander

            Those statistics are too easy to slant to fit an agenda. Look at home size, acreage of land owned, number of vehicles in a household, luxury items owned, etc. Americans live FAR better than the average Euro by those standards. I do not consider living in cramped city dwellings and relying on public transportation to be an upscale life.

        • K D M

          Um er yeah, but if you look at the Democrats what they are actually doing is pushing down the middle class and pushing up the politicians and big business that helps them keep down the middle class like Unions.

          You are going to get an even smaller group controlling all the money and a much larger group of poor with no middle and no opportunity to better yourself.

          I’m sick of giving much more of my money to the poor and needy than our president does and hear him talk about taking care of the poor. The government can not take care of everyone. They need to stop trying to do it all and focus on what is needed to promote honest business and a good market economy where entreprenuers are rewarded for good products and services and everybody benefits. Are you willing to pay more for a good product? Shouldn’t you get more for doing a better job? Let’s stop villianizing people who make a honest profit. (I’m not suggesting that all businesses and entreprenuers are honest and do the right thing and should be able to do so – we need laws and regulations to prevent abuse – but not to control the market.)

          • JeffH

            K D M, if the Dems and Obama get their wishes, a family of four, making $125,000 will see their tax increased approx. $5800/yr.
            A family of four making $75,000 will see an increase of approx. $2800/yr. These are just projected 2015 figures based on the repeal of Bush tax cuts, govt. mandated health care, and other tax exemptions being repealed plus new taxes. So much for “NO NEW TAXES”!

        • Mike In MI

          denniso – a response to his post at 8:30 on 4/19 way bck at the top of this line

          The development of the 2 caste system

        • Mike In MI

          denniso – a response to his post at 8:30 on 4/19 way back at the top of this line

          The development of the 2 caste system in this country that you decry so bitterly above is a relatively recent phenomenon. The third world nations are already just what ours is being purposely turned into – two tiered. The thing that we have in common which is the primary cause of two tiers is a devilish bunch of goons controlling a top-down-authoritarian, centralized government system. The things the extreme liberal philosophies say they try to discourage (one caste of elite rich people at the top and subsistence grovellers’ caste on the bottom) is exactly what they establish in actuality BY THEIR PROGRAMS. It has happened repeatedly in history so they have the theater production down by now. The only thing that changes is the players. Today’s star is B.H. Obama leading a caste of millions.

          Traditionally in our nation we have had a thin veneer of rich people at the top, a poorer lower group of variable thickness and a very large middle class because they could (and did) start out wherever they were and build up from there to as high as they could go or wanted to rise. They worked together in their communities to achieve together – ever hear of a guy called de Toqueville (sp.). He travelled throughout the colonies and was amazed at the community spirit in early America. Large representations of middle class people have always been the rule in this country, except in the larger cities with aggregations of new or vulnerable immigrants, large Catholic or authoritarian church denominations and crooked city and state government power cliques. Progressive Obamaism has decimated America’s middle class, producing a largely two caste social system. So, you are about as wrong as you can be, denniso.
          Your problem denniso is you love the romantic idea of being able to say, “I’m searching for the truth.” It probably worked good in college to flop the flippin’ floozeys but it don’t work in the real world. Why? It has been said by someone who knew the Truth, “Seek and you shall find.” The “YOU SHALL” makes it absolute. So, if you were really searching you would have found it, denniso. Maybe I can say it plainer, “You’re a fraud, denniso.” But that’s not news to the regulars here.

          • JeffH

            Mike In MI…I’m bent over in pain from laughter…amd well stated.

          • Rob Alexander

            Thank you, that’s essentially what I was saying and it’s nice to see someone else who truly “gets it”. -Rob

          • denniso

            Mike…you say that progressive Obamaism,whatever the hell that is, has decimated the middle class. Wow! He’s been in office for 15 months and he’s already wrecked the middle class. Of course,Bush’s 8 yrs and economic collapse didn’t hurt the middle class,did it?

            Have you noticed that Obama gave you and almost all Americans a $400 tax cut and $800 for a couple?

            Most of your comment is too unintelligible and convoluted for me to follow,or is it just meaningless? So, no further response from me.

          • JeffH

            Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.
            Ronald Reagan

          • denniso

            Mike…so do you actually believe that Jesus is the only guy who ever searched for the truth in life? Out of the billions who have lived on this earth,only Jesus looked for answers and the truth?

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          Do you not know denniso, that what Obama and the dems just did with healthcare, made the insurance companies billions upon billions more dollars than they ever had before. This wasnt for the so called poor people, it was for the choice insurance companies that the dems are in bed with, so dont you be fooled. And it is the working man like, me that are going to pay more for my premiums, and have less coverage. It is people like my 85 year old father, who will get less medicare or medicaid, and have less coverage now. It is the single working mother, who never could afford insurance before, now being forced to buy it, and if she doesnt, she will receive a huge fine. If you dont believe me, then you are fooling yourself, because this is exactly what these lepers have done. It benefits their rich insurance cronies, who dump millions in their pockets, and the rest of us pay for it. Oh yeah, it does benefit the crack dealer down at the corner, who now can get it all free, since he doesnt have a job, but for the working class, its going to suck. Watch and see, this is how it is.

    • Harold Olsen

      I wonder if it’s just a coincidence that the word “lawyer” sounds similar to “liar.”

      • Palin12

        Know what you get when you cross a crooked lawyer with a crooked politician? Chelsea!

        • JeffH

          OOOOOH! Low blow! Accurate, but still a low blow…

        • http://donthaveone Beberoni

          I thought it was an unsatisfied politician who preyed on every woman that came by because the crooked lawyer was ugly.

    • Tone

      Take it from someone that has spent the last 25 years working in the factories. We produced more than all of the other industrialized nations COMBINED and the corporations profited more then they ever did. Yet our pay has gone down in relation to the cost of living, our benefits have been cut while the cost of those benefits have skyrocketed, the gap between the rich and the poor has gotten bigger and bigger, and our jobs have been shipped overseas, and now the right has the nerve to call us lazy, the audacity to say we just want had outs, and worst of all we are told if we don’t like it to go move elsewhere! HOW DARE YOU!!

      Try to understand this. We loved Ronald Regan and we believed in his economic policies they made the nation thrive. When he spoke world powers fell. I can’t even begin to explain how great it was to be 20 years old in 1985! The saddest part is that it should have worked and it would have if the corporations had reinvested in America in the same way that the workers produced for the corporations. But the corporations got greedy and tried to take the money and run.

      We wont let the corporations control us anymore then they already do. If it comes down to a choice between corporate slavery or socialism we will chose socialism but we don’t like it anymore then you do. If republicans can’t find a way to get the corporations to reinvest in America then you are useless to us.

      • http://donthaveone Beberoni

        No sir. The corporations had the living life taxed out of them by Bill Clinton, while he enacted NAFTA and shipped all their jobs to Mexico. Had he left the business’s alone, they would have had cash to keep expanding and hiring more people, but the democrats screwed that all up. Clinton rode the success of Reaganism for 6 years before it caught up to him, as the last two were a hell hole. Off course, when youve got the liberal media in your pocket, what with being owned by the democrats and all, none of this truth was reported, so you uneducated point your fingers in the direction the media tells you. One day maybe you will be interested in the truth, and you will seek it, and you will find it, and see what damning things Bill Clinton did to this country.

    • H Lee Poteet

      Except for the curious fact that both Barack and Michelle have been forced to give up their law licenses. Fancy that! But they and those like them are going to do everything they can to protect lawyers before they consider any other group of Americans.

  • s c

    Now, if some amongst us would dare to read and absorb this material, we might be able to confront the common enemy (politicians). Many people refuse to understand the significance of a two-party system that dotes on power and class envy.
    No, I don’t mean the usual ‘this party is good’ and ‘that party is bad’ idea. America has been USED and abused by generations of power-mad monsters who will stop at nothing to get and hold power.
    Americans have let themselves be held hostage by puppets who work for those who wait in the shadows. That makes many of us ‘useful idiots.’ It makes no sense to play a game based on someone else’s rules. The rules change daily, and those who benefit most are the ones who control the “leaders.” Think, people. We were given a blueprint in the 1700s. That blueprint has been manipulated and contaminated, and it is WE who suffer for it.
    We come into this world living under a Wizard of Oz
    plan. Until we see it for what it is, it is the puppet-masters who secretly control America. Our ‘leaders’ are talking heads and empty suits. Wake up, America. If you don’t think, you DON’T exist. The controllers know that. They know America will have to be in utter misery for some to dare to wake up and demand to be FREE. We are getting very close that situation, and the handwriting is on the wall(s).

    • BigBadJohn

      I agree with you s c,

      “Now, if some amongst us would dare to read and absorb this material, we might be able to confront the common enemy (politicians). Many people refuse to understand the significance of a two-party system that dotes on power and class envy.
      No, I don’t mean the usual ‘this party is good’ and ‘that party is bad’ idea. America has been USED and abused by generations of power-mad monsters who will stop at nothing to get and hold power.”

      The only difference between the two parties is who the handouts go to. Republicans favor the rich and cultivate their loyalty through tax breaks and handouts to specific industries. The Democrats use handouts to the poor to manipulate them, but they have their own favorite industries. All the while both parties line their own pocket with millions. The working man is screwed by both parties. Republicans like cheap labor and stop at nothing to control wages. Democrats do throw workers a bone once in while to keep them in line, like minimum wage, but it all about getting reelected.

      The one thing that both parties agree on, and was shown in campaign reform, is that they want to limit third party power. In North Carolina, they dropped the Libertarian party from the ballot.

      With the SC ruling that corporations can contribute as much as they want to election campaign, it is going to be almost impossible to get a third party elected that is for the people.

  • Lisa Jones

    Me thinks someone is working towards getting more Republicans elected. No partisin politics here. LOL.

    • s c

      There’s a simple rule that lets you know the true quality of your government, Lisa. If the ‘system’ does not make life better, it will make life more complex. In this country, most people refuse to
      think about politics and what makes life complicated. Can you really say that politics has made your life so good that there’s nothing worth examining? You must live in a different world, Lisa. You seem to have a very bad case of ‘itcan’thappenhereitis.’
      Divide and conquer worked 2,000 years ago. It still works. You sound as though you’d rather make it easy for those who will do ANYTHING to rule the world. All it takes is for people to avoid looking into a mirror and asking a simple question. Do you have what it takes, or are you too ‘comfy’ to take a hard look at yourself and answer a simple question?

      • Danna

        To: s c. You sure did read into what she had to say in what, 2 sentences? I agree with her later comment. They ALL need to go. They need a term just like the President. Nothing will change when they all know how to play THEIR game (both sides).

    • http://donthaveone Beberoni

      You have missed the point, and taken you left wing liberal defensive posture, and formulated an attack, as the dems do when confronted with the truth. The problem is, is that both sides are made up of mostly lawyers, who to me, are the scum of society. They think of themselves as priveleged above the rest of us, and think of themselves as knowing what is best for all of us, and they are all greatly out of touch with the common man. Also, the problem is, is that the democrat voting base is also out of touch with reality and the common man, because they buy into what was mentioned in this article, that the democrats are for the working man and the Republicans are for the rich, and it couldnt be farther from the truth. Making all these social programs and handouts and tax hikes the democrats constantly bring, cost the poor and the middle class so much. The democrats are the richest, slovenly richest people out there. They do not represent the working class and the poor, no, they prey on them. They do all they can do to keep people down and out and depressed and dependant on the government, from which their power comes from. This is not true. The democrats give you these little handouts and keep you down in your place where they want you, and most of you that vote for them are content to let them do this to you. Get educated and see who they are, and what they have done to so many people, which is to keep you down.

      • Barb

        I have to agree with you! The democratic party is the party of hand outs not hand ups. They give a person just enough to barely help and then keep them firmly under their thumb so they can never get out of their hole. Sadly these people don’t see this because all they see is hand outs and it’s up to the working class to keep them going. Meanwhile the top Democrats are the richest people in the world , the elite of the elitists! The lawyers although not all but a lot of them are to blame for our health care trouble too, suing anyone and anything for any reason for astronomical settlements is the root cause of all this. It’s the out of control lawsuits that needs regulation not healthcare or health insurance.

        • Mike In MI

          Barb,
          You’re kidding yourself if you think the lawsuits are without cause or that the medical system is all lilly white, without blame. The disease care system in this country is about the most insidiously evil thing imaginable. Drug companies underwrite and direct the rules and regs in medicine invisibly, behind the screens and under the radar by secretly controlling what gets taught in medical scools and legal manipulation of what can be done or how.
          What they do keeps people in a weak and debilitated condition – “health” maintenance” – and keeps them poor by charging exhorbitant prices which only a pooled fund can pay for (insurance or government coffers). That concentrates and consolidates money to be used for more control over you and everybody under the system.
          They know that if they can induce you to feafully relinquish your dollars they can limit your freedom. They don’t care too much how much you make if they can ge you to give it to them because you are afraid of getting sick. Once they get hold of it they don’t care what you think or what you want because they know you can’t spend it as a free, personally responsible and choosing citizen, You literally become a slave to their commands and expectationsbecause you give them control over how and for what they will spend your money, given to them out of fear you might get a disease. Then they only allow it to be spent on keeping yu sick once they get their hands on you.

        • Mike In MI

          By the way, why do you think the FDA primarily goes after the nutritional supplement, herbs and heathful foods industries? At the same times FDA supports and permits BIGPHARMA’s licencng and distribution of drugs like Vioxx, Bextra, and on, and on that injure and kill hundreds of thousands of people a year while FDA protects the killers? They let them hide the numbers so we know little or nothing about it. That’s what the HIPAA laws do very efficiently because Gary Null, PhD researched the carnage, then wrote “Death By Medicine” to try to reveal to us the perfidy of the medical scam.

          The drugs and medical implements (also enabled by FDA) makers have prostituted and perverted “science” in order to produce and promulgate things that don’t do what the manufacturers say they do. Those things injure, debilitate and manipulate people through spreading disease, suffering and manipulation via physical and mental suppression.

          The net result is loss of freedom to think, act and live in whatever way you see beneficial to you. Government supports nd encourages it all to your detriment. They do everything they can to get you thinking they do it for your benefit – and you, Barb, have sucked it in deep so the hook is in your gills.

          • Barb

            Mike, if you noticed is said not all! AND I agree with you about the Big Pharma Companies too! They are the other leg of the problem. Yes there are legitimate lawsuits but there are a lot and I do mean a lot of frivolous ones as well, those hurt everyone and you have to admit that! So I stand corrected I should have mentioned the pharmaceutical companies too!

          • Mike In MI

            Barbie, You’re a doll (no pejorative intended).
            Fascinating to me – the difference between reasonable, common sense people who ARE able to critically examine themselves and what they think or have said on this site. Then they either admit it or clarify their thought processes. On the other hand, gliberal blabberfaces make unfathomably innane remarks, driven by unsound and insane minds emoting meandering rivers of polluted effluents and they never examine their reprobate regurgitants.

            Babs, I salute you! You’re the blessed.

        • Rob Alexander

          I have to disagree about lawsuits being the root cause (and trust me I have no love of lawyers). I see the root cause being mainly the 3rd party payor system – the fact that everything is paid for by insurance now.

          People cared about managing costs when they paid for most everything themselves, and were able to cover routine medical costs out of pocket without difficulty. Once the perception that “someone else” was paying the bill took hold, people didn’t care about the cost any more.

          Obviously malpractice lawsuits are out of control, but insurance for EVERYTHING is the root cause of the high costs.

    • The Doctor

      Having read the comments by Lisa above, I am compelled to respond. Lisa, don’t look now, but your “liberal partisanship” is showing! I am an individual who researches economic, political and social issues and have for many years. When I see someone lying, taking advantage of others or outright deceiving their fellow citizens, just to get-a-leg-up, I speak out and I don’t care what political party that individual represents, I’m going to call them out and let everyone know we have a thief and a liar in our midst! Right now, the vast majority of those committing “these sins” against their neighbors happen to be Democrats and anyone with the intelligence of a 5th grader can see it as plain as day. The fact that you state that “someone” is trying to get Republicans elected, shows quite clearly that you are a “shallow partisan individual” and a Democrat who is offended that someone would point out, who it is that is lying and stealing from the citizens of this country! This entire affair that has taken place surrounding all political issues in the past two years was “social engineering” by Democrats to “gain” their “socialist Utopia” with themselves as “absolute rulers”. Time to look in the mirror Lisa and “come clean”! Try honesty, you may even like it!

      The Doc

      • Barb

        Well said Doctor!!!!

    • Average Joe

      Lisa Jones says:
      April 19, 2010 at 5:33 am

      Political tags – such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth – are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.
      Which group do you fall into? Time to pick a side.

      • Claire

        Average Joe—Time to pick a side? There are bad politicians in both sides. Forget party affiliations, this is why we are in this mess.

        • Average Joe

          Clair,
          Please re-read my post. I think you missed the point….the sides to choose ….are you someone that wants people controlled or not?I myself have no wish to control anther human beings life….it is not my right to do so…..

          I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.
          Robert A. Heinlein

          • Claire

            Average Joe—Whoops- I did miss you point. Sorry, a thousand pardons please. Like you I do not wish to control anyone else, I prefer to be my own person.

          • Jana

            Average Joe and Claire,
            That is what our problem is. We as conservatives want to live and let live. We are not activists so we live our lives working hard to make better lives for our families while those who do have ulterior motives are actively out working to change the laws to control all of us hard working people.

            It is time for us to become aware and to become active and say STOP. These Socialists are working hard to change our country and take it to a much lower level. We must become active too.

          • laura

            Jana I didn’t think we could get much lower OOOOHHHHH BUT WE CAN and they’re taking us there.
            We better start doing something.
            GOD BLESS
            AND GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • Claire

            Jana — And I agree with your post. I am not asking for a “pat” on the back but I have worked hard my entire life, and you have too. I always put out more work than anyone in my office, and I succeeded. I didn’t have to step on anyone’s toes or tromp on anyone. I am not that type of person. I always felt a person should earn their wages fairly and aquarely. I have had a decent good life and I want to keep it. I want to be able to continue this life. And I know the rest of you on this site feel the same way. I am not trying to be egotistical or selfish but we all deserve better than this. Like all of you, I want my kids and grandkids to have the same life I have had, maybe even better. We elected these people to be our representatives of America and most of them have sold us out. To put it mildly and without blasphemy (I really want to curse big time) we have been “had.” I am sorry to say this, but I have had enough. I am really aggravated with both parties. I am to the point that I want them out of my life for good. To be truthful with all of you on this site, I have really changed this past year and a half. For years, I used to try to give politicians the benefit of the doubt but no more. As everyone knows, I voted for Obama. I am disapointed with the people he has surrounded himself with,–Holder, Emmauel, Geithner, Gates, etc.
            I was raised in the sticks, poor as hell and I was used to hearing the music and the hollering from Black churches. It never bothered me, that was the way it was back then so I did not have a problem with Rev. Wright. I still don’t have a problem with him. Because I am USED to this. Believe me, I am not racist, I am just trying to make a point here. There were also tent revivals for the Whites back then and they did a lot of hollering too.
            I truly thought I voted for a person that would make a difference, no lobbyists, no earmarks, no backroom dealings, troops were going to be pulled out in 17 months, etc. Now I could kick myself in the rear. I sometimes think what the hell did I do? I did not make a wise decision and when you consider my age, I should have had the wisdom. I should not have voted at all.

          • Claire

            I am sorry if I offend anyone, but this is how I truly feel.

          • libertytrain

            Claire – your post was wonderful, from the heart and probably encompasses the way most of us feel – though I didn’t vote for him (smile). But I know what you mean -

          • Jana

            Claire,
            I don’t know how that post could have offended anyone. I agree with what you said, and thank you for sharing.

        • Average Joe

          Claire says:
          April 19, 2010 at 7:56 pm
          Gracious apologies are always accepted…..although is really wasn’t needed…Anyone can missread something….happens to me on a regular basis…thnx

          • Claire

            Average Joe– And I thank you for your graciousness.

    • Lisa Jones

      Wow you folks really get on the defense quick. How you can read so much into one or two lines. I was just stating that it looks like Bob is trying to get Republicans elected and that it’s clear he is partisin. I don’t really care as long you change who is there now. But if you think putting all Republicans in is going to solve the problem you are wrong. All those currently up for election in 2010 need to go. Does that sound like I’m a left wing person? You can’t keep electing the same people over and over and expect different results. So get rid of them all, not just the Democrats. You people here are so paranoid and afraid of everything it’s funny. What entertainment to read some of your comments.

      • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

        Dear Lisa Jones,

        If you think I am a partisan Republican hack you obviously haven’t been paying attention. I suggest you peruse my archives. I’ll direct you to one recent column: http://www.personalliberty.com/personal-liberty-articles/don%e2%80%99t-pin-your-hopes-on-the-party-of-lincoln/

        Happy reading,
        Bob

        • Lisa Jones

          Bob,

          I know in the past you have beat up on the Republicans too, but you come off as being mostly right wing. I’m actually very excited to see what happens in Nov. I’m hoping for 435 new faces in the house and 36 in the senate. The only way to show them we are discusted is to change them out and change them offen. They will never vote for term limits so it’s up to the people to limit their terms.

          • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

            Dear Lisa Jones,

            I am an ultra-conservative. I have devoted my life to research and the quest for truth. I am a student of history. I believe in personal liberty and freedom. If that makes me right wing in your book, so be it. I’m not sure I would agree with your assessment unless by right you mean the “correct” wing.

            All the best,
            Bob

          • denniso

            Bob,
            I am an unabashed liberal. I have devoted MY life to the quest for truth. I am a student of history,science,economics,philosophy and music. I believe in as much freedom,autonomy and individual responsibility as possible in a modern,nuclear,crowded and complex world. What does that make me?

          • http://www.boblivingstonletter.com/ Bob Livingston

            Dear denniso,

            I’m not in the habit of putting labels on people, so you tell me. However, ’tis troubling that you put a qualifier on freedom, autonomy and individual responsibility.

            Best wishes,
            Bob

          • JeffH

            The price that one pays for refusing to act on the truth as one sees it, is to be led to believe untruth to avoid guilt.

          • denniso

            Bob,
            Just to be clear…liberals want much the same as you do,we just think that our approach is better and more proven over time.

            We don’t want a gov’t any larger than necessary,likewise we don’t want a military any larger than is needed for defense.

            We want as many Americans as possible to live a good life and have the freedom that we all want.

            We want the gov’t out of our bedrooms and no one’s religion dictated to us and our kids in school.

            We know from history that large corporate power can literally take over gov’t and control citizins lives,so we want a gov’t(state and fed) that is large enough to be capable of stemming that power over our freedoms.

            We also know that w/o gov’t intervention and regulations,the private sector can and does inflict actual harm on citizens…bad drug products,faulty consummer products,environmental toxins,fraud and abuse in the financial sector…so we accept that we need a gov’t w/ enough power to combat those actions when most individuals can’t. History is replete w/ examples of private sector abuse of people unable to defend themselves against such power or deceit.

            We want a gov’t large enough to ensure a reasonable level of safety for Americans so we aren’t reduced to the ‘good old days’ of shootouts in the street and the the worst people dominating others w/ brute force and violence.

            We also don’t want a police state to accomplish this,which is why it is almost always liberals defending people if they are abused by police.

            Most of us want an end to the horrific, tragic,ineffective and very expensive ‘war on drugs’. Most of the people pushing the ‘war’ are conservatives who cry about freedom yet lock citizens away for years or life for drug use. The conservatives hero, Ronald Reagan, ramped up the drug war as no previous president had,imprisoning many for life
            for possesion of a pound of pot. I still wonder how the ‘conservatives’ who seem to value freedom can advocate such fascist behaviour from the gov’t.

          • denniso

            Dear Bob,
            To your point above about my putting a ‘qualifier on freedom,etc’…you know as well as anyone that there is essentially no such thing as absolute freedom, in life,society,marriage or work. We agree that we can’t falsely yell fire in a theatre because of the harm it would inflict. We agree to libel and slander laws in speech.
            We can’t own nuclear weapons or even dynamite w/o a permit. I can’t exercise my freedom and autonomy by dumping cyanide in a river upstream from where you drink.

            We have to balance the degree of freedom lost in any society w/ the benefits gained for individuals and the society itself…it isn’t easy and it’s an ongoing fight,but it doesn’t help when the debate is reduced to simplistic statements and black and white answers and labels that pre define us.

          • JeffH

            denisso, if I were to make a comment at all about liberals based on your most recent comments I see someone that lives in a catch 22 society and is totally confused about good and evil. You can’t have it both ways.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            denniso,
            you say all these pretty things that liberals want and what they stand for. how come I’ve never seen more than one or two that practice these ideals?? Your words are very nice but also very empty!!

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Bob,
            If you could, how about running a column by Burt Prelutski (SP?)? He has some very good points and will call things what they are good or bad!! I am a very big fan of his!

      • Mike In MI

        It is part of the nature of print media, Lisa, that people don’t hear your tone, inflections and modulations of voice. It is selfish egotism for you to assume that people reading your words know what is in your mind – unless your explanations define your meanings. It is generally expected that folks participating on this site are not paranoid. That is, unless your use of “paranoid” means knowledgeable, informed and reasonable verbally communicative.
        You can’t be understood if you don’t write so as to “communicate”

        • Jana

          Mike in MI,
          My sentiments exactly. When we write something we need to go back over it and make sure it is clear. I have reread a few things that I wrote and had to go back and re-explain what I meant.
          Another point is most all of us realize the fact that it is not just one party that is at fault. There are a few Dems in here that think their party is perfect, however most of us do speak often that we need to get back to the Constitution and Conservatism in this country. We also believe in voting most of them out as soon as possible to stop this ‘career politician’ mentality.

      • Robert

        Lisa, over half the country knows that the Dems are the walfare party
        we don’t even have to ask a person what party they favor.
        If you have ever worked around new emplyee and heshe is a Dem. the 1St thing the do on day two of the job is tell the boss that’ mama say I need a raise. I’ve seen people that don’t have use of their arms and legs do more to help themselves. a Dem is to lazy earn a fare living.

        • Hugh Jordin

          How broadly unfair can one be?

          Every Dem is a leach and every Republican is a saint??!!!

          Get real.

          • Robert

            Hugh, you have it backwards man. have you ever seen CBS, & NBC news?
            They lie I told it like we see it.

          • Mike In MI

            Wow! Hugh Jordin, Thanx for making me look prescient. While I was considering and writing my last entry to Barb above at 4/19 at 11:59
            Hugh accommodated me by posting this.

            OK everybody, read what Baby Hughey has written here in answer to Robert’s post. Then read Rboert’s words carefully and see how accurate and reasonable Hughey’s comment is. Notice any correlation? I really think Hughey ought to look into applying to the Obama teleprompter guild. He’s got the Rules for Progressive propaganda pretty pat. He takes a sentence. Adds a few inflammatory words and phrases. Strikes out some words. Flips the meaning. Takes his self promoting assumption of elitist superiority. Then, informs Robert, Robert is out of touch with reality, needing to “Get real”.

            That’s almost exactly what Eve did with God’s Words in Genesis under the influence of the Serpent. Hughey, of course, writes as thought he is under the influence of the modern day incarnation of the Serpent in the WH.

          • Hugh Jordin

            Mike Mi-

            Talk about misinterpretation???!!!

            You take the prize.

          • http://?? Joe H.

            Mike In MI,
            But very accurate!!!!

        • Harold Olsen

          Another thing I’ve noticed about co-workers who identify themselves as liberals or Democrats is that they are the laziest and get into trouble and get fired more often than those who identify themselves as conservatives or Republicans. Most jobs, though low paying, I’ve had I’ve been a supervisor. I had one guy working under me who was a liberal Democrat who actually said to me one day, “Just because I have to be here for eight hours doesn’t mean I have to actually do any work.” That, to me, typifies the work ethic of the left. They just want a free ride and do not want to earn there own way. I have seen very few exceptions of this.

          • Palin12

            I’ve noticed the exact same things, Harold! I worked on swing shift with a liberal coworker. The supervisor from days goes home 2 hours after we get there, and the minute she leaves he takes a 20-minute nap while the rest of us keep on getting the work out. He was not able to focus at work and was eventually fired.

          • Hugh Jordin

            I work with people of all political persuasions and they ALL work very hard or they don’t last. Conservatives and liberals get along because they cordially agree to disagree on politics but all have the same work ethic.

        • Hugh Jordin

          do you think Fox is truthful?

          They are all full of it, they just tell different lies to pander to the paranoias and delusions of their target audiences.

          • JeffH

            They “pander” to the broadest and most informed “paranoids” viewing audiance. FOX must be more truthfull than the other alphabets or else the majority likes the “pandering of paranoia”.

        • Tone

          Take it from someone that has spent the last 25 years working in the factories. We produced more than all of the other industrialized nations COMBINED and the corporations profited more then they ever did. Yet our pay has gone down in relation to the cost of living, our benefits have been cut while the cost of those benefits have skyrocketed, the gap between the rich and the poor has gotten bigger and bigger, and our jobs have been shipped overseas, and now the right has the nerve to call us lazy, the audacity to say we just want had outs, and worst of all we are told if we don’t like it to go move elsewhere! HOW DARE YOU!!

          Try to understand this. We loved Ronald Regan and we believed in his economic policies they made the nation thrive. When he spoke world powers fell. I can’t even begin to explain how great it was to be 20 years old in 1985! The saddest part is that it should have worked and it would have if the corporations had reinvested in America in the same way that the workers produced for the corporations. But the corporations got greedy and tried to take the money and run.

          We wont let the corporations control us anymore then they already do. If it comes down to a choice between corporate slavery or socialism we will chose socialism but we don’t like it anymore then you do. If republicans can’t find a way to get the corporations to reinvest in America then you are useless to us.

          P.S All main stream media is corporate driven and biased toward their favorite political party puppets. The only place to get unbiased opinions is on the internet!

    • Scott

      Right on!

  • Eternal Vigilance

    While the above reviews address or attack the “heart” of the problem, they do not touch upon the “root” of the problem – which is the individual’s failure to live a responsible life.

    Whether out of selfishness or neglWhile the above reviews address or attack the “heart” of the problem, they do not touch upon the “root” of the problem – which is the individual’s failure to live a responsible life.

    Whether out of selfishness or negligence, the failure of the individual to meet a minimal level of involvement in the workings of this “Representative Republic” shows either a conscious or sub-conscious expectation of “something for nothing”.

    Clear evidence of this is given in the article – for example – lack of interest in monitoring banks once FDIC was enacted, Social Security, or the “Federal Reserve.” With respect to the latter, querying school children to young adults reveal no recollection of being taught the basic economics involved in the competing interests surrounding the effects of inflation.

    One “unrecognized” aspect of the current “Tea Party” activities is that the underlying, basic, sentiments behind the Tea Party “talking points”, are answered if all citizens become actively responsible for both their personal lives, and fulfill the responsibility imposed by their participation in this “Representative Republic.”

    Participation in this sense considers receipt of any benefit conferred as acceptance of the responsibility to constructively participate.

    Eternal Vigilance
    Stockton, Californiaigence, the failure of the individual to meet a minimal level of involvement in the workings of this “Representative Republic” shows either a conscious or sub-conscious expectation of “something for nothing”.

    Clear evidence of this is given in the article – lack of interest in monitoring banks once the FDIC was enacted, Social Security, or the “Fed”

    One “unrecognized” aspect of the current “Tea Party” activities is that the underlying, basic, sentiments behind the Tea Party “talking points”, are answered if all citizens become actively responsible for both their personal lives, and fulfill the responsibility imposed by their participation in this “Representative Republic.”

    Participation in this sense considers receipt of any benefit conferred as acceptance of the responsibility to constructively participate.

    Eternal Vigilance
    Stockton, California

    • http://?? Joe H.

      Eternal,
      Two words cojoined that libs hate……Personal responsiblity!!!!

      • http://naver samurai

        Let’s not forget, christian, church, God, Jesus, praying anywhere, founding fathers, etc., the list is long and distinguished.

        • Jana

          samurai,
          EXCELLENT!!!

  • Alfonse de Lata

    The Democrats still have the upper hand in being able to project the idea that they are the party of the little man or the working man. In order to combat this, the Republicans need to develope a system whereby they can convince people through a sound bite strategy. Many people do not have long attention spans and won t read National Review or any like publications as wonderful as they are. We need one liners and zingers.

    • Sonny

      We don’t need one liners and zingers. If we can make it to the next election things will get better. Over the last 40 years or so the deficit has actually grown durring the terms of Republican presidents I don’t think this is as much about the president as it is the make up of congress at the time. Clintons deficit percentage was far less than any of the Republicans but he had to deal with a republican congress for most of his 2 terms and they didn’t let him get away with some of the spending he proposed. Bush on the other hand had to deal with a Dem controlled house most of the time, 9-11, and Katrina which were all very costly so we are not really comparing apple to apple.
      Soon conservatives will be in control again in the house and more control will be in place to stop the bleeding.
      Besides what does the deficit matter the last president to actively try to reduce it was Andrew Jackson. The U.S. has already passed it on to 6 generations whats another 6 going to hurt we never intend to pay it off anyway.

    • JeffH

      Alfonse de Lata, “The Democrats still have the upper hand in being able to project the idea that they are the party of the little man or the working man.”
      I disagree completely. My case in point is just look at the Tea Party movement and the people that voted for Obama that heve “come out” to admit their mistake. Look at Congress and their approval by the masses. The Democrats only fool the “fools” now.

  • charles

    the democrat party was not always like it is. it did not change over night. they were in charge for nearly 40 years and progressed toward what they currently are. socialism by another name is still socialism. first they started the social programs claiming to be the party of compassion to build a voting base then slowly started down the road to socialism. i am obviously a republican but even the republican party has been getting high jacked by some moderate socialist. I feel it would be easier to correct the mistakes of the republican party then to try and start a new party.

  • Laura Schlegel

    Regardless of party affiliation, we all want the same things, the freedom for upward mobility for all. So it’s up to US, “We the People” to hold our representatives responsible for policies that keep this dream alive and well. Insted of worrying about size of governemnt, we need to be conerned about a government that works. When we are dumbed down and aren’t actively engaged in sound debate with our representatives, our government is controlled/bought by the corporatocracy, only concerned with profiteering, regardless of what they are exploiting (people, animals, environment, economy), we all lose. Members of both parties have voted for deregulations over the years, that have exploited US all. We all need fight to establish smart regulations that keep US working, educated, humane, healthy and living in safe, sustainable ways to balance the success of people, planet and the corporations. The corporations need to pay their fair share in taxes to the local communities they profit from. When CEOs make tax capped millions, invest off shore, outsource jobs and US workers benefits are being cut or are being laid off, there is something seriously wrong and out of balance. Pay attention to which representatives are fighting for sustainable people and planet right & profits with sound debate and which ones vote for corporate gouging profiteering rights with smear tactics, hate mongering and lies.

    • Hugh Jordin

      Sound thinking.

    • Tone

      Don’t stop there keep going I’m with you brother !!!!

  • charles

    a good goal would be to have a republican congress that can over ride veto’s. imagine sending thew fair tax bill to president. he veto’s it. congress over rides veto. the results would be immediately felt through out the economy. would that be enough to discredit this president and all democrats. what if obamacare was repealed using a congress over ride of veto. then send just a bill to allow for purchasing health care across state lines. president veto’s it. congress over rides veto. there would be immediate results again discrediting this president and his policies.his approval numbers would drop and congresses would go up. talk about setting the table for the next republican president. over riding veto’s has been rarely done but i believe it would be good for this time. GOD help us!

    • Jeep

      The current congress has decided to shelf a budget for this year. Apparently, the fear of exposing the costs associated with all the “new” programs and entitlements is too high a political price. (Reps have used this tactic in the past too.) However, I think the best we can hope for in the short term is that we can elect enough conservative/libertarian candidates into the house to just defund health care. The taxes will still be there. But, maybe by 2012 we can carry through to get the senate and abolish this monster.

      • JeffH

        Shelfing the budget is nothing new, as I believe it happened a couple times under Busg also. That said, it is an election year which explains why.

        • JeffH

          Bush

        • Jeep

          Exactly right, Jeff. As they say in the movie industry, “There are no new plots under the Sun!”

    • BigBadJohn

      I have always contended that government just works better when the three branches of government are split. The more even the better, it forces congress and senate to work together to get anything passed and limits either parties agenda.

      • Jeep

        Totally agree BBJ. It seems to me that a Dem pres with a Rep congress does not allow for the “progressive agenda” of the left to even get started, while keeping the wandering Reps on the path.

  • Jeep

    In the last presidential election the largest companies in America gave around 2-1 in donations to the Dem party. Corporations and bankers such as Goldman Sachs, HP, Microsoft, etc. To me, some suprising names. I really do not know what this means, but I find it very counter intuitive to the prevailing wisdom. Any thoughts?

  • http://www.personalliberty.com/news/pediatric-patients-with-chronic-pain-look-to-acupuncture-19609231/ James A Graham

    PASS THIS ON TO EVERYBODY YOU KNOW

    Barack OBAMA, in his Cairo speech, said: “I know, too, that Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”

    AN AMERICAN CITIZEN’ S RESPONSE:

    Dear Mr(?) Obama:

    Were those Muslims that were in America when the Pilgrims first landed? Funny, I thought they were Native American Indians.

    Can you show me one Muslim signature on the United StatesConstitution?

    Declaration of Independence?

    Bill of Rights?

    Didn’t think so.

    Did Muslims fight for this country’s freedom from England? No.

    Did Muslims fight during the Civil War to free the slaves in America? No, they did not. In fact, Muslims to this day are still the largest traffickers in human slavery. Your own half brother, a devout Muslim, still advocates slavery himself, even though Muslims of Arabic descent refer to black Muslims as “pug nosed slaves.” Says a lot of what the Muslim world really thinks of your family’s “rich Islamic heritage,” doesn’t it Mr. Obama?

    Where were Muslims during the Civil Rights era of this country? Not present.

    There are no pictures or media accounts of Muslims walking side by side with Martin Luther King, Jr. or helping to advance the cause of Civil Rights.

    Where were Muslims during this country’s Woman’s Suffrage era? Again, not present. In fact, devout Muslims demand that women are subservient to men in the Islamic culture. So much so , that often they are beaten for not wearing the ‘hajib’ or for talking to a man who is not a direct family member or their husband. Yep, the Muslims are all for women’s rights, aren’t they?

    Where were Muslims during World War II? They were aligned with Adolf Hitler. The Muslim grand mufti himself met with Adolf Hitler, reviewed the troops and accepted support from the Nazi’s in killing Jews.

    Finally, Mr. Obama, where were Muslims on Sept. 11th, 2001? If they weren’t flying planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon or a field in Pennsylvania killing nearly 3,000 people on our own soil, they were rejoicing in the Middle East. No one can dispute the pictures shown from all parts of the Muslim world celebrating on CNN, Fox News, MSNBC and other cable news networks that day. Strangely, the very “moderate” Muslims who’s asses you bent over backwards to kiss in Cairo, Egypt on June 4th were stone cold silent post 9-11. To many Ame ricans, their silence has meant approval for the acts of that day.

    And THAT, Mr. Obama, is the “rich he ritage” Muslims have here in America.

    And now we can add November 5, 2009 – the slaughter of American soldiers at Fort Hood by a Muslim major who is a doctor and a psychiatrist who was supposed to be counseling soldiers returning from battle in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    That, Mr. Obama is the “Muslim heritage” in America.
    EVERY AMERICAN MUST
    READ THIS !!

    Be Sure to SEND IT
    to All . Even Print it out
    and Send by Snail Mail !!

    Obama Must be Stopped

    • Doc Sarvis

      And the Bush family was aligned with Hitler.
      And Timothy McVie of OK City fame was a Christian.
      And George Bush overlooked warnings of 9/11.
      Are you sure there were no Muslim’s that fought for the Union in the Civil War or that fought for the U.S. in WWII? How do you know this?
      And we know that there Are Muslims fighting for the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan.

      With these facts and valid questions, I just don’t see your point.

      • James Vincent

        First of all your facts are wrong, which is normal for the social liberals of the left.
        George W. Bush aligned with Hitler is BS and Nazism is a Right wing Philosophy! Both aforementioned are false!

        And Timothy WAS NOT A CHRISTIAN!! And you know it?
        You can stand in a garage all day and this doesn’t make you a car.
        The Fruit of Timothy McVey was murder and death, not forgiveness and love! Mathew 7:17, 18 Jesus said His followers would bear GOOD FRUIT not evil, a good tree cannot bear bad fruit as McVey did… Galatians 5:22 the Fruit of the Spirit which is Love,Joy,Peace,Patience,Kindness,Goodness,Faithfulness,Gentleness and Self Control. Did Timothy McVey show any of these Characteristics? NO!! Just another Liberal Attack on Christianity! Shame, shame!!!

        • libertytrain

          While Timothy may have been raised in a Christian home, he did not carry out Christian teachings —

          • Doc Sarvis

            The same can be said about Muslim Extremists (or any extremists for that matter). Though they may have been raised Muslim, they are not following the Muslim faith but an extremist cause that misuses the religon for awful purposes.

          • libertytrain

            Doc – I think I have to agree with you on that one. Though I am going to get a barrage of attacks launched at me now – Cie la Vie.

          • Jana

            Doc S,
            I agree with you on this for sure. I often speak out against Islamism because there are radicals in this religion that take the killing of infidels to the extreme.(Anyone not believing in their god is an infidel) But there are a lot of truly nice Muslims, and not all of them have evil intentions on anyone. Just like there are these radical supposed Christians. These are the ones who kill abortionists etc. These radicals of any religious bent are not the norm in anything. There has to be something born in them or taught to them from an early age that is not normal, to be so cruel.

          • Claire

            jana– I have edited many manuscripts on Islam/Muslim/Terrorism and they begin their teachings almost from infancy, the minute they are able to walk and talk. The things I have read are mindboggling. As you already know, the teachings are deplorable especially for the female gender. The girls are married to men of all ages. A lot of these little girls are married by age 6. When these little girls start their menses the marriage is consumed. And when they become pregnant at a very early age, they usually have severe problems giving birth because they are not fully grown. Some of these little girls have a terrible time and end up not being able to control their urine. They just stand there and urinate and they cannot help it. And the torture they inflict on people that do not want to belive in this religion are taken out of their homes in the middle of the night-tying their legs to a camel, and tying the arms to a different camel-consequently splitting the person in half. I could go on and on telling you the things I have read. This is no doubt why I have no use for this culture. Sure, there is good and bad in religions, but I do not want any of them around me or my family. This is a religion that I cannot and will not deal with.

          • Claire

            Jana–a few mispelled words. Sorry, hit the wrong keys. I should have proofread.

          • Claire

            Here I edit for a living, trust me people, I do a good job–at work.

        • Average Joe

          James Vincent says:
          April 19, 2010 at 3:54 pm
          First of all your facts are wrong, which is normal for the social liberals of the left.
          George W. Bush aligned with Hitler is BS and Nazism is a Right wing Philosophy! Both aforementioned are false

          While you may be correct concerning George Bush not being alligned with Hitler, you might try looking into Prescott Bush … Geroge W’s grandaddy…who lost his bank during WW2 when it was charged under the
          “Trading with the enemy” act……sometimes we need to research more than what happened last week….last month … last year….actual history did not begin last year etc…. While you are at it…look into Prescott Bush’s ties to the Saudi/Bin Laden Group……..it didn’t just start……..I cannot stress enough….RESEARCH….RESEARCH….RESEARCH!

      • http://naver samurai

        Doc, aren’t you forgetting that Joe Kennedy was a Nazi sympathiser and was fired from is job as Ambassador to England? How about the Kennedys having ties to the mafia? How about “Osama’s” brother being a leader of a radical muslim group in Kenya and killing people because they are not muslim? How about Jimmy Carters brother Billy spyibg for the Lybians during the 1970′s? If you wish to cast blame on someone, make sure you can cover your own !@# first!

        • Doc Sarvis

          Mine is covered quite well, thank you.
          I am afraid (or glad) that there is not enough room on one website/server to document all of the politician’s evil doings in the world. I believe Kennedy did have some ties with the mob but I don’t know much about Joe K. I can not believe Billy Carter was a spy. That makes me laugh. Anyway, please tell me what radical muslim group President Obama’s half brother is a leader of and proof of them killing people because they are not muslim.
          My point to the above post is the same as yours to me. It is easy to make a laundry list of claims (false or half truths at best) to make a flimsy case.

          • libertytrain

            Doc – I have to admit that when I read the idea of Billy Carter being a spy – I could only think of the old “Get Smart” series of bungling spies. Of course, I suppose someone might have been so brilliant as to pose Billy as the goofy beer-drinking, good-old-boy bro – it was all a ploy to befuddle the Libyans and learn all the secrets —

          • Average Joe

            Didin’t ya know…there was suveillance equipment in all of those cans of “Billy Beer” when he traveled abroad….lol…sorry guys and gals…I just couldn’t neglect the Billy Beer…..

    • V Cox

      Here is James Graham again, with his explosive email pitch to
      STOP OBAMA Anyone who reads and sends this made up stuff is simply a co-conspirator in Mr. Graham’s bigotry.

    • JeffH

      James A Graham, I don’t find your posts offensive at all. Keep them coming. Interesting that they always seem to push somebody’s button the wrong way. Food for thought.

  • Jeep

    To paraphrase sc, we need to identify the common enemy. I would extend the definition of the “common enemy” to include anyone who votes party line, just because. The more people we can get involved in the political process, the better. Let everyone be a part, but don’t show up without your critical thinking cap. As Einstein said, “Information is not knowledge.”

  • DaleK

    Alfonse, you are probably correct in your assessment that the Republicans need to use short sound bytes and such, as the Democrats have been more efficacious in delivering their message, although full of half-truths, distortions & out right lies (see the meretricious blather coming from the Democrats & their media allies during the health(no)care debate).
    As reported recently, the Tea Partiers tend to be better educated, more well read, & higher earners than the general public at large; they at least bother to educate themselves, rather than many of our fellow citizens, who are content with the pablum they are fed by the Democrat-controlled media and schools. For them, ignorance is bliss, for they can’t possibly fathom that a government that “cares for them” by giving them costly goods & services which, for example is the essence of “free” healthcare, is at the same time, rapaciously seizing our (and their) Constitutional freedoms. I am sorry to say that far too many of our fellow citizens are content in their indolence to see that they in effect, have become wards of the state, or slaves, addicted to those “gifts” of the government, of which the rest of us are paying for.
    Our freedom rests upon information, which this Administration is trying desperately to control through laws & regulations such as the “fairness doctrine” & internet control, which are inimical to The Constitution but they don’t care, because it is ALL about power.

  • Roy

    The statement that we all want freedom is patently false. The Democrats DO NOT wish for everyone to be free, but to exercise absolute control over all aspects of our lives. If you vote Democrat and don’t understand this, you are ignorant. If you do understand this, then you are compliant with their facist policies.

    • BigBadJohn

      Old political saying:
      Democrats want to regulate business, Republicans want to regulate how you live. Absolutely not cut and dried but kind rings true if you look at history.
      Democrats forced companies to fund pension plans, republicans let companies raid those pension funds. Democrats keep trying to limit oil drilling. Unfortunately, Democrats, or at least this administration, now want to take an active stance in your personal choices vis a vis healthcare.
      Republicans want to limit or abolish abortion which is a family planning issue.
      Republicans pushed the whole concept of “war on drugs” and came up with mandatory sentencing. The best way to win that war would be to take the profit out of it – legalize drugs.
      Republicans want to limit what you do behind your own closed doors, gay marriage,pornography etc.
      Read most of the people here, they would love to see Christianity proclaimed the national religion.
      These are personal issue and the government should not have any say in them.

    • denniso

      Roy, if you vote Repub based on that simplistic statement of political philosophy,then you’d better look twice at whose actually ignorant and complicit.
      The Repubs want to force the Christian religion into public life..

      The ‘moralists’ in the Repub party are the most strident and judgemental in backing and promoting the so called ‘war on drugs’,that tells you that you can’t smoke a natural weed and if you do or dare sell it you go to prison,sometimes for life.

      Most ‘conservatives’ want the State to jail doctors if they comply w/
      what their female patients want to do w/ their own body.

      Most ‘conservatives’ have supported the Feds in their pursuit of medical marijuanna patients.

      Most ‘conservatives’ want the Feds to prohibit terminally ill people in terrible pain from gracefully ending their lives.

      All Dems want is a fair and just society w/ civil rights and freedom for all,rich and poor. That goal means that we have to have some degree of constraints on absolute freedom…speed limits,environmental regs,prescription drug regs,laws against child labor,labor safety laws,affordable access to healthcare for all.

      If you want a free for all,survival of the fittest society where the rich and powerful control everyone else,move to Somalia and other countries where the most money and the biggest gun dictates life and death to all.

      • Jeep

        You are such a democratic hack…If you are going to tell a lie, follow Hitler’s advice and make it a big one.

        Reps do not want to make Christianity a “state religion.”

        There are “moralists” in both parties that want to keep illegal drugs illegal.

        Conservatives want doctors to be free to decide on whether, or not to perform abortions. Not to be forced by the “State” to perform abortions just because they are doctors.

        You purposefully confuse “moralists” with conservatives when you talk about “medical marijuana” use.

        Let’s see…you want assisted suicide to be legal…okay. Most conservatives recognize this for the repugnant act of “doctors” who get their jollies in legalized murder.

        Dems want a “fair and just society”? Then, you turn around and say there has to be “some degree of constraints on absolute freedom”. It cannot be both. In your utopian world someone has to be hurt in order to give freebies to someone else. The rich are citizens too. But, you would gladly bring down the wrath of the “State” to force slaves to take your handouts. How about this? A free America where the outcome is not guaranteed, just the opportunity. Otherwise, go to Denmark.

        I’ve been to Somalia, doesn’t look anything like the US.

        I am sure you will have some inane comments, but at least unlock your mind first. Or, don’t take the check from the Democratic Nat’l Committee for your next post.

      • JeffH

        Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘gun nuts’ ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ‘sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues

        • Jeep

          Spot on, Jeff.

          “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.” Saul Alinsky

          • JeffH

            Jeep, it so nice to see the people that have done their homework and learned their lessons well. You, my friend, are a quick study. Keep up the good work.

          • Claire

            JeffH— I can remember this old saying “don’t mix religion with politics, if you do, neither wins.”

          • JeffH

            Claire, yes, you are absolutly right.

      • angel-wanna-be

        dennisso, judeao-christian religion has been a part of America Heritage from the get go!_Put down all your REVISED and New Age editions of American History and read the originals. _Our Judicial System as a whole is based on BIBLICAL PRINCIPLE as well.

        • ted crawford

          So true, Angel! This is clear when we recall James Madisons answer to someone who ask how the Constitution might work. He answered ” The Constitution was designed for a people whos principals are founded in Judeao Christian beliefs. It is wholly inadequate to all others”

          • Normal Guy

            Ted can’t find your reference anywhere but religious right sites. Here are a couple of quotes that suddest more support for seperation of church and state.

            June 2, 1779–Thomas Jefferson’s “Bill for Religious Freedom” was introduced; it objected to establishment of religion by law or by required tax support for religion: “The impious presumptions of legislators and rulers, civil as well as ecclesiastical, who being themselves but fallible and uninspired men, have assumed dominion over the faith of others, setting up their own opinions and modes of thinking as the only true and infallible, and as such endeavouring to impose them on others, hath established and maintained false religions over the greatest part of the world.” Petitions for and against Jefferson’s bill were drafted.

            1785–James Madison”s “Memorial and Remonstrance” was drafted and circulated as a petition. It protested not only against taxes for religion, but also against the legal establishment of religion: “Who does not see that the same authority which can establish Christianity, in exclusion of all other religions, may establish, with the same ease, any particular sect of Christians, in exclusion of all other sects? That the same authority which can force a citizen to contribute three pence only of his property for the support of any one establishment, may force him to conform to any other establishment in all cases whatsoever?” As for Christianity, Madison wrote, “During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy, ignorance and servility in the laity, in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution.” Madison continued, “What influence in fact have ecclesiastical establishments had on civil society? In some instances they have been seen to erect a spiritual tyranny on the ruins of civil authority; in many instances they have been seen upholding the thrones of political tyranny, in no instance have they been seen the guardians of the liberties of the people.”

          • Average Joe

            Normal Guy says:
            April 20, 2010 at 9:33 pm
            Finally something we can agree upon. Many people confuse what the Declaration of Independence says with the Constitution :
            We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.
            vs:
            We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

            While the 1st Amendment does allow us to practice religion of our choosing…it does not infer that any particular religion is recognized as the religion of the nation. It simply means that we are free to worship any diety that we choose to worship or no diety all.

            It is a truism that almost any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
            Robert A. Heinlein

  • Tracy

    Follow the money!!!! The big donors always hedge their bets!!!!

  • Ronald D Johnston

    Send all the lawyers out to the middle of the ocean and sink the thousands of ships. The ones who can make it back to shore might be pretty good people.

  • working class

    I’ve had enough with both parties. I want honesty a new reality show pitting all would be candidates against a series of lie detector questions; I’d televise the test and results. I’d be fair and ask each person the same questions I’d make them short and to the point. No wavering simply yes and no questions. Then give them an hour after the questions to watch them explain their answers. It’s no different than the government telling the food industry we need to see the labels of ingredients on the food we eat. I’d like to see the same labels on our elected officials we choose. You have the democrat party put in 10 questions and the republican party put in 10 questions. Have each party administer the test for accuracy. Sample questions like these would be great.
    1. Have you cheated on your wife?
    2. Have you ever tried to beat a lie detector test?
    3. Have you cheated on your taxes?
    4. Pro tax increases?
    5. Pro abortion?
    6. Have you ever taken a bribe?
    7. Should we allow illegal immigrants?
    8. Should we Legalize marijuana?
    9. Would you outlaw lobbyists?
    10. Should we drill for our own oil?
    11. Send high school drop outs to the military?
    12. Force welfare recipients to work for their benefits?
    13. Do you support the death penalty?
    14. Have you done illegal drugs?
    15. Could you push THE BUTTON?
    16. Would you send you son or daughter to war?
    17. Should lawyers have to pass an ethics exam every 4 years in order to keep their license?

  • Scott

    I’ve been a Republican all of my life and probably always will be becouse I believe in working, saving and investing my earnings wisely as did my dad before me. That way of life at one time was the American way for both Democrats and Republicans. I was born in 1933. My parents lived through the depression and I saw how rough at times things were.
    I will say this, the depression was going to happen regardless. World war one contributed to it. But mostly as I remember it was the immigration. Too many people, and not enough jobs was the start of it. The country was growing too fast so something had to be done. So Hoover and Roosevelt found themselves with a country full of unemployed people. The author Quotes 28%. As I remember it , it was more like 55%. Maybe a 28% Ave. but that seems low. The WPA and S.S did help a lot of people who other wise would have starved to death, and some did. What Roosevelt did might not have been the right thing, but at least he did something. Unlike now, it wasn’t the Jobs leaving the country, it was too many people coming in for the jobs available. The stock market fell.
    The same thing is happening now, Immigration hasn’t changed, but the jobs have left. Sound familiar? A vicious Circle?
    Many bad decission were made during the depression, but we came through it.
    One more thing about S.S. If it had been used as it was meant to be used, it could have been a good thing. But when politicians were allow to borrow (steal) from it and use for every thing under the sun, than it became useless. 2.6 trillion in I.O.U.’s owed to it at this time, never to be paid back. But that little item sees never to be discussed.

    • Jeep

      Social Security is just a Ponzi Scheme. These schemes entice new investors by offering returns other investments cannot guarantee. The system is destined to collapse because the earnings, if any, are less than the payments to investors. Many high profile people have gone to jail recently (remember Madhoff?) for instigating such schemes. But, I suppose it is a case of the govt saying, “do as I say…”

    • Mike In MI

      Scott – It is appropriate to refer you to the entry by “JEEP” of April 19 at 7:59 AM. He pretty well said all that need be said RE you.
      Before you posted, you should have read the openning article to the point of understanding. Had you done so you would know one of the points proven was that voting for either of the Big 2 results in scant differences in the consequences. That’s why believing any of the propaganda either releases is the height of foolishness.

      • Scott

        Mike: After reading most of your winded responses, I would suggest you try your hand at something you are more adapted to, for instances “hog slopping”.

    • ted crawford

      I believe that Social Security WAS used as they intended, given the way the bill was written! We continuely hear about the “unintended consequences” of their actions, nothing is further from the truth! I’m a simple man, if I can see the consequences, then they did! If not, they should never run for office!

  • kilrntex

    My mother-in-law is a diehard democrat who grew up in the depression and believes that the repubs are for the rich and the dems are for the poor. Yes Virginia, the repubs want to see everyone improve their life and the dems want to make everyone poor except for the elite dems at the top, who want to rule over the rest of us. Most of the rich scum in the world are dems. I’ve never heard any of them give their money to the poor and never heard of any of them paying any taxes! How many lowlifes did obama go through before he found enough dems to fill his cabinet. Many took their names off the list fearing an audit. There’s Charlie Rangels all over the place in government. I understand why obama wants to raise taxes now, none of his people pay any. The dems are all maggots and parasites and many repubs are.

  • angel-wanna-be

    Envy is spelled out very clearly in The tenth commandment, God States,_”You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”__The answer is fairly simple, READ THE BIBLE!

    • Mike In MI

      Hey, Angel – Proverbs 1:10 – 19 is fully revealing is this regard, especially the matter of the enticement that every gang member would draw what each needs from “the same purse”, pool, slush fund, Social Security Trust, Medicare Trust or any other treasure chest available to the leaders in charge of the thieves and murderers trying to fool the youth.

  • Airangel

    Seriously, we need to research and vote “best person” for the job in 2010, I don’t care their title….even the National Tea Party movement (not just Idaho Tea Party) chose congressman Walt Minnick who is a Democrat in Idaho. They chose him based on his history and values as a strong candidate to run and high in their favor…you need to know what each running party stands for and vote accordingly…a good example of “too much government” is Austria…a total Socialistic country taking 94% of paychecks. People live off of 6%, just enough to sleep, eat and breathe but no way to prosper and grow and really have any quality of life and freedom….we need to not be complacent and educate ourselves and our friends and families…more private sector jobs need to be created, NOT GOVERNMENT JOBS that do not pay for themselves but are soley supported from taxes.

  • Rick Bowen

    Thruout my life I have supported both democrats and republicans, only to be disappointed by both parties. I have been rallying for tax reform since the sixties. Every time we get some kind a reform the taxation gets worse. I own a small business and it cost me $7000. a year to conform to all the tax law requirements. THATs OBSCENE! Not to mention the required Insurances that would put you out of business in a heartbeat when you can’t pay up. I am with the tea party movement throw all the bums out and start over. Obama and all his cronies must go if we are to save our republic.

  • Political Junkie

    After reading the comments above, it seems that no one got the point of the article. Doesn’t anyone see the similarities that FDR did in the 30′s to what Obama and the RATs in Congress are doing today?

    As for voting them all out. First of all, it won’t happen. There are too many people in this country that don’t pay taxes and, as a result, have no vested interest in what handouts cost since they don’t pay for them. In fact, too many of them are receiving those handouts. A couple of contributors did point this out. I’d like to see a Constitutional Amendment passed that says if you don’t pay taxes, you don’t vote.

    What people should do is pay attention to how your Representative and Senators are voting on the issues. If you disagree with them, vote them out. Most RATs are working in lock step to take over this country, they need to go. Some Republicans are almost as bad, e.g. Lindsey Graham, a real RINO. We have to be careful that we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

    • Airangel

      I agree, you should have to pay taxes in order to vote – period!

      • denniso

        You guys are way off base and repeating the great Repub lie that 1/2 the country doesn’t pay taxes…
        ALMOST EVERYONE IN THIS COUNTRY PAYS TAXES! Undocumented immigrants,the poorest of the poor and everyone else. Just because some don’t pay fed or state taxes doesn’t mean they don’t pay. Everyone who buys things in most states pays a hefty and regressive sales tax. Everyone who drives pays a gasoline tax and licensing tax for the car. Anyone who owns a home,even a shack,pays property tax. All workers above a bare minimum pay social security and medicare tax.

        So, quit repeating the lie…

        • Airangel

          why are you getting all riled up? if they work and pay taxes then they vote..it’s simple

        • Palin12

          Your “undocumented immigrants” don’t pay one-tenth what I paid to the IRS.

        • denniso

          And you don’t pay a tenth of what Bill Gates does…so what? Does that mean that you should pay more?

          • Palin12

            No, it means the illegals should go home!

      • http://GOGGLE vaksal

        AIRANGEL THATS A REALLY UNREALISTIC OUTLOOK,WHY? BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE ME THAT WORKED OVER 45yrs OF OUR LIFES PAYING TAXES INTO THIS SYSTEM,AND ARE NO LONGER WORKING,WOULD NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO VOTE? WHERE WOULD IT END,OH IF YOU DIDNT GO TO COLLEGE YOU CANT VOTE. PLEASE JUST SAY IT AS IT SHOULD BE SAID,IF YOU ARE IN THIS COUNTRY ILLEAGLY ,YOU CANT VOTE,IF YOU ARE A CONVICTED DEMOCRAT OR REPUBLICAN PUBLIC SERVANT,A FREE TICKET TO SIBERIA WHERE VOTING DOESNT MATTER YOU CANT vote.

        • ted crawford

          You bring up a valid point! This could easily become another unintended consequence! I t seems to point out that any legislation should be well thought out, openly discussed, and very carefully worded! Unlike the healthcare bill!
          I do believe the idea of paying taxes to vote has merit. We must, however, address this issue, and probably more, before we come up with some preposed legislation to address it.

  • eddie47d

    James Graham; You left out the fact that no American Indian names are on the Declaration,U.S. Constition,Bill of rights,Ect. Many Indians welcomed us and ended up with nothing so tell me again who is an American.

    • Jeep

      Hey! What about the Japanese? Or, the Chinese? Were there any Polynesians? Darn…we keep forgetting some group, or another…

      • Debo

        Jeep.
        The only real Americans are the ones that greeted the Europeans when they landed. The Chinese and the Japanese haven’t staked any claims, and the Polynesians were long after when they were annexed. We all came from somewhere else so lets all enjoy this great spot on this earth, and stop the zenophobic bs. It is selfish and unbecoming of a generous nation.

        • Jeep

          Debo, you need to get a life and take some classes on sarcasm.

  • kate8

    The enemy’s primary tactic is infiltration – conquer from within. The fascist elites first took over the democrat party and have been seeping into the republican party for decades. They’ve infiltrated our institutions (churches, Scouts, charities, EDUCATION, etc.).
    Nothing is sacred nor free from their influence.

    We really need to be vigilant about those running for office. They need to be scrutinized carefully (and SHOW us their birth certificates! And NO sealed records malarky). If we make it until Nov.
    without some false flag event, it is critical that we do this right.
    I don’t think we have any more chances, if, indeed, it is not already too late.

    • JeffH

      kate8, well said and spot on s most of your comments are.
      Thanks once more.

  • http://maskedwriter.com al

    Yes, it seems that what Obama is doing now is similar to some of the things FDR did. When will the American people learn that only having the power to vote between two corrupt politicians at a time is not freedom at all. In California they are trying to pass a law where citizens actually vote and approve a specific type of spending law. Why not make it so that now Americans can actually vote their approval or disapproval of all new laws/taxes. As I said, right now we only have the power to vote in another corrupt politician to rob us more. Let’s take away the lawmaker’s power to impose new laws/taxes and give it back to the people.

    • DixieConnie

      Very good Al. I totally agree with you. Power to the people.

  • JeffH

    Ladies and gentlemen. These upcoming elections will be the single most important elections in modern history. These elections will make or break this country and the future of every generation that follows.
    If Obama and the socialists continue as a majority, simply put, the nation that was founded by men of principals and responsibility will be no more.
    Think long and hard about what I have just said…your countries future depends on it.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      JeffH,
      you have just voiced why I will only vote for someone that has a chance to beat Obummer!!! Our blessed country cannot take another term from him again!!!

      • JeffH

        Our country cannot survive a Democratic majority. If they continue to control the house and senate, we’re finished. Everyone can kiss the American dream goodbye.

  • http://none Dale

    No one but myself and those like me should have the right to decide how my money is spent. If you don’t pay taxes you should not have the right to vote on how my pay is taxed.

    Government employees should not be allowed to vote because they do not pay taxes. Government employee pay is tax revenue taken from the private sector. ‘Taxes’ paid and deducted from their pay is just a reduction in the amount of tax revenue they receive for their job. Allowing non-tax payers to vote gives them the ability to vote and steal my paycheck. According to the latest reports government employees make 40% more than private sector workers and as much as 80% more in long and short term benefits.

    Now you know why government sucks up the economy. As a private sector worker and business only you are footing the bill. Even social security paid out to retired government employees was taken from the private sector. Government workers never contributed one dime to the SS fund. It was tax revenue moved from one tax pot to another.

    Government spending returns money to the same folks they stole it from in the first place. You cannot pay taxes with taxes!

    Likewise, before Obama should be allowed to make Military decisions he should be forced to spend a term on the front lines.

  • Dee

    Simple minded people propose simple minded solutions. The payroll tax is made up of several taxes: Social Security, Medicare, State and Federal Tax. The employer matches the Social Security tax for each employee. Only someone who wants to appeal to the uninformed would propose eliminating payroll taxes without proposing better solutions.

    Pay attention to the post from James A Graham in all of the articles today. Get your hands on David Horowitz’s books: The Shadow Party, and One-Party Classroom. Spend some time on Wikipedia reading about anarcho-capitalism and anarcho-syndicalism and the other “anarchos”. In a very short time you will be able to discern the path down which this country is being led … then make your choice at election as an informed citizen.

    • JeffH

      Dee, you might want to check out this site.
      Is a Shadow Party running the Democratic Party?
      http://community.marketwatch.com/groups/us-politics/topics/shadow-party-running-democratic-party

    • JeffH

      Another good link…The “Shadow Party” is a term originally devised by journalists to describe “527″ political committees promoting Democratic Party agendas. It is here used more specifically to refer to the network of non-profit activist groups organized by George Soros and others to mobilize resources — money, get-out-the-vote drives, campaign advertising and policy iniatives — to elect Democratic candidates and guide the Democratic Party towards the left.
      http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/ShadowParty.asp

    • JeffH

      Barack Obama was Rothschild’s Choice
      “Barack Obama will go down in history as America’s first Jewish President.”

      Abner Mikva (Jew)
      Former White House Counsel,
      Clinton Administration
      (Chicago Tribune, Dec. 12, 2008)

      Even more startling is the goal that Rothschild’s man has been assigned by Illuminati “chieftains” to accomplish. That goal is nothing less than the systematic dismantlement and destruction of America and its occupation by a Jewish-run Mafia. Barack Obama was chosen to become the first leader of a Jewish-ruled New World Order
      http://www.texemarrs.com/rothschilds_choice_article.htm

      • kate8

        JeffH, Good for you for uncovering this. It’s good to make the distinction between “Jewish” and “Zionist”. The House of Rothschild and their associations are Zionist, which are not really Jews at all,
        but actually descend from Edomites.

        And yes, Kissinger himself is on record as having stated that Obama is being groomed to head the world government.

        This whole push to “fundamentally change” America is much bigger and more sinister than most people understand, and includes the rest of the world. A global economy has been set up to function like a stack of dominoes. If one topples, all the rest collapse as well. And they
        are now collapsing.

  • kate8

    How is it that elite democrats like Pelosi, Obama et al stand up and
    cry “Raise taxes on the rich! Redistribute the wealth! Increase entitlements!”, and exempt their own ill-gotten gains. And still the
    masses cry “Yes! We love Obama! We love Pelosi! Long many they rule!”.

    These elites do not pay taxes, do not give to charities (except miniscule amounts – wouldn’t you like to know what these “charities”
    are), and still get a pass from the masses! When they say “tax the rich” they are talking upper middle class, as the uber-rich elites do
    not pay taxes. Indeed, they take them.

    Conservatives spot their own bad apples. Dems deify theirs.

    Kinda boggles the mind.

    • DaveH

      Kate,
      When people have their eye on the trough, they can’t see the light.

  • eddie47d

    We all want less government and a government run more efficiently.Neither party controls spending and creates bureaucracy on top of bureaucracy.So little accountability at each stage of tax increases. Both parties divide and conquer and rip of the middle class and poor. Unfortunately,since we’re all human we will take any wealth that comes at us. Whether earned or not;thus we end up with regulations. Who set the monetary standard for those on wall street? or any C.E.O.? Where did this nonsense come from that they deserve million dollar bonuses on top of their salaries.This is not a question of envy but a lack of their responsibility in how it effects the American economy. Many American executives make around 400% more than the average American worker.Who determines their wage scale? These executives also make more than 375% of the average industrial nations C.E.O.’s. So what is fair and is it this unregulated greed that is bringing America down. We the average citizen can’t compete with their wealth which also drives prices higher. These same wealthy C.E.O.’s can lay off workers in droves yet want debt relief for themselves. I think too many of them lack integrity or true patriotism.I know school teachers,electricians,policemen ect. who make $40-80,000 a year and aren’t ripping off this country.I know their love and loyalty to their communities and America is much higher than these corporate pirates. Hedge fund managers make $10,700 every 10 minutes(so add it up). Who says their skills are that much greater than someone who teaches our kids or flies our planes? We need to look at all the pay structures and why is America declining.

    • ted crawford

      We, if we only would, can control the wages of these people! In fact we do now, unknowingly! We do this by the way we purchase our goods and services. If we would spend the time to know about the Corporations that make or provide these goods, and made our purchasing decissions based on supporting only those that meet our value standards, we would be incontrol!

  • Gary

    Willy was right.

  • kate8

    BTW, thanks, JeffH. And ditto to you.

  • ONTIME

    It is past time for the educational systems of this country to put into it’s curiculum the material for the teaching of the government, heritage and traditions of this nation and make sure that it is not corrupted by revisionism, it is information that should be proudly and freely related and conveyed to every man woman and child in order to guarantee that all who live here understand the freedoms, the government and this Republic and the words of our founding fathers. We as a nation need this now more than ever and we need to insure that we become more vigilant about how we maintain the responsibility we have let slip into the hands of the manipulative. It is important because we have lost our way, the founding fathers knew instinctively that government when not made to stay within the parameters set forth in the Constitution would do exactly what it has done to date, grow, intrude and demand and we have stood by idly while the corruption has now reached a point of intolerance and we are verging on a precipice that may very well be the most climatic in our history.

    The very character of the nation is at stake and we have a obligation to restore leadership that serves as is demanded by our Republic’s Constitution, not a government that has no respect for representation of the very people that give it life. Our states cannot make needed decisions that balance the powers of the federal government, our courts are deaf to the fact that the laws are being misinterpeted and act as though the corruption of politic is more important than the will of the governed. We cannot survive as a freedom loving people if we do not obligate ourselves to maintain the integrity that our forefathers asked us to in order to guard against the loss of this nations soul.

  • kate8

    More info comes forward on who Obama really is, and the upcoming
    trial for treason May 14. Fascinating.

    Ya gotta love Rev. Manning.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1_jZnNT9e8

    • JeffH

      kate8, once more you have done it…what a great video, everyone should watch it.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      kate8,
      Agreed and I am thankful to you for posting this video!!! Keep it up lady!

    • ted crawford

      If Dr. Manning truely has what evidence he claims he has, I fear for his future! He will have had to have led an exemplatory life to avoid discreditation! He also must have world class security to avoid some “mysterious” accident or illness!

  • Jaeger

    Denniso,
    I hope you have read George Orwells, “Animal Farm” If you have you will see what is happening now is eerily familiar.
    When the animals took over the farm, everything was fine until the horse Dodger died. After he died, it became difficult for the animals to provide enough food to go around. But the pigs were seen in the farm house having feasts with plenty of food and wine. When the head pig was queried about the fact the pigs had plenty to eat, but the rest didn’t, and since they were all supposed to be equal, his response was, “Some animals are more equal than others’. It will take more than one major “crisis” in America, to create a situation like the death of the main worker in “Animal Farm” but we are on #2, and working on #s 3 and 4. It won’t take much more to see which group “are more equal than others”, unless the leadership are stopped now.

    • DaveH

      Government Employees already are “more equal” than private sector employees:
      http://www.publicpurpose.com/gf-gemp.htm#gempmore

      And unlike the private workers, they usually are negatively productive. By that I mean that they usually not only don’t produce anything, but they also actively interfere with the production of others.

      • denniso

        The vast majority of all workers in our mostly service based society don’t ‘produce’ anything….so they aren’t actually working then??

        • DaveH

          The workers in the service sector are providing services that people voluntarily pay for, unlike those in the Government sector.
          I realize, Denniso, that Liberals don’t understand the word “voluntary”. It’s when you pay your hard-earned money for something you desire, unlike the Big Government that Liberals advocate where they take your money for services you don’t desire.

  • kate8

    If anyone wants to read the headlines NOT mentioned in the MSM, subscribe to Dprogram.net Daily News. Today’s articles will curl your hair.

  • JeffH

    Print out FIVE COPIES of the most descriptive flag in American history, the symbol Benjamin Franklin felt was the most appropriate for the revolution when he wrote, “She never begins an attack, nor, when once engaged, ever surrenders: She is therefore an emblem of magnanimity and true courage. … she never wounds ’till she has generously given notice, even to her enemy, and cautioned him against the danger of treading on her.”

    Fold one of the 8 1/2 x 11 inch flags and insert it into an envelope addressed the President of the United States. The President’s address is:

    President Barack Obama
    The White House
    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
    Washington, DC 20500

    Fold another and insert it into an envelope addressed to your Federal Representative. Fold another two flags and address them to each of your Senators in Washington, DC.

    Place all four envelopes in the mail so they are postmarked MONDAY, APRIL 19th. Why April 19th? Because April 19th is the anniversary of the “Shot Heard Round the World.” On that day in 1775, our forefathers stood their ground against British tyranny in the Battle of Old North Bridge at Concord, Massachusetts.

    http://www.ignatius-piazza-front-sight.com/2010/03/15/front-sights-100th-monday-blog-lets-do-something-big/

  • http://victorbarney@embarqmail.com Victor L Barney

    It’s called a Marxist(Anti-Messiah, according to it’s founder, Karl Marx) takeover! And, it was promised if he elected! This time, it’s the real Israel, not Judah; so it will become Marxism’s biggest failure, making the “great Depression of the 30′s look like a picnic in the park!
    Watch!

  • Palin12

    I am beginning to think that the whole issue of whether Obama was born in the US or in Kenya could be a diversionary tactic to steer us away from looking at the 4 years he spent in Indonesia. watch this video and see what I mean:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtvJ_nM47GM&feature=PlayList&p=B7AD433056A1C3AB&playnext_from=PL&index=1

    • angel-wanna-be

      Palin12, There is more and more indications that he is NOT an American citizen___This has been going around too__

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBJihJBePcs

      • Palin12

        Here is more evidence Obama is a citizen of Indonesia. At the time he attended school in Indonesia, only legal citizens of Indonesia could attend these schools. They did not allow dual citizenship. Obama became a citizen of Indonesia in order to attend school there. It is listed on his school document that his religion is Islam. There is no evidence that he ever repatriated to the United States. Therefore his election is void, and any bills he signed into law are invalid, including the health care bill. The runner up becomes president, in this case McCain. Sarah Palin would be sworn in as VP.
        http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1026857/pg1

        • Claire

          Palin12–There is a guy in Bloomington, Illinois that is really raising the dickens about Obama’s birth certificate or lack thereof. I do not know the whole story, but he says he has definite proof. I am trying to find out. I will post this info as soon as I hear the entire story.

          • Palin12

            Please do!

          • JeffH

            Missouri Republicans push birth certificate questions to oppose ‘tyranny’

            Fifteen Republican members of the Missouri General Assembly have signed on to a state constitutional amendment that appears aimed at advancing the claims of the fringe movement that doubts President Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president.

            The language is contained in a proposed “voter’s bill of rights,” which would serve “as a defense against corruption, fraud, and tyranny.”

            The proposed amendment states:

            For candidates who are required by the Constitution of the United States to be natural born citizens, the secretary of state shall request an official copy of the candidate’s birth certificate. Other certifications, such as a certificate of live birth, shall not be accepted. Should any candidate fail to provide an official birth certificate within thirty days of the request by the secretary of state, his or her name shall not be placed on the ballot.

            The Birthers, as they’re known, have focused on the State of Hawaii’s refusal to release the original of Obama’s birth certificate, as opposed to official copies; Hawaii state law bars the release of the original.

            State Rep. Robert Cooper wasn’t immediately available to discuss the bill, which has drawn criticism on local liberal blogs.
            http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0309/Missouri_Republicans_push_birth_certificate_questions_to_oppose_tyranny.html?showall

    • JeffH

      Palin12, kate8 and others with question marks.

      BORN IN THE USA?
      Justice Clarence Thomas: We’re ‘evading’ eligibility
      Does testimony hint at division behind Supreme Court’s doors?
      U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas told a House subcommittee that when it comes to determining whether a person born outside the 50 states can serve as U.S. president, the high court is “evading” the issue.

      The comments came as part of Thomas’ testimony before a House appropriations panel discussing an increase in the Supreme Court’s budget earlier this week.
      Justice Thomas had previously resurrected a case challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president not based on his birthplace, but on whether Obama, a child born to a foreign national and admitting dual citizenship, would still be eligible under the Constitution’s Article 2, Section 1 “natural-born citizen” requirement
      Hints of division within the Supreme Court on the issue existed as far back as December 2008, as Justice David H. Souter had initially denied the case a hearing, but Justice Thomas agreed to bring it back for review. The case did not, however, obtain the required approval of four justices to move it forward to a full hearing.

      So far, the Supreme Court has not yet heard any case challenging Obama’s eligibility on any grounds.
      http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=142101

      • kate8

        Yes, I saw the article on Justice Thomas and, you are correct, they
        have not been willing to hear any of the elegibility cases which have been brought before them.

        There have been numerous cases brought before lower courts in several different states, however, by many different people, and since before
        the election up to the present. Thus far, they’ve all been dismissed for “lack of standing” on the part of the plaintiff. (We the people apparently have no “standing” to know who this man is.

        There has been one judge who did wish to hear the case on its merits,
        and last I heard it had been rescheduled for June or July. I wouldn’t
        hold out much hope for it, though, as the thugs controlling things are
        pretty persuasive when it comes to making judges see things from their point of view.

        • angel-wanna-be

          kate8 and jeffh, none of what you have written should be a surprise, 1.8 million, I believe (don’t quote me) was spent on burying info!

      • Palin12

        Thanks jeff, I can always count on you for excellent links…unlike you-know-who with busted links, lol

      • Debo

        JeffH.
        Your Post is just so silly. The U.S. Constitution requires that in order to run for president one has to be born in the United States. It doesn’t say anything about the citizenship of ones parents/parent. Your comment is just bogus and without merit. It is past time you birthers accept the fact that Obama is the President of these United States. Obamas’ mother worked for the U.S. Embassy in Jakarta, so I take it that he went to the school where U.S. diplomats children go. Your argument about dual citizenship is just nonsense. You all need to find another issue, this one has been tried and found wanting. Guys and gals give it a rest, it’s old and tedious.

        • JeffH

          Debo, is it that my post is so “silly” or the fact that a “silly” Supreme Court Judge raised the question to his colleagues?

  • kate8

    Palin 12, something is definitely afoot here, more than meets the eye.
    However, the cases being brought before the courts have all included his questionable life history, including his Indonesian citizenship.

    This man is a figment, a media creation. Empty as a hologram. An image created and given the ability to speak……

    And the image is crumbling, no matter how hard the powers-that-be, including the media, try to maintain it.

    Eventually, the truth always comes out. (I hope.)

    • angel-wanna-be

      kate8, bible says , that whatever has been done in secret, will be revealed, not in the time frame we know, but Gods.

    • Palin12

      Obama sealed all his educational records by executive priveledge on his first day in office:

      http://fas.org/sgp/obama/presidential.html

  • kate8

    Yes, angel. And no one is exempt from reaping what they have sown.

  • Matt

    I just heard on KSFO in San Fransisco this morning that this administration has spent twice as much on alcohol and booze than the last administration. It’s good to know what our government feels is important to invest in in a down economy.

    • Palin12

      Does that include pelosi’s bar tab?

    • JeffH

      It makes sense. Only a total drunk would head down the path that the Dems and Obama are walking.

  • kate8

    Alcohol is great for numbing that feeling of having betrayed one’s
    country. Or perhaps they are just on such a roll that they can’t stop
    celebrating.

    How about Obama gleeful laughter everytime an interviewer brings up the desperate state of our economy.

    http://www.eastvalleytribune.com/story/152636

    • JeffH

      kate8, another great find, and I’ll help you out to the next level.

      Was Obama “punch drunk” in 60 Minutes interview with Steve Kroft?
      His remarks came in a“60 Minutes” interview in which he was pressed by Steve Kroft for laughing and chuckling several times while discussing the perilous state of the world’s economy.
      “You’re sitting here. And you’re— you are laughing. You are laughing about some of these problems. Are people going to look at this and say, ‘I mean, he’s sitting there just making jokes about money—’ How do you deal with— I mean: explain. . .” Kroft asked at one point.

      “Are you punch-drunk?” Kroft said.

      “No, no. There’s gotta be a little gallows humor to get you through the day,” Obama said, with a laugh.

      Even his awkward laughter highlighted an issue Obama has faced dating back to the campaign, a sense that he sometimes is too “cool” and detached to fully grasp the public anxiety over mounting job losses and economic worries.
      http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/17778

  • kim

    I havnt been here in a while and decited to have a look at this topic. It seams not much has changed. The libs who come on here leave snite hollier than thou remarks bearing little or no facts. I have looked up many of their so called facts and its twisted like their little self richous mind. Im a poor person in income and therefore know of what i speak. I love the rich. Id like to be one someday. The American dream is of that. I cant help it if im not smart enough of didnt come up with a great idea or got my money from daddy. The rich employ us peons. They contribute to society in so many more ways than some poor guy waiting for a handout. There are just as many nasty selfish people that are poor as rich.All that BS bashing rich people is shear jealousy. here in Pgh we have great instituations built by rich people. Did a poor person ever open a school. YES they did and guess what. They became rich. All those libs in DC are stinkin rich and since they are lawyers have figured out a way around the system. facts are facts and even tho i cant type or spell I know enough to know if someone gives you something you owe them. If the government gives it to you then they have the right to tell you how to spend it. where to live, what school to send your kids. What doctor to see and if your are valuable enough to even live. I can bet you if Nancy and I came up with the exact same cancer with the new plan she would see my grandkids grow up before I.Gov. gives you anything and you owe them your life. I give my money freely to those who I think need it and if I got rich Id like to be able to do the same thing. Not have the Government take it and give it to who they think deserve it like drug addics and abortions and Acorn filled with the worst of humanity. Ya know I use to say I was a liberal minded person. I was even registered a Dem but as I got older and saw their thought process and how anti american and anti God it all is I changed. I do not want to be associated with a group of peoplethat is so easily led to the slauter as those who love Obama and their cronies. Ya there is good and bad in every aspect in life but it seems Satan has his way with those libs. I do feel sorry for all of them. BTW save your retort of how I cant type or spell coz I could care a rats ass what all you libs think.

    • DaveH

      Kim,
      For not being able to spell or type, I think you put together a very good comment. I wish you the best in your life.

      • http://?? Joe H.

        DaveH,
        I agree wholeheartedly!!!

    • shasta

      no problem reading this and i applaud you…….great post THANK YOU KIM

    • ted crawford

      Kim, well said! You are well supplied with the rarest of all commodities in our country, COMMONSENSE! It matters only little if one can spell or type, if they can’t think!
      Thank you for your post.

    • laura

      GOD BLESS YOU KIM, PEOPLE LIKE YOU MAKE PEOPLE LIKE ME FEEL A LITTLE BETTER, I HOPE SOMEDAY YOU ARE RICH, I’M SURE YOU WILL USE IT FOR GOOD. YOU’RE ALREADY RICH IN MIND AND SPIRIT AND THOSE THINGS MONEY CAN’T BUY.
      GOD BLESS

      Laura

  • James Vincent

    John says: April 19, 2010 at 12:37 pm
    I was going to write a response to Denniso but after reading your post I feel what needs to be said has been said brilliantly by you. These Progressives though no matter how much evidence you put forth to them I feel they through pride, ignorance, self righteousness, lack of intellectual insight they will find “Truth to be derisory and perverse. I have for years said that Social liberals are subjective thinkers whereas Conservatives are Objective. What this means is when a social liberal see’s a social need they want to try fix the so called problem without regard to consequences. I.e. Institute a government health care system and who care if it destroys the economy and bankrupts the country!

  • kate8

    Thanks for the article, Jeff. What happens when the nation is sucked completely dry propping up Wall Street? I think that is the plan.

    Great posts here today.

  • chuck b

    jeffh

    barry uses humor as cover up for his ignorance, he was an embarrassment on fox news in his interview by bret baier. we should take a look at so. africa as an microcosm of our country. we can see in the future what could happen here. if you remember the liberal democrats of this country never stopped until they overthrew the government of so.africa in order to spread the wealth, crying out about apartheid, racism and civil rights. both rhodesia and so.af. were wealthy, self contained countries that were not on the international dole. they were over run by immigrants and they demanded their rights. does this kind of remind you of where we are at this present time. our politicians are granting people rights they never earned and allowing foreign immigrants to flow across our borders to be sheltered by the tax payers of our nation. we have not enough employment for those already here and yet the powers allow it to continue. our country will soon look like so. africa.

    • JeffH

      chuck b, for sure. I think this November will be our last chance to save this country from socialism. If we can’t get the people in place to block every move made by this nit-wit until he is arrested, impeached or voted or run out of office our country of freedom is finished. The free market is practically dead now.

  • kate8

    This past November I had the pleasure of meeting a young college student from Rhodesia. Her family were Christians, and she recounted stories of how, when she was 9 or 10, Christians were being systematically slaughtered by those taking over. Her immediate family managed to escape to this country, but many perished.

    This kind of thing happens the world over, and we are foolish if we think it can’t happen here. The Jews in Germany didn’t believe it was going on until they broke down their doors.

    • DaveH

      Kate,
      I believe that anybody capable of rationalizing the theft of our hard-earned money, would likely not care much about our lives either.

  • JeffH

    Bill Clinton and the corporate media waste no time in dancing on the graves of 168 dead men, women and children to demonize their political opposition.

    Former President Bill Clinton told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Friday that he is worried rising anger at the federal government could lead to another OKC bombing, implying that people who use the Internet to express dissent will be to blame for the violence.

    http://dprogram.net/2010/04/19/video-establishment-exploits-okc-bombing-victims-to-push-%e2%80%9cextremist-threat%e2%80%9d-propaganda/#more-35333

    • laura

      JEFFH, I believe he even said something like the Tea Partiers were a bunch of Timothy McVeighs, don’t quote me but I vaguely remember him saying it, correct me if I’m wrong.

      Laura
      GOD BLESS

      • JeffH

        laura, That has become another chant of the leftists. Hannity mockingly referred to his crowd recently at the R. Reagan Library as a bunch of “Tim McVeigh wannabes” and the leftist couldn’t wait to tell us about the comment. “Even Hannity says it”! What a hoot to see them strike like cockroaches and try to convince the realists that he meant it.

  • Richard William Faith

    It continues to boggle my mind every day that we conservatives haven’t yet figured out that during the very first moment after we hear our government leaders misusing words, we don’t instantaneously jump down their throats! Take for example, the phrase “the economy”. The expression itself, in or out of context, is a LIE. There is nothing whatsoever “economical” about our so-called economy, and EVERY TIME WE HEAR THAT PHRASE, is is incumbent upon us to interrupt the dialogue immediately to make that point; furthermore, we should NEVER, NEVER, NEVER use that phrase without inserting the phrase “so-called”. Another term that is nearly always a lie in itself is “reform”. Nearly everything that a politician of any party, but especially a Democrat, refers to by the word “reform” is not only NOT a reform at all, but nearly always the diametric opposite of a reform. Accordingly, every conservative should adopt a personal policy of inserting the phrase “so-called” before the word “reform”. Another lie-term that the Democrats are using as a means of putting lipstick on a pig is “value-added tax”. This tax certainly does not add value to anything! Once again, so-called! I thank God for creating me with a built-in capability of feeling anger and rage when the bastards insult my intelligence like that. Here’s another one: “cap and trade”. I think this really means “Let’s put a cap upon trading, once and for all”. After all, that’s what it will do. As I read the articles on this website, I do take some solace in the fact that the authors are beginning to insert the “so-called”…; however, it isn’t being done aggressively enough. The insertion of “so-called” (where appropriate) should be done always, and without exception. If we don’t do that, we hide our lantern under a bushel (that’s a fire hazard, isn’t it?), allowing the word-liars to think they’ve vamboozled us (even when they haven’t), and coming across to the uninformed as though we actually endorse what’s going on. Hear this: we are all for (actual) reform, and that’s precisely why we mustn’t ever use the phrase “health-care reform” (Obamacare) without inserting the “so-called”, because it is imperative that clarity on the following two causes be unintermittently maintained at all times:
    1) We FAVOR (true) reform
    2) We OPPOSE any so-called reform that actually isn’t a reform at all.
    In addition, it angers and insults us when horrible programs are shoved down our throats under pleasant-sounding names (euphemisms).

    • Warrior

      Great post!

  • Delores Smith

    TO: BOB LIVINGSTON

    Thank you for presenting factual information in your article, “Democrats and the Politics of Envy.” I really appreciate the information.
    Bob, in my opinion, I believe that what is going on right now in our nation is the most serious of any events in our history. The President has surrounded himself with extreme radicals, and is changing our form of government without the consent of the governed.
    I believe that socialism is just the first phase of his goals. He sees most Americans as very stupid.
    As I read most of the posts that you receive, it is obvious that Americans are considerably brighter than
    the opinion Obama has of us. We love our Country and The United States Constitution. His goals will never be achieved.
    Delores Smith
    Delores109@cox.net

  • kate8

    I was just reading Obama’s qualifications for his Justice pick. The one qualification missing was any reference to the Constitution.

    That should be #1.

    • Claire

      I heard this nominee is “for” women’s rights. This also needs to be checked out.

  • Raymond Newman

    Ayn Rand predicted all of this to one degree or another in “Atlas Shrugged.”

  • http://Liberty Susan

    I can’t dissuade you who are fighting against your own best interests to stop trying to destroy what’s left of your freedom or to understand that the GOP and Teabaggers and the Birchers and the KKK are NOT your friends, and the fight against tax changes will give the wealthiest more and the poorer you are, the more you’ll pay proportionately. You’re like confused football players making a touchdown for the other team and expecting applause! Read the facts printed online by the government accounting (non-partisan) office; listen to more than Hannity, O’Really?, and Rush the creepy old drug addict. I’m pro-life and I don’t want my mom’s murderer to be put to death. One prick of a needle, and he feels no more remorse, nor does he suffer. If we were all taught better, everyone would avoid unwanted preganncies and std’s. The fact that our President is half Caucasian shouldn’t be held against him; the fact that he earned his credentials fighting for those of us who are blue-collar and even poorer shouldn’t turn you against him, either. The Good Ol’ Boys offer no REAL answers, only empty, vicious, lies and rhetoric, not the facts. READ the actual information from the source, ask your local teachers to go over the plans with you, ask your librarian how to get to the Library of Congress online, and READ THE FACTS!!! the right feeds you horrid stuff and reaps benefits from your fears. THINK FOR YOURSELVES and stop being ignorant, fearful and reactive! We are all Americans, (yes, even our President), and we should pull together, not engage in a tug o war, with we the people losing on both ends. God bless you ALL and keep you.

    • JeffH

      I’ll re-post this for Susan

      Associate opponents with unpopular titles such as ‘kooks’, ‘right-wing’, ‘liberal’, ‘left-wing’, ‘gun nuts’ ‘terrorists’, ‘conspiracy buffs’, ‘radicals’, ‘militia’, ‘racists’, ‘religious fanatics’, ’sexual deviates’, and so forth. This makes others shrink from support out of fear of gaining the same label, and you avoid dealing with issues

    • Claire

      Susan: I will agree with some that you say-especially about Hannity, O’Reilly and Limbaugh. However, Pro-life is not my cup of tea. I do not approve of killing innocent babies for the hell of it unless the mother’s life is at stake, rape, or incest. And if my Mother had been murdered, I would want the creep that did it to suffer for the rest of his life. I would want him to die a cruel death. And to be very blunt, if people would practice safe sex and/or keep their pants on there wouldn’t be any unwanted pregnancies and stds. And I believe both parties are guilty of the lies, and mudslinging. There is no politician alive that “walks on water.”

    • laura

      Susan,
      Speaking for myself,I have some very clear cut reasons why I do not like Obama none of which have to do with the color of his skin or who his parents were.First of all the company Obama keeps is an incredibly dangerous bunch like Richard Holbrooke,Ed Montgomery,Jeffrey Crowley,Alan Bersin,David J.Hayes,Ron Bloom,Dennis Ross,Lynn Rosenthal,Gil Kerliowske,just to name a few and all are part of his very radical left side agenda and all could care less about you and me.
      I think your view of the Tea Partiers and the GOP being somehow in relation to the KKK IS CRAZY(a misconception of yours).
      I for one am not scared I’m angry (another misconception).
      I don’t listen to the gentlemen you mentioned that often but they seem to be pretty right on the money.
      As far as facts are concerned we don’t have to read them we can see them quite clearly.
      So many of the things you mention are somewhat confusing. If you are pro-life why do you support a president who wants to legalize partial birth abortion? I won’t comment on your Mother,it’s not my place but I do know that if someone purposely killed my Mother I doubt he or she would feel remorse so what’s the point in the lesson of allowing him to keep their life “TO FEEL REMORSE”!!!
      YES,we are all AMERICANS “BUT” we have a president that won’t salute the American flag who has openly admitted in his book”THE AUDACITY OF HOPE” that “I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction”. When he sought the endorsement of the Marxist Party in 1996 when he ran for the Illinois senate.When he sat in a Chicago church for 20 years and listened to a preacher spew his hatred of America.When he accepted funds from the Palestinians for his election.You see I have many good reasons not to like him and it’s not because he’s black. AND I for one am sick of the right wingers calling me and mine racist when they’re the ones always bringing it up in fact I believe it’s the Dems that are actually the racist why else would they support such socialist programs but to keep the poor and races down.

      GOD BLESS AND MAY GOD CONTINUE TO BLESS AMERICA

      • laura

        I MEANT LEFT WINGERS , I’M VERY TIRED
        GOOD NIGHT

        • JeffH

          laura, not to worry, we’re all tired of it…very good comments.

          • laura

            HEY JEFFH, I’m back, just in time to deal with our little leftie debo.
            No hard feelings debo.

            LOL

      • Debo

        Laura.
        Isn’t it better to hate the policies than the person? Hate is a very strong emotion. Hate eats at ones very being, and it isn’t natural for one to hate, one has to learn it. Let us be a little more tolerant in our everyday lives. Do you know the only thing President Bush did that I liked was sending troops into Aghanistan. For 8 years his policies upset me, but I did not hate him for a second,because he was our president. Now, I am so glad he is gone, because he can’t do anything to upset me anymore. One more thing is that I did admire the First Lady Laura Bush, she is one classy lady. What I am trying to say is, one should be able to separate policies from people.

        • laura

          Dear Debo,
          We’ve had our conversations before and have not agreed and that’s ok.
          Again we are not going to agree. First off I never used the word “HATE” once,YOU on the other hand used it 5 times implying that I used it and used it with malice. Your opinion of Bush and his wife are just that “your opinions”.
          As far as policies are concerned, what a person believes in is part of who they are. If a person says that abortion is alright then I say they are condoning murder if a doctor preforms an abortion they are a murderer. If a man calls himself a Christian to get something and then reveals that he is a Muslim he is a blasphemous hypocritical liar. You said that “I hate Obama” in my rant. That IS a lie, for I did not, in fact I don’t believe I’ve ever wrote in any of my rants that I hate Obama.
          When you write lies you make yourself look not credible.
          I don’t know what your point is or your direction. It’s easy to see that Obama has lied to everyone and people like you still back him and then try to turn the tables on us righties by out right lying.
          I JUST DON’T GET YOU!!!!!!

          GOD BLESS MY FRIENDS
          GOD BLESS MY ENEMIES
          AND GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • Debo

            Laura.
            Granted, you didn’t use the word ‘hate’, but what is the difference?, it’s all semantics. I apologize for that. Look, I don’t believe in abotion, but it’s none of my business to tell someone whether to have one or not. Abortion is a very complex issue with a lot of ramifications for the individual in that position. Whether it’s murder that’s not for me to decide. Each of us has to deal with our conscience. What is your proof that the President’s religion was ever Islam? There are no facts that the President was Islam only innuendoes put forth by the extreme right wing fringe. You folks have never seen a lie that you don’t like. It is good that that we have such a free society where anyone is free to slander other people and not pay any penalty. You have a right not to like the President, but the cases you have laid out can’t stand the truth test. You and I aren’t going to agree on much, because I’m a progressive thinking person who believes in the humanity of man. I also know that most of the changes that have made people lives better have been the work of progressives the world over. These are facts no one can refute. My point is that righties believe that they are the salt of the earth, but they are only to the extreme. I don’t know where you fall on the political spectrum, and I really don’t care, but I hope we can agree to disagree.

          • laura

            debo-
            Don’t play your STUPID little games with me!!!!!
            YOU SAID-AND I QUOTE- “granted you didn’t use the word hate, but what difference does it make”!!! When you just got done giving me your pathetic spew on hate. Things like “hate eats you up” “hate is a strong emotion” “it’s unnatural”. YOU USED IT 5 TIMES IN YOUR RANT IMPLYING THAT IT WAS ME WHO POSTED IT.
            IF ANYONE WEARS DIFFERENT HATS debe, IT’S YOU. YOUR A LIAR AND YOU KNOW IT.
            Your the worst kind of Liberal, makes me ALMOST sad for the rest.
            One good thing that came out of this CON YOU PLAYED was the lefts real side YOU ARE A LIAR and YOU have exposed yourself like nobody else could.
            As far as abortion is concerned, I’m going to say this loud and clear IT IS MURDER, if a women is pregnant it is no longer JUST her body, it is a home, not to a fetus but to a LITTLE INNOCENT BABY,”Your Pathetic debo”. I’m not going to mince words with someone like you. All the words you spew about hate being someone else, it’s really you, you try to cover them up and do a lot of back tracking, but it’s no use your a LIAR, MANIPULATOR,but worst of all, you try to believe yourself to BE right.

            And one more thing, when it was said you perverted liberalism that was an understatement.

            AND PROVE OBAMA ISN’T A MUSLIM,I GAVE MY PROOF, NOW TRY TO PROVE ME WRONG.

            GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • Debo

            Laura.
            I can’t prove you wrong because I can’t prove a negative. And for your other post about me being a joke. 1 joke + another joke = 2 jokes. Now I have to go and mow my lawn. Ketch you later. Peace Out.

          • Palin12

            debo…let me jump in here. You want proof Obama is a Muslim. In a nutshell, at age 6 Obama moved to Indonesia and became a naturalized citizen of that country in order to attend school there. On his school admission document it lists his religion as Islam. Watch….
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkjFc3S21nY&feature=related

        • Claire

          Debo–Keep in mind it is the person that created the policies. Policies do not “happen” by themselves.

        • Jana

          Debo, It sounds like you know and understand that emotion of hate much too well not to have experienced it. Now you are trying to impose your emotions on someone else.
          There is nothing too low for you Leftists Liberals. Liberalism used to be a good thing, until people like you perverted it.

          • Debo

            Jana.
            You wear many hats. You are busy as a bee. Now you are a psychoanalyst. Damn you are good. You are a sweetheart.
            Peace out.

          • laura

            debo,
            “YOU WEAR MANY DIFFERENT HATS” “YOUR A BUSY BEE”
            OH PLEASE,
            YOUR A JOKE.

            GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • Debo

            Jana.
            Grudgingly you have come to accept the fact that progressive ideas are far superior to conservatives ones. Then, I shouldn’t be calling you folks conservatives, because meanspirited,intolerance and rabblerousing don’t make one a conservative. You all jump on the bandwagon because you think there is a chance to force your will on others. Your brand of conservatism is destined for the dust bin of history. Jana, you are very angry and nasty, but I can be just as nasty. If you don’t like someone then you hate him/her, there is no grey area. As I have said before you are rightwing fanatic. Peace Out.

          • Jana

            Debo,

            You are a typical pot calling the kettle black. You come on to this site to cause trouble, spewing your hatred and bigotry and claiming its everyone else doing it,trying to force your will on everyone else.
            You are the one that has always been nasty and even snotty. You started out that way. You have a very misguided heart and it comes out in how and what you write. I feel sorry for you as you claim peace, but you have no peace. The very way you write and come across you reveal your inner self, and there is no niceness in there. You call everyone else a liar and tell them they are full of hatred. Anytime someone uses those words as freely as you do says that this is exactly how you are and what you are yourself.

            You have attacked Laura in a very mean and ugly way that has been totally unfounded. Shame on you.

          • laura

            debo,
            YOU ATTACK- Jano , she’s actually being nice to you,I on the other hand am not. I’ve known your kind my whole life, And your kind of PEACE is a lie!!!!!

            GOD BLESS AMERICA

  • kate8

    Really, Susan. Ask local teachers? You mean those fine schools of liberal indoctrination? LOL.

    Maybe you should look somewhere besides your liberal talking heads and their political talking points.

    If we were all taught better? The destruction of morals has been a liberal goal. They are the ones who have encouraged our youth to turn against the traditional values of their parents. Where on Earth have you been?

    I was wondering where the libs were today.

    • DaveH

      They’re busy working their Government Jobs.

      • kate8

        When did they get jobs?

  • chuck b

    delores smith

    obama sees most americans as stupid!! “he’s right” a majority of them voted for him.

    • shasta

      I agree with you Chuck, I never saw so many ignorant Americans, they dont realize they are being robbed, one would think they would check a President to be credientials out before voting for him, Ovomit lost me at Hello and God Damn America…..oh and then came William Ayers, how can anyone who values America check yes for this Thugging Thief?

      • Average Joe

        They have been “Lobamatized”…..no will of thier own anymore…..sooooooooooooooo sad………..And I thought they quit doing those….years ago…..

  • eddie47d

    Jeff H; The free market screwed itself. They bought into every scheme put out there and they tried to sucker us all into it.

    • JeffH

      ..as we are the suckers in Obama’s Candy Land game. Why let a government destroy the free market when it is a proven success? America will never get people back to work without it.

    • DaveH

      Sorry, Eddie, but I will take the free choices of the Free Market anyday over the Forced Choices offered by Government.

  • chuck b

    susan

    if we were all taught better?? why are our schools failing to educate? have you ever examined what effect the unions have had on our education system and the liberal government control? the teachers are educated in the same conditions and by those mostly liberal educators. they have dumbed down the curriculum in order for those of less ability to compete. the union demands for higher pay have drained the school districts and the state of resources. kick the unions out of the school room, revise the competency test for teachers, give the districts the power to fire incompetent teachers. stop the political indoctrination in the class room. take a look at your country today, this is the result of our education system. not all of our teachers fall into this category, they have overcome the
    obstacles cast before them.

  • eddie47d

    Kate 8; Your Rev. Manning videos had a very dark side to it. He goes after Obama for being a one women man.That he should have played the field. So much for moral values from him or even you. That bit about Obama and Reggie Love being with him all the time is a little excessive too. That’s like saying Karl Rove was with George Bush all the time so we must suspect something. You fell for this manipulation and his insincere conservative values. Go back and watch all the videos that get brought up. There’s the one called Hitler=Obama with good old Nazi music for your listening pleasure. That’s the same tactics Glenn Beck uses to stir up the troops. I call it media manipulation and dishonesty and shame on you for falling for this garbage.That same footage on Hitler could be used on any politician so be careful in what you support.

    • DaveH

      Eddie,
      Manning doesn’t say any such thing. He is simply stating that it is very unusual for a heterosexual man to have not had multiple female acquaintances.

      • Claire

        DaveH– Since I consider you to be a rational,common sense type of person, I thought I would comment on some of the so-called links that are posted for people to click on and read. I have to admit some of them are disgusting and some are very good. I realize any politician can be guilty of many many wrongdoings and yes, evil, and I do not condone this. And before anybody freaks out, I do not live in a dream world. But to me, some of these sites are communistic in nature, and perverted. I want the clear-cut truth just like anyone else but I will not garner my knowledge from these nasty sites. The truth can be given without the aura of decadence.

    • Allan

      Eddie-

      Are you aware of the death threats and other vile characterizations of Bush, Cheney, Rove, and Rumsfeld, etc? These were made DAILY on various liberal blogs, print media, radio, and TV…for about SIX YEARS. Thousands of times. Liberals harangued Americans with their contentions that the Bush Administration were murderers and war criminals, that Bush wasn’t our legitimate President, that he made America the most hated nation, that he was arrogant, incarnate evil, in bed with this company or that, that he wasn’t listening to the people, and on and on. Have you forgotten? Any of this sound eerily similar to now?

      So liberals are surprised when people question Obama’s credentials or dislike his policies???? Hail, oh Hypocrites of delicate sensibilities. LIBERALS set the tone for this wretched dialogue we must now endure. Civility is likely unrecoverable. Liberals sowed the seeds…and I hope they like the fruit. It is humorous (in a perverse way) to listen liberals quibble about words coming from conservatives. Only Liberals, of course, get to use labels, right or wrong. In the end, it really doesn’t matter. Liberals are helping to polarize the nation and facilitate the resurgence of conservative leadership.

      • laura

        Allan,
        Like all leftie libs they always point the finger and accuse but never remember or admit their nasty little comments, it’s totally their way.

        GOD BLESS

  • ABinGA

    We just had a Federal judge here in GA impose a $10,000 dollar fine on a lawyer for claiming Obama was not a natural born citizen of the U.S. and could not legally issue orders to the military. She was representing a soldier. The judge claimed the lawyer was bringing frivolous issues to his court wasting his time.

  • kate8

    eddie47d, grow up. I happen to like Rev. Manning. He is able to say things that most of us can’t. Besides, there has been plenty of evidence about Obama’s drugs and gay escapades. One of his playmates, a guy named Young, was murdered to keep him quiet, and another, Larry Sinclair, survived an attempt on his life and went public. Of course, the MSM has dutifully kept all this under wraps.

    And ABinGA, if you are talking about Orly Taitz, the judge was another sellout protecting Obama’s rear, and the fine was an outrage. She’s not going away.

    BTW, Orly is a Russian immigant who knows who Obama is and what he is doing, and she’s trying to help prevent American becoming the awful place she left.

  • ABinGA

    kate8 you are correct. I see you do your home work.

  • eddie47d

    Dave,Manning is IMPLYING nonsense he has no facts to back himself up. Does your wife know how many women you have kissed or whatever? Would these women come forward and confess this in public. Manning makes an awful lot of assumptions about someones personal life that could be absolutely false. (can you say gestapo). Not all people put their love life out in the open and it’s really nobodies business. If it’s true like in the Tiger Woods situations then Rev. Manning can come forth. Until then he’s nothing but a reckless slanderer. So you too have fallen for his B.S.’line hook and sinker.

    • http://?? Joe H.

      eddie47d-cup,
      no what he’s trying to say is that no one remembers him from college!!!! not even the women that he supposedly attended with!!! now do you get it?!?! You seem to be even slower tonight is there a problem??

      • Normal Guy

        Dim Joe

        Here is a link from the New York Times that discuss’ the Harvard Law review election process with his peers.

        http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/28/us/politics/28obama.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

        Here are a few quotes from the article for those to lazy to do any actual research.

        “But those who opposed it saw his presidency as the triumph of meritocracy. He was a black man who had helped one of Harvard’s most celebrated professors, Laurence H. Tribe, with an article on law and physics, and would graduate magna cum laude.”

        “At the last moment, the conservative faction, its initial candidates defeated, threw its support to Mr. Obama. “Whatever his politics, we felt he would give us a fair shake,” said Bradford Berenson, a former associate White House counsel in the Bush administration.”

        ““The things that make law school politics fractious are different from the things that make American politics fractious,” said Ron Klain, who preceded Mr. Obama at the law review and later served as Vice President Al Gore’s chief of staff. Mr. Klain has watched the senator’s rise.”

        There are dozens of people that you can verify that discuss Obama’s time in University etc. Your idiotic rants regarding his background just confirm your ignorance. What is with all you right wingers – you hear something once, decide that this is fact because you heard it once, and then take ignorant dug in positions concerning complete fantasies that you accept as fact. Pitiful.

  • kate8

    The thing is, Obama has gone to great effort to keep his life a mystery. Few people can be found who remember him, and every record he supposedly has has been sealed. Some of what he has claimed about himself has been proven entirely false. What is he hiding? Why is the man presiding over our nation allowed to keep us from knowing anything about him?

    Every other person who has run for public office has been subject to intense scrutiny. But Obama has been covered for at every angle. Does this not trouble you? It should. No conservative would ever get away with this. You libs, and conservatives, too, would be howling for him to come clean.

    Rev. Manning knows a great deal about Obama, and he’s not afraid to stand up to the political machine. I respect him for this. He knows Obama is out to destroy our nation, and he is speaking out. How Obama has conducted his personal life is only important as far as what it says about his character. And why has he been so careful to black it out so completely?

    BTW, Rev. Manning is not the source of info on Young and Sinclair.

    • Kent

      This nation has made Obama a very wealthy man. What would be his motive for destroying it? He has young kids, don’t you think he wants them to grow up in the same America he did? Everyone says Obama is out to destroy America, but no one says why he is out to destroy America. He could be a private citizen again in just a little over 2 years or a little over 6 years at the most. Think about things. Do you really think congress would overturn the presidential term limits for him to remain in office? You really have to get off the paranoid crazy train there hate8.

  • kate8

    Claire, what if the truth is distasteful? How does one gloss over it to make it more palatable for certain sensibilities? I suggest that if you find it offensive, then don’t read it.

    Communistic? Perverted? Perhaps you should stick with mainstream news. They won’t tell you the truth but, hey, it will be sanitized.

    • Claire

      kate8—First of all, I have a right to my opinion just the same as you. I do not pretend to “know it all.” Truth can be distasteful, and cannot and should not be “glossed” over. And remember I said “CLEAR-CUT.” I simply prefer the truth to be as it is, without the innuendos that are added for effect which carry it over the top. Some of these sites are intended for subversion and keeping the public riled up. “Sanitization” has nothing to do with the issue I am speaking of. Apparently you do not agree and that is fine. I really do not care. I have my own thoughts and beliefs just the same as you do. I prefer not to be brainwashed and keep in mind I am fully aware of Obama’s actions and I do not approve. Perhaps we can agree on this last sentence. This is the goal after all, isn’t it?

      • libertytrain

        Claire – I do so appreciate the way you think, write and thanks! Your reply was excellent.

        • Claire

          libertytrain– Thank you for you kind words. I want you to know that I always appreciate your comments also.

      • JeffH

        Claire, I will always respect you for your lack of bias, honesty and even though we may not always agree, I thank you and others for helping me evolve just a little bit on this site. I will always stand firm with my “conservative” beliefs.
        I post links with a lot of different “views” on the what and whys of Americas troubles, current and past. I post them so that people can think, rationalize and come to their own conclusions. Do I believe everything that I post? Only I know what I believe and don’t believe.
        I’m far from paranoid, but everything I see and read is nothing more than bits of information that must be broken down and analyzed for truth and untruth. This society has become a society of distrust, for good reason, because if you can’t trust your government…who can you trust. I’m sure you can remember the days where a handshake and a spoken promise were considered a “bond of trust and honesty”. I see this kind of trust, honesty and integrity in you!
        There are others that present themselves the same way, and I thank them also.

        • Claire

          JeffH–Yes, a handshake and a promise was the way it used to be. I remember it quite well. I respect your opinions, and we can always quietly agree to disagree. Thanks for the kind words, the feeling is mutual.

  • ABinGA

    kate8 Don’t get me wrong. I’m on your side. Was pulling for Orly. Don’t care for the judge much or any of his family. Long line of money in this city.

  • kate8

    ABinGA, the corruption in every area of government, right down to localities, is so pervasive that they have all locked arms and are closing ranks. I think it’s going to take an act of God to pull us through this one.

    It amazes me that there are still those who will rise up and buck the powers-that-be and the power of the media, even against all odds. These people deserve our gratitude and support.

  • ABinGA

    I agree with your thoughts 100%. Another thing that amazes me is I’ve got kin and aquaintances that try to complain about what is happening but do you think they will get off their lazy butts and vote? The one’s who don’t vote I have to tell them when they do vote then we can talk. It’s a darn shame. It isn’t only some of the younger ones but older alike.

  • Raggs

    Why are we discussing this? obama and his cronies are nothing less than Marxist / communist… You bet the democrats want people to think that the republican party is behind the rich and against the poor… If they can fool enough lazy deadbeats into to thinking it’s true than this would give them an advantage in pushing socialism on this country… Just look at health care—- socialism!!! cap-n-tax— socialism… immigration reform—- socialism…
    Everything this regime is putting on the table is control over Americans….

  • eddie47d

    Socialism can be evil and should be confronted when it’s overbearing. Capitalism can be evil and overbearing and should be confronted. A few on this site have taken on Wall Street but the majority turn a blind eye to their travisties.Do businessmen look out for the welfare of America or their own personal wealth. Many companies have been blessed by the generosity of our system.Yet have lost that code of fairness and honesty. It would be nice to get rid of the I’ve got mine screw you mentality and then America can once again be an even greater nation. We have selfish people on welfare and C.E.O.’s alike who are taking America for a ride. We all need the courage to confront both sides and kick them in the pants.

    • Raggs

      Hummmm… You cry capitolism is unfair… Prehaps a Russian style ethics code will best suit your needs… So move!!!! but leave this country free from dictators…

      • denniso

        Raggs….you move to Somalia and let us fix this mess of a country. You want to see dictators? Look back at what Cheny/Bush were doing…surveiling actual Americans online and on phone calls and in the public libraries.

      • JeffH

        Democracy is the wholesome and pure air without which a socialist public organization cannot live a full-blooded life.

      • Kent

        All games have rules, and a game without rules is pure chaos. Capitolism is fine, but it needs to be controlled with guidlines. Workers and consumers both need to be protected from companies that will take advantage. There’s still plenty of money to be made even following the rules.
        Could you imagine what things would be like with no government regulations? We don’t have to imagine far to see. Take Massey Energy and the coal mine in West Virginia. Now can you imagine if every company ignored the safety of their workers. A lot of people might not even make it home at the end of the day. What if we had no building codes? How many buildings would be falling down because the company could make more money by cutting corners rather than doing it right. You government is there in so many ways, but you are too selfish and self centered to see how it bennifits all of us.

        • denniso

          You’re right…capitalism is fine, if it’s got rules to keep it fair and safe. Capitalism w/o controls always tends to run amok and implode…just like we’ve experienced recently.

  • http://herringtons.home.mindspring.com lighterknot

    I do envy the Republican Party; same as I believe ignorance is bliss, there is a Christian majority and Santa Claus is real. This blog reads like 12 blind men feeling up an elephant except someone slipped in a jackass; it don’t matter really the blind have developed amazing senses to compensate. Wish I could say the same for you guy’s.

    The document our fore fathers founded was based on the gentleman’s honor system and only recognized and policed those ranks. The great conservative system was based on the right to duel; not expensive lawyers. It was quickly demolished like the law of the west and a more civilized SOCIAL government established. Except every man of honor realizes something dear to his autonomy was lost. And maybe many lives were saved it did however muddy the waters of individual freedom based on responsibility.

    Socialism is not a bad word; our constitution is a socialistic document empowering WE THE PEOPLE equal under the law of the land. Makes you wonder if our founders had a clue. The waters have become so muddy now and polluted certainly not fit to drink and a great oligarchy has risen out of our ingenious technologies and world dominion is surely its intent. It’s a slimy green monster fat on dollar bills; a seventh generation birth of uncontrolled capitalism exposing our true faith…greed. Human nature at its flowering best you might say.

    Elephant or Jackass the situation now is GLOBAL and the composition must be looked at from that angel – the advent of the nuclear age put the world in a tiny box requiring a single government or we are all dead. Especially if we continue to push non nuclear nations around and lie like we did to the Native American Indians.

    I believed in our constitution and hoped our global government would be one; I still do I think. But I see no freedoms as I enjoyed in my earlier life and as it IS NOW freedom is a farce – we live in a technocratic machine bound to become so well tuned we’ll need permission to fart. Check out the technocracy of the Venus Project under Zeitgeist.com and their clam to divine technology. The only thing humanity has followed faithfully to date.

    Lighterknot

  • kate8

    True, Jeff. Capitalism is not the problem, corruption is. Capitalism functions very well when a people are honest and accountable to a higher power (and I don’t mean Big Bro).

    Greed and gross disparity are a result of years of forces wearing away at our mores and value system, intended to bring about exactly what has happened. Socialism/communism/fascism rise out of a nation devoid of honor. This is why the left has worked so hard at eliminating all references to God, devaluing life, encouraging decadence, and flooding this nation with diametrically opposed cultures and then forcing us to bow to them through PC.

    This nation has lost its soul.

    BTW, May 1st there is a call to prayer for all those who still love what this country once stood for. Check out WND.

    • Jeep

      I beg to differ…just a little. Have some faith in…something. Whether it is God, or just the average American, have some faith! We have overcome much in our short 200+ years of history. And, I for one, do not think the last chapter is upon us. The signs are everywhere that American’s are waking up. We the people still have control of the direction that this great nation is going. We have, and shall overcome any problem.

    • angel-wanna-be

      kate8, it’s hard to watch America and the people who really love her, beaten up, disparaged, and scorned.__I believe we are witnessing the end of prosperity for awhile. _I do believe November will be our last chance, to win America back__I know myself that “To each, there is a season” Life runs a course and cycles of Good times and Bad._ While none of us are perfect, most people, I believe try to be the best they can be. But The Socialists who took over Washington, came in a blink of and eye, with an an arrogant smirk on their face and in their heart._ I think it’s sad when your faced with the truth, that the Government doesn’t care about it’s people, only themselves._ANYTHING THE GOVERNMENT SAYS, I BELIEVE IS NOTHING BUT A BUNCH OF LIES._ One thing I am sure of is, that God, the Bible and those of us who believe, have been spat on, crucified and burned for our beleifs. The Bible and God have remained unscathed, those that are left will carry bible and go on AHEAD___Let the non-believers have there day or days. God is slow to anger, but this Country has been on a reckless path for years, abortion, homosexuality, corruption. And those of whom, that refuse to live by Gods laws, will die by them. My prayer is for healing and the calming of the wrath of God. If I am called a CRAZY RADICAL RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST, because I believe in God. So be it then…..God Bless You

  • John

    denisso you sure paint with broad brush strokes when you are on the attack don’t you? Your arguments are intellectually dishonest, otherwise you wouldn’t feel the need to label and assign beliefs to me that I can’t recall expressing to you. Compassion comes in many forms, some positive, others crippling. The original context we started with I believe related to the politics of envy that the left promotes. I maintain that while most entitlements may be well intentioned, they are almost always poorly implemented and the end result is a burden to those that must support it through taxes and that they almost always “enslave” those whom it was intended to help. Poverty exists in this country because in many ways we promote poverty through the endless maze of entitlement programs rather than promote self reliance and rewarding of accomplishment. The “rich” exist because they have chose to be rich, the “poor” choose to be poor in most cases. Take all the wealth and pass it out equally and wait. Before long, the rich will again have the greater share, the poor will return to their “less fortunate” status. Why? Because the “rich” will work and rely on their individual efforts to reproduce their wealth while the poor will not have a clue on how to retain or build their share having been enabled in a “compassionate” manner.

    I have two sons, both around thirty years old. One has a home and a family, the other is a “career” college student who laments how he is constantly broke. One works diligently, the other parties all the time. One talks of bettering his life, the other talks about the next “Phish” concert. One was independent growing up, the other was enabled by his mother throughout his childhood. One espouses conservative principles, the other liberal. One is angry at the system for going down a socialist path, this other thinks socialism “isn’t a bad idea at all”. One is secure about his direction, the other is envious of his brother. Both lived with me for a time, one paid his rent faithfully, the other never had it and complained that I was asking too much of him. The difference was and is night and day between them. One rarely asks for help and is proud to make his own way while the other has always relied on help. What lesson would I be imparting on the one always wanting help if I always enabled him? Some day he will get a “clue” and realize that he can either be dependent the rest of his life and at the mercy of those enabling him, or stand up and take personal responsibility for his lot in life and do something to improve his future. The same applies to our society. Until we stop enabling people and start truly helping people to take personal responsibility for themselves nothing will change. So you see denisso, your “compassion” which I lack, is nothing more than chains around the necks of the “less fortunate” you so desperately want to help. And my compassion? I want people to succeed and will bend over backwards for those who are willing to help themselves. That is true compassion, and might I add compassion with dignity and freedom.

    • denniso

      I’ve said this before, I’ll say it again…something like 40% of ‘the rich’ inherited their money,they didn’t work hard for it or ‘choose to be rich’. If you really think that the poor ‘choose to be poor’,then there is no discussion…that’s a very convenient comment I’ve heard from many ‘conservatives’ that serves as a cop out for any feeling of guilt or responsibility as a fellow human. That absurdly simple minded statement ends any hope of discussion…similar to the literal believers saying that God will take care of anything,no point in worrying or trying to do anything to make things better. Addios…

      • JeffH

        I feel that everyone has a right to be insane.

      • JeffH

        Beware how you trifle with your marvelous inheritance, this great land of ordered liberty, for if we stumble and fall, freedom and civilization everywhere will go down in ruin.

      • John

        denisso, so what if 40% inherited their wealth? Does that make them worthy of your scorn? Apparently…. What right does society have to demand they hand it over? And what holds the poor back? What prevents them from improving their life? The system? Is there some grand sinister conspiracy to hold them down? Our actions have consequences. We live in (for now) the greatest nation on earth, a country where anyone, despite their race, religion, or condition can choose freely to be what they want. That is the fact that the left so desperately wants to dispute feeling this need to level the playing field through redistribution. It’s wealth envy, pure and simple and you’re infected…

        • denniso

          The 40% or so who inherit their wealth is relevant because you and most ‘conservatives’ repeat over and over that the rich work so hard for their wealth,and that the problem w/ the poor is they won’t work hard…that is the great American myth that you perpetuate and that does a huge diservice to most people who work their asses off and can’t get rich. It’s a simplistic lie that ignores what I said, that
          nearly 1/2 of the rich inherit their wealth and many of them sit on their butts or spend their lives on eternal vacation…that’s what’s wrong w/ the myth.
          I don’t hate or envy people who have extreme wealth whether worked for or not..but I sure as hell don’t respect those who have only inherited money.

          • Jeep

            Although I am sure this answer will not satisfy you…I would argue that those “40%” are American citizens. They are entitled to the same Constitutional protections as everyone else. You seem to be saying that it is okay to rape them because they didn’t earn it. You are obviously green with envy. But, how would you treat the other 60%? Is it okay to rape them too? Or, because they “earned it” they get a break.

            And, you are very short sighted if you think that anyone in America does not have the opportunity to succeed. It is simply a matter of choices one makes in life. If you decide to do drugs, knock up your girlfriend, etc. these decisions will not make it easy for you to succeed. But, the successful millions in America did work hard, played by the rules, and made better personal choices than the “poor”. Nobody wants to be poor. But, you cannot argue that poor people in America were not given the chance to do better.

          • John

            denisso, this 40 percent who you maintain has inherited their wealth sure has you disturbed it appears. First of all, I ask you what gives you or anyone else the right to say that they must give up their wealth because it was inherited? Then there is the other side of this of course, what of the other 60% who haven’t gotten wealthy through inheritance? Those are your stats so we”ll use them for the sake of debate. What say you of their achievements? What makes them so “different” from the “less fortunate” you defend so vigorously? That is the point you keep evading, always returning to the wealth envy mindset that somehow the “rich” are to be scorned. What makes them different is what I am asking you to clarify. Where they born under a lucky sign? Or “destined” by some deity to succeed? Or was it rather a will and a drive to succeed? It all comes back to the individual. Either they have the drive and the self respect to strive to be more than they are despite the hardships we all face, or they don’t. Human nature, that which cannot be changed. Self reliance and responsibility are traits the “rich” have, irresponsibility and the lack of will are traits of the “less fortunate”. How many of our forefathers came to this land dirt poor? Most of them. Mine did I know, coming to Virginia in 1732 as indentured servants working for almost 20 years before breaking away. The difference between those days and the present day was the lack of a government sponsored “compassion”. Hell there was no government to speak of for many. They either made it or not, no government entitlements. No teat to cling to. They took on a challenge making a life in a new land that fewer and fewer Americans now would. Today we have a system which rewards reliance upon the government, and scorns the “rich”, it means votes, it keeps those who dole the goodies out in power. Conservatives, true conservatives, do resent that as badly as that pains you. Note that I didn’t say Republicans, they are just as bad as the Democrats. The parties are not relevant. The ideologies are where the war about “rich v.s. poor” is being waged in this country. Marxist concepts are what the left peddles yet they are afraid to openly embrace it for what it is, socialism. “From each determined by their ability to give, to those determined by their need.’ Or something along those lines. Never been a big fan of Karl…..

            So in the end, the article rings true. Democrats speak of being the party of the poor, scorning the rich, espousing unions and using racism but in fact they are the ones enslaving them, seducing them with the wealth envy mantra. They fear true freedom it seems. They consider the founding framework outdated and non applicable to today’s America. I maintain that profit is not a dirty word, independence and self reliance aren’t “outdated” notions. They are the foundation to what built this great country. A foundation that all Americans can share if they are willing to make the sacrifice. Unfortunately, too many would rather be on the dole, and far too many are willing to enable them to do so.

          • Normal Guy

            John & Jeep

            I have been very fortunate in my life. I was born into a good family, university opportunities, lots of social connections that have helped me to build a number of companies that provide a good living for me and employment and good opportunities to numerous people that work with me and for me.

            I don’t require any help from the government but I have no issues about paying my taxes and supporting what I consider public goods. I don’t think that my success is all my doing, I think that this country has provided me with opportunities and that providing services that improves the lives of others who are less fortunate is a good idea. Inheritances taxes are also not a problem for me. I am already distributing assets to family members and think it is not unreasonable to pay back some of what I have been able to accumulate. I am especially in favour of the top 1% of our society recycling some of their wealth, hoarding assets is not good for the nation. Here are some interesting stats:

            “In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one’s home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%”. – Economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2009)

            “Figures on inheritance tell much the same story. According to a study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, only 1.6% of Americans receive $100,000 or more in inheritance. Another 1.1% receive $50,000 to $100,000. On the other hand, 91.9% receive nothing (Kotlikoff & Gokhale, 2000). Thus, the attempt by ultra-conservatives to eliminate inheritance taxes — which they always call “death taxes” for P.R. reasons — would take a huge bite out of government revenues for the benefit of less than 1% of the population.”

            Check out the link – http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html

            From a strictly selfish point of view I think we are better off if all the wealth is not concentrated in a very small percentage of the population I think this is a formula for discontentment. Poor uneducated people equals high crime, low productivity, and a uncompetitive sub-par workforce – this is not what makes a nation strong. Most people don’t want to be poor, they are willing to work hard to improve their lot in life, it is the American dream to make something of themselves, I see this all the time with people that I employ, give them an opportunity to succeed and they will. I think it is important that opportunities are provided and I think that, health care, education, and financial support of early stage business, or trades pays huge dividends. Teach a man to fish stuff, if you allow people to prosper, if you give them the opportunity for a better life – Well from a selfish point of view it is better for me, I get a better country to live in, I get a safer more stable society.

            Before you go all socialism on me I am very much a free enterprise person, I just see solving some social problems as being in my best interests. I don’t want to give all my money away I just don’t mind investing some of my wealth in my country.

          • John

            Normal Guy, Thank you for a well versed reply but you are missing my point entirely. How would spreading the wealth around change how the poor approach life? Uneducated? Who’s responsibility is that? Spreading the wealth would only lead to a loss of incentive for everyone. The rich would simply quit investing and spending. Excessive taxes and unions are already driving investment and business abroad. Who does it hurt? The poor…Who do you think hires the “poor”? Who buys what the common man produces, however menial the job? Do you honestly think the criminal element would suddenly become law abiding? Would those who make a living existing on entitlements have any incentive to change and become a productive member of society? What would be their incentive to do so when they can share in the fruits of others labors without laboring themselves? The ailments our society faces are common to any society, capitalist or socialist. The problem is not hoarding wealth earned or inherited, the problem is losing the incentive to be self reliant and demanding others pay the way. The problem is the politics of envy, enabling those who simply don’t want to contribute. It’s fair for them with some, so why is it fair then to legally steal from those who do?

            You sound like a fair minded, benevolent man, yet I wonder how you view irresponsible behavior and the enabling of that behavior?

          • Normal Guy

            John

            I am sorry but I think that there are huge untapped potential in our society because many poor people are not able to better themselves, we are sacrificing opportunity, stepping over dollars to save pennies.

            In a society as large, prosperous and complex as ours there are tremendous opportunities to invest in untapped resources, people are a resource and the waste of their potential is not just a loss of their contribution but worse a turning of their energies toward the underground, crime, substance abuse etc.

            Your position seems to be that anyone who is not able to succeed without any assistance is not worth helping. I know from personal experience that this is not correct. Investing in youth, supporting community sports and arts programs, providing decent healthcare, improving education will have huge benefits. You seem to think that the crime rates, are intractable, that those on assistance all want to be, I know that this is not true. You seem to think that business wants to hire uneducated, untrained people, just don’t tax me and I will hire more… That is absolutely false, I will hire when my customers are buying, I will hire when I can get good staff that are productive workers, my business will grow faster when I have better resources. You seem to think that human nature is all about sloth, I know that this is not true. People will work for success given the opportunity.

            I am not naïve; I know that there will always be strata of society that are criminal, addict, social assistance leaches. I don’t suggest that we are going to change everyone; I know that right now we are not optimizing what our society could do. I think that we can do much better; society can provide more fertile soil so that those that can contribute do.

            With our country in its current state the first priority needs to be to stimulate economic growth and get the debt back in line, so current efforts need to be about efficiency, about growing and paying down debt. But we have a lot of social problems, the largest percentage of our population in prison in the western world, very high inner city crime and violence, poor levels of performance at school. We need to treat the disease not the symptom.

            In regard to enabling behavior, for the dregs – no interest. For the trapped – for the good ones going to waste for the untrained, uneducated, for the sick or injured who can’t afford to get themselves back in the game, those that will never live up to their promise because they can’t get out of the hole on their own – I say enable all you can. We are all stronger with them contributing.

          • denniso

            John…you’re making assumptions about my comments that I didn’t state. I said, I don’t hate or envy the wealthy but I don’t respect those who didn’t work for their money.
            I never said we should take the wealth away from the wealthy,whether they inherited it or not. I do advocate that the wealthy pay more in taxes because their wealth was made partly w/ the aid of the entire society,and they can afford it.
            Show me a single wealthy person who has ever been reduced to poverty because they paid higher taxes than working people. The wealthy pay more in taxes but that doesn’t mean they ‘lose their wealth’, they are still wealthy.

          • John

            Normal Guy and denisso, And it appears you both have me pegged wrong as well. I strongly believe in enabling people to succeed, but in a responsible manner. Would I give money to some panhandler? No… If I could offer him a job would I? Yes….I’ve attempted to use a couple of analogies in past posts to clarify what it is I think. I’ve reflected on the history of our country and the hardships our forefathers faced without government assistance. I’ve related personal observations regarding my sons, all to no avail. But then I don’t expect agreement and that is why I referred to the ideological differences we have.

            I believe that anyone who is willing to pay the price, anyone who has the self respect, anyone who takes responsibility for their own life and lives in this country can succeed. I also believe that too many of our fellow Americans have learned that they can “work” the system and that the left panders to them. Are there people in need of a helping hand in this country? Absolutely, and I will do anything I can to help them, always have and always will. Conservatives aren’t heartless despite what some would have you think. But they must want to help themselves in an honest manner if they want me to continue to help. That is the difference it seems between us. I resent the left telling me that I am not compassionate. I resent legal theft in the form of excessive taxation all in the name of compassion. I resent the thought that government is the answer. People are the answer.

            I just come from different stock. I was poor growing up, though I didn’t know it. We never spoke of poor, or envied others. I watched my father and mother work hard all their lives to give me something better than what they had, all without complaint, all with a strong sense of dignity. They didn’t enable me, but rather instilled in me values that have served me well. I hungered for an education, I worked menial jobs to get through school. I ate a lot of peanut butter and drove some real clunkers in my day. No frills… I believe that many Americans have lost that self respect that I can proudly say I had. I believe that many do want the easy way out. I’ve seen abject poverty and I know that one can escape it. What makes me different than anyone else? You tell me.

            No fellows, I’ve had it with the entitlement mentality, no job, no education, and no desire to get either, but the feeling they are owed something from the sweat of someone Else’s brow. That describes the politics of envy. All we are doing is creating a dependent society in the name of “compassion”.

          • denniso

            I don’t believe in just handing money out to people who have no desire to work or to do better, except for the children who are usually the innocent victims of poverty and wind up raised in it and learn to repeat the same. If we don’t break the cycle of poverty between generations then society will be adversely inpacted indefinitely and millions more kids will be lost to it.

            I worked my way through college for 5 yrs,eating rice at 15 cents a serving for lunch most days and free crackers and no gravy because it cost another 15 cents. I couldn’t afford to date and left college in debt that took me 5 yrs to pay off…I have been self employed my entire adult life except for 2 yrs…creating my own jobs and not relying on a boss or company or the gov’t for a dime.

          • denniso

            John…you say you won’t give anything to a ‘panhandler’ and you ‘have had it w/ the entitlement society’. Why aren’t you outraged
            by the billions in tax dollars doled out to corporate panhandlers? The rightwing seems to have no problem w/ millionaires getting gov’t subsidies and defense contractors on the public dole paying their ceo’s millions and their engineers a couple hundred thousand a year.
            When you disparage all ‘panhandlers’ as leeches essentially,you ignore their humanity and individual situations…they’re not all the same. Any of them at any point in time could be desperate to feed his kid or get enough money together to take a bus to find a job, or just mentally ill to enough of a degree that they can’t work. Sure many are
            only beggars only looking for easy money, not all. Just as some corporate subsidies and handouts of tax money are valid, many are a scam and most ‘conservatives’ never whine about them..is it because
            ‘conservatives’ are essentially the corporate party and class?

          • Palin12

            Dear denniso, as I sit here reading your post the tears are streaming down my face! Have you lefties ever heard of Personal Resposibility? Let me see if I get this. If some guy voluntarily decides he wants to become a crack head, do you want to tax me to pay for his medical care? How about instead if this individual picks himself up by the bootstraps and shakes it off and carries on with his life?

          • Claire

            palin12— I sure don’t want my tax dollars taking care of a damn fool crackhead. Besides, I could never figure out WHY a person became a crackhead in the first place. The idiots. Don’t they realize they only have one life to live? Are they too weak to make a good life for themselves? Are they too dang lazy to think past their next fix? I have totally no patience for people like this, regardless of circumstances. Sometimes a person can have a rough life through no fault of their own, but by gosh get a grip and straighten up.

  • angel-wanna-be

    JPhn, well said, I too have two kids a boy and a girl, although they were raised in the same house with both my husband and myself, and only 21 months apart, I was alwasy amazed at the diffences in the mindset of each of them. At 27 and 30 now, they both are fairly Conservative, and are seriously concerned about where America is headed. They believe in Family, God and the “if you don’t work, you don’t eat”, philosophy.___Good post!__Thanks for sharing.

  • Claire

    This is off the subject, but I have to ask. What is going on with the National Day of Prayer? Is the government trying to ban this?

    • JeffH

      On April 15, 2010, United States District Court Judge Barbara Crabb, for the Western District of Wisconsin, struck down the National Day of Prayer statute, 36 U.S.C. § 119, as violating the Establishment Clause. Judge Crabb ruled that the statute serves no secular purpose, but rather calls the nation to engage in a religious exercise – prayer.

      The National Day of Prayer belongs to Americans. It is a tradition that dates back to 1775 and it is not for a Judge to take away. We the people called for the day of prayer and for 59 years we have practiced our freedom to gather and pray.

      This is an attack upon our religious freedoms and it is a sad day in America when an atheist in Wisconsin can undermine this tradition for millions of others who simply wish to join their fellow citizens in praying for their country.

      The National Day of Prayer provides an opportunity for all Americans to pray voluntarily according to their own faith – it does not violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.
      http://nationaldayofprayer.org/news/save-the-national-day-of-prayer/

      • laura

        Truly a sad day for Christian America and all others as well.
        My own 9 year old daughter told me of it this afternoon and she was very upset.

        GOD BLESS US ALL, JEFFH, CLAIRE AND ALL THE REST

        Laura,
        lets us know a change is in the air, doesn’t it…..sad,sad day

        • Claire

          laura–I agree with your post. The foundation of America is crumbling because of people like this. Shame on this judge. I would think she would have the decency to be embarrassed and ashamed for what she has done. But people like this have no shame, or morality.

      • Claire

        JeffH—Thank you for the information. I find this appalling. What in the world was this woman thinking? Slowly but surely these people that are in “power” are banning anything decent and good for America. I can remember when I was younger I used to hear that Russia always said this about America — “they would get us from within.” “They” are doing a dang good job of it. “They” are destroying the backbone and moral fiber of America. And the gist of it is that some of these pathetic people (the judge) are supposed to be Americans. The National Day of Prayer would cover all religions, I would think? I will have to look and see what party affiliation this judge is connected with.

  • Palin12

    Has anyone ever noticed there are NO democrats on Mt. Rushmore? NONE!

    • Claire

      Palin12—Thank you for the info–I never paid attention to party affiliation concerning Mt. Rushmore.

      • Palin12

        Just trying to stir the liberals up :-)
        They come in here to stir us up and sometimes they get stirred up themselves.

      • denniso

        It could be that Dems don’t believe in defacing an entire mountain face w/ idols…

        • Palin12

          Defacing?? I think it’s a beautiful work of art! There’s room for one more in the middle…maybe they could put Barack Obama….NOT!

          • denniso

            A mountain should be a mountain…man made sculpture should be consigned to man made places. If God created the mountain should man
            deface it into replicas of himself? Why no women on the mountain?

          • Claire

            denniso–there are no women on Mt. Rushmore because we haven’t had a female president.

          • laura

            Claire-
            Isn’t it funny how progressive liberals kick GOD out of everything but then use HIM (or suddenly become theologians) when they want to make a point such as defacing mountains.As denisso said “if GOD created the mountain”.?.?.? And “defacing a mountain with idols”.?.?.?
            Just an observation.
            GOD BLESS AMERICA

          • denniso

            The Crazyhorse carving was begun by a white guy,not the natives…I don’t know if the indians are continuing it. The statue of liberty did not tear up a whole mountain face that will remain for thousands of yrs…can’t you see the difference between destroying a mountain and building a sculpture w/o destroying the land?

          • libertytrain

            Denniso the Crazy Horse Sculpture was begun by an Indian Chief and a Sculptor -according to the official website link I gave you earlier- so feel free to check the link for more about the Indian Chief partnered in the Sculpture -
            “The Story of Crazy Horse Memorial
            Sculptor Korczak Ziolkowski and Lakota Chief Henry Standing Bear officially started Crazy Horse Memorial June 3, 1948. The Memorial’s mission is to honor the culture, tradition and living heritage of North American Indians.”
            Crazy Horse sculptor Korczak Ziolkowski and Lakota Chief Henry Standing Bear dedicated their Crazy Horse Memorial dream on June 3, 1948.”

          • Palin12

            denniso is obviously artistically challenged.

          • Palin12

            Tell me just ONE THING that would make me, as a potential tourist, want to visit So. Dakota, other than Mt Rushmore. The sculpture enhanced the mountain and is much more photogenic now.

          • Claire

            laura–You know, I think Mt. Rushmore is a beautiful work of art. And I have noticed people do throw in God, and sometimes I think it is because they have said hateful remarks, and they think this will absolve them of any wrongdoing.

          • Claire

            laura–I didn’t finish…God created the mountain, but mankind made it more pleasing to the eye. The mountain was not defaced, it was made historical. Liberals do stretch things to prove a point, however God’s name should never be tossed around carelessly. Only with sincerity and respect. I am not standing up for anyone here, but Denniso has his beliefs in the Liberal party and nothing will make him believe otherwise. You and I have our beliefs too, and we will not change either. Besides, we don’t want to change, right??!!! lol

        • libertytrain

          denniso – Re Mt Rushmore – Did you need to ask the Indians that are trying to do the same with Crazy Horse something about defacing nature? http://www.crazyhorsememorial.org/

          • Palin12

            Exactly what I was thinking! That Crazy Horse monument will be even bigger than Mt Rushmore and I had to pay $10 to see a half-finished monument, while paying nothing to see Rushmore in the late 90′s. Denniso should be ashamed of himself for disparaging Rushmore. I imagine he feels the same way about the Statue of Liberty.

          • libertytrain

            Palin – No, I don’t think he’d feel that way since it was a gift from the French.

  • lighterknot

    Well I’m afraid of literknots too; they could be what hell is fired with down south. They are those heavy near petrified limbs of the slash pine tree dense with pitch (tar) and laying dead for years some are bleached white like bone. They make handy clubs and the Southern Christine uses them to install religion into the nonbeliever, the backslider and anyone else that don’t agree. Much like the cave man and just as superstitious no doubt. I thought it an appropriate tag for myself; I’m old, dense, dead and I’ve had every bit of my religion beat out of me; thought not with lighterknots but the forked tong…It happened at a young age and I’m one of the lost souls that can’t believe God is going to fix anything for me or any one else. I can’t believe he’s on our side or theirs whoever they are and I’m very sure you won’t find him in any organized religion of modern times. I’m dead sure he belongs to neither political party yet there is a spirit “the living” that is where it dwells (all life). This earth is a living planet an oases in this galaxy possibly heaven. I had much rather live here next to raw nature than streets of gold or the Venus Project. A slight lie there I enjoy creature comforts. And I still try to have a sense of humor. So symbolically I will use lighterknots to uninstall the lunacy of the Christine Right whom might be denser.

  • http://www.facebook.com Magee,Robert H.O.

    None of us or respondents are actually looking for anything different from what the other Americans are searching for. Now if say you are lucky you have enough today or you have worked for it and earned it you deserve it.

    No one is envious about anybody having what they got.Any time you think the problem is out there, that very thought is the problem. You solve it by stopping transmitting negative views about others searching for the same opportunities you are seeking.

    Americans are better of with their political system. never take it for granted it could be worse. I am not asking you to be content with what you already have but keep searching and add on to what you have accumulated. If you are not succeeding change tactics on how you approach your search.

    To blame it on any political parties is not fair. Political parties are facings socioeconomic inevitabilities. Their work is to referee on how citizens share these scarce resources. There are many approaches Democrats follow one approach and the Republicans follow the other approach.

    You can introduce another approach and give them ideas to legally examine your problems rather than labeling them envious. The approaches the two parties have used are limited to certain ideological goals and sometimes those approaches are not in sink with every American. That is not necessarily wrong in my view because we are not to be dictated as to what is right or wrong without ethics and morals.

    Current Administration is right to fend for those who have been excluded from the system and they have not enough voice to overcome the ever surging trend of exclusion of those who have not enough to pay their way out of problems. The system serves all people and therefore affordability of public services is a necessity it cannot be left to business only as usual.

    Sure society cannot ignore the unprivileged and to speak for them is not necessarily doing wrong against those who have achieved but society has a responsibility to share the scarce resources in ways to provide social goods and services.

    Democrats take advantage of serving the less privileged that does not make them envious but sympathetic of that group of people who have no big say in institutions that provide essential services.

    Republicans happen to own most of those institutions and they speak as owners of the companies and they are expected to stand firm on the idea of making business solvent and sound financial footing. Companies public or private must not be drained of profits they make.

    So while Republicans say no to reforms to Health care, Democrats say yes to help those who need the help of affordability of the Health services.

    At the end of the day there has to be a consensus where the majority have it. It is the majority which decides what should happen. The law passed will serve all Americans the right way. Republicans need it and Democrats want it too.

    This is the American way and the only way appropriations are decided by congress through politics of the two parties in representative democracy.

    • Jeep

      What? I think you were trying to make a point. I can disagree though with many things such as envy. Many people are very envious in America. Just look at the way our govt has been conducting business for the last few years. Some have discovered that they can use the club of the IRS to get power and wealth, and they are using it. You talk about the “ideological” goals like there should be something other than the US Constitution. Not in America. Sorry, but the current administration is not working for those “who have been excluded from the system”. Do you really think that putting America into debt as far as we are is really going to help the poor? Silly liberal, the “war on poverty” has been a complete failure. “Ignore the unprivileged”? I thought that everyone in America was given the opportunity to succeed? What America do you live in? Dem or Rep, you are blind if you think either party has consistently championed the poor. And, you are wrong about Reps “owning” the big companies. Did you know that in the last election Dems received contributions almost 4-1 from Wall Street?

      Look do a little research and stop perpetuating the myths and lies. America is the land of opportunity, not the land of guaranteed outcomes. If you want that look to Denmark.

  • Phillip Field

    After eight years of George and endless years of the Haves contradicting the Gospel of Christ by their policies and values, never realizing (or ignoring)the obvious dichotomy, you would think they might have the decency or common sense to shut the f up.

    • Jeep

      That’s right! Now we have Mr. (This is not a Christian country) Oman in office. Much better, whew! And, those darn “Haves”. What a bunch of losers they are. Giving away in charity more than any other nation in the world. We hate them, right?

  • eddie47d

    Having wealth isn’t really much of an issue since everyone wants it. It’s those who get their wealth on the backs of others that chaps peoples hide. Anyone who exploits someone else to gain wealth doesn’t love his country or it’s people. Look how poor Mexico is and where the richest man in the world lives.Years ago Mexicos wealthy owned 97% of the land which made them perpetual landlords and no one could ever get ahead. Even if someone had money there was little land to buy for a home so how is that fair?

    • denniso

      If gov’t can’t or doesn’t set rules for capitalism and markets, then the largest corporations do it and everyone else marches to their drumbeat.
      If we don’t have a gov’t large enough to battle giant corporations on behalf of the people,we’re in trouble…oligarchy.

  • JPW-

    I asked god last night about there being no deceased Democrats on Mt. Rushmore. She told me they are all in heaven with her.

  • American patriot and fighting man

    JPW can you spell G-O-D, not god

  • bedbug

    They are all a bunch of horse thieves; and what do you do with horse thieves? Get a rope……

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
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.