The 62 Percent

0 Shares
139525139

According to the latest Pew/Washington Post poll, a greater majority of Americans are comfortable with the National Security Agency (NSA) reading everything except your thoughts than were comfortable with the idea of a President named Barack Obama. In fact, if the numbers are even close to correct (never a sure bet), 62 percent of Americans harbor no ill will toward government’s inexorable transformation into the sort of outfit one can normally find only in a George Orwell novel or the Department of the Treasury (Internal Revenue Division).

Nearly two out of three Americans believe gathering intelligence on potential terrorism is more important than their Constitutionally affirmed freedom. As a Nation, we are more unified about turning over our freedoms than we are about virtually anything else of significance. To give you some political perspective: A President hasn’t strutted into the Oval Office swinging that kind of electoral lumber since President James Monroe circled the bases unopposed in 1820. (Presidents Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson got close.) I’m not convinced we could come to such an agreement over anything that doesn’t involve free beer and not watching MSNBC.

To be fair, Democrats are less bothered by the NSA’s intrusions than Republicans, but only by a few points. Both sides register well above 50 percent in the “yea” column. That’s sad, but unsurprising — especially given the fact that the two sides have selected Obama, Mitt Romney and Senator John McCain as their intended leaders of the free world.

But what do we actually receive in return for our gift of liberty? The poll results suggest we’re willing to trade liberty for security. Clearly, liberty is in shorter supply than straight answers at a White House press briefing. So where’s that shiny new security we’re supposed to be enjoying? The attacks on Benghazi, Boston and Fort Hood all occurred during the conduct of Operation Boundless Informant. In fact, given the scope of the program, not only should those horrors been averted, but a sizable chunk of crime nationwide should have been averted as well. I’d like to think that some cubicle rat at Fort Meade could take a break from reading my mother’s group emails to her bridge club to alert the local flatfoots that someone’s on his smartphone planning to knock over the First National.

They armed Mexican narcoterrorists, and they promptly lost track of the guns. They federalized our healthcare, but they lied about virtually every aspect of their plan. They left four Americans to die in the desert while they partied in Las Vegas, and then they blamed the whole thing on an old YouTube video. They turned the Internal Revenue Service into the KGB and told us we deserved it, what with all that praying we’ve been doing. The same guys who used to take over the principal’s office to protest something involving whales or Jane Fonda are now running the show in Washington, D.C. When they were kids, they were smug and ignorant. As adults, they’re smug, ignorant and elected.

Yet 62 percent of us are perfectly willing to hand over the Bill of Rights as a marker against future attacks like the ones the NSA domestic spying program has already failed to prevent. Sixty-two percent of us are willing to endure having our emails read by the same government that makes the Department of Motor Vehicles such a party. Sixty-two percent of us trust everything from our Web-browsing habits to our phone records with the same people who brought us a State Department that spends more time on duplicity than it does on diplomacy.

Sixty-two percent of us are willing to ignore patron of liberty Ben Franklin’s admonishment: “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” As for the other 38 percent of us… well, we must be hiding something, right?

–Ben Crystal

Ben Crystal

is a 1993 graduate of Davidson College and has burned the better part of the last two decades getting over the damage done by modern-day higher education. He now lives in Savannah, Ga., where he has hosted an award-winning radio talk show and been featured as a political analyst for television. Currently a principal at Saltymoss Productions—a media company specializing in concept television and campaign production, speechwriting and media strategy—Ben has written numerous articles on the subjects of municipal authoritarianism, the economic fallacy of sin taxes and analyses of congressional abuses of power.

Join the Discussion

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.

  • KG

    Ben Crystal must have attended the same journalism school that Chip Wood attended. “Who flung pooh” U. The Hearst memorial scholarship fund – where lying to affect public opinion is a fine art. The ‘embassy’ in Libya was a CIA safehouse. The so-called ‘diplomats’ were SEAL team operators. The attack was done by Alqueda operators – mostly from Chechnya.

    I finally found the truth behind the so-called ‘Libertarian’ movement. A guy named Stephan Molyneau spilled the beans in one of his youtube videos. He said “…the goal is NOT freedom, the goal is Morality.” And I had to ask “…whos ‘Morality?” I guess whatever you THINK is ‘moral.’ So, libertarians claim the “…the knowledge of good and evil.” No wonder you guys act like little Mussolinis. There was someone else who claimed that the fruit would not kill you. He was reffered to as a Serpent. And he seduced a certain young lady into breaking the law. But, of course, Conservatives have no problem breaking the law if it for the ‘,,good of us all.”

    • vicki

      Ad hominem

      • KG

        An ad hominem (Latin for “to the man” or “to the person”), short for argumentum ad hominem, is an argument made personally
        against an opponent instead of against their argument.

        And what was the argument? That Bill is full of it? Or that a self-confessed ‘libertarian’ is afraid of loosing freedom?

        The truth is Libertarians hate liberty, they want to be ‘righteous’ and ‘moral’, but, in reality, they wish to dictate ‘their’ morality unto everyone else. That’s the argument.

        • Vigilant

          Your grasp of Libertarianism is as faulty as your English “skills.”

          P.S. Who is “Bill?”

          • KG

            Yo, man, I gotz skills!

            Bill…I love you so! I always will….
            Wont you marry me Bill? I got the wedding bell blues!….

            Love you, man
            KG

          • Bill

            So you are looking for someone else to take care of you?

          • KG

            Aren’t we all?

          • WTS/JAY

            So you assume?

          • Bill

            KG
            You have admitted to us in other posts that you are a Che Guevara communist. Why don’t you put your money where your mouth is and move to Cuba. That way you can be a parasite from all of the wealth created by the type of government that you promote. Are you man enough?

          • KG

            You have demonstrated your willingness to be a Nazi stooge. Why not just put pretenses aside and just start killing Jews now? Or maybe you could move to South Africa and join with the white nazi Affricaners. You would have a ball killing innocent negroes.

          • vicki

            Argument to ridicule

        • Nadzieja Batki

          Considering we don’t know you from Noah’s house cat, how is it we are dictating our morality to you?
          But what you are wanting to do is dictate YOUR morality or YOUR immorality as it may be on the rest of the country.

        • Bill

          There you go again, making up things that are not true. Free marketplace and smaller government, so parasites like you can’t feed at the public trough

        • vicki

          That you do not recognize your ad hominim against Ben is obvious and considering the source, not unexpected.

        • Frank Kahn

          Maybe, you are capable of seeing the irony of your statement, but then again, maybe not.

          You have just attempted to make an ad hominem the basis of the argument. If that was proper, then you could not possibly use an ad hominem in supporting the ad hominem attack.

          Bill is full of it, is a classical ad hominem attack.

          Libertarians hate freedom is both proof by assertion and an ad hominem attack.

          The assertion that libertarians are against liberty because they want to dictate “their” morality, is both an ad hominem and a lie. It is not their morality, it is morality.

          As I stated above, morality is based on nature, and what you think is not important. It is immoral to kill another human being, unless it is necessitated by self preservation. Medical abortion is unnatural, if nature determines that a fetus is a problem it is automatically aborted.This is called a miscarriage.

          • KG

            OK, so I have to follow what YOU feel is moral? Tigers eat Indians when they are hungry. So, I can eat an Indian when I get hungry? Mr Molyneau thinks anything the Government does is an act of violence. But, what he fails to acknowledge is that the government gets it’s power by the consent of the governed. He feels as though I as a union member is using the ‘violence’ of the state to get what I want. When the truth is, the People want those same things (better working conditions, better wages etc). That’s why Roosevelt was elected 4 times. There aren’t enough rich people to vote in a president. Moral is the divination of good and evil or, what you think is evil, or good. I know that you want to claim the sheepherders book as a ‘moral’ standard, but I’m afraid when I burn my sacrificed goat, the smell is offensive to my neighbors, even though G-d says that its a ‘sweet savor’.So, the question is “Whose Morality?”

          • Frank Kahn

            My father told me to never argue with a stupid man, for he will not know the truth. But, I never listened to all his advice so I try to help you anyway.

            There is no MY in morality. You dont have a different morality than me, you either have morals or you dont. The morals of the Bible (not the sheepherders book), are consistent with nature. If it is natural, it is moral. If you don’t like it that way, you have a problem with morals, and are therefor immoral.

            Twisting things out of stupidity will not win you any points. It is natural for a lion to eat meat from living animals, after they kill them. If an Indian is careless enough to get killed and eaten, that is his problem. It is not, however, natural, for humans to eat humans. Just because wild predators eat humans, does not make it natural (moral) for humans to eat humans, that is just stupid.

            It is natural for migratory birds to fly south for the winter, this is natural. Humans don’t have the need to do this so it is not natural.

            Pigs wallow in the mud to keep cool, this is natural because they don’t have sweat glands. Humans have sweat glands so they have no natural need to wallow in mud.

            There are thousands of natural habits of animals that are not natural for humans. Comparing the two for morals would be insane.

            You are partially right in the definition of morals. Morals are good and right, so to be immoral is bad or wrong, not necessarily evil. Morals are closely linked to ethics, which is also a standard of good or bad. Personally, I dont care if you want to be immoral, just don’t expect me to agree with it or say it is okay.

            Unions, here you are so blindly stupid it is worthless to even attempt to explain the insane misconceptions you have about them. They are not now, nor have they ever been about better working conditions and better pay. They are about tyranny and oppression. They are about class warfare and prejudice.

            Back when the government started supporting unions, Blacks were not allowed in them. So, when the government decided to give all contracts to union labor, they were discriminating against blacks.

            Also, since blacks were not allowed in, the union was designed to increase the disparity between white living standards and that of blacks.

            Unions are a communist organization. They believe that the worker should rule the company, and set policy for wages and compensation. They are tyrannical in that they force you to join or you dont work. Once you join, you are forced to pay their wages, use their insurance, and even refuse to work when they tell you. Their outlandish compensation packages, which includes retirement, is responsible for bankrupting many companies, and even cities and states. Their strangle hold on government employees have also contributed to the problem with our national deficit. Sorry, but there is nothing good about labor unions in our nation at this time.

          • KG

            In this world, nobody ever gives you anything. You must earn it. Since I want a better life, I could ask for it politely, however, the people who already have a good life are not so quick in sharing that life. So, what to do? I could just continue to live in poverty accepting the scraps that fall off the richmans table, or i can use the one resource they need and I control. My warm body. So, with the threat of withdrawing my labor, the rich man is forced to share his wealth – unless he wants to do it himself. Many rich people have problems working in the hot sun.

            Unions are groups of working people who demand a better life. Because the real source of wealth is the labor that produces it. Are squirrels thieves by ‘stealing’ the acorns from trees? The tree really only needs one acorn to plant another tree. But squirrels need many acorns to live and produce more squirrels.

          • KG

            It was ‘natural’ at one time to see Negroes as slaves. It was even justified by the bible thumpers.
            So, healthcare benefits are ‘outlandish’? The desire to retire with dignity is ‘immoral’? Who do you work for? I guess you must feel superior because you pay out-of-pocket for healthcare. However, there is power in numbers. If you get a bunch of people together…..oh, wait – you must be one of those ‘rugged individualist’ who needs nobody but themselves to live. So, the next time you get sick, or break a bone, why not just pray over it?

    • hippybiker

      Your usual senseless rant.

    • village idiot

      Good for you. You finally found the truth and the truth will set you free! Enjoy your freedom pal, whilst it lasts. You wouldn’t perhaps have found the truth to the worlds problems and be able to rectify the matter would you? Anything is true if you believe it!

    • momo

      “Conservatives have no problem breaking the law if it for the ‘,,good of us all.”
      Neither does Obama, Bush and the rest of the holier than thou idiots running this government.

    • Bill

      Nice try at distorting the truth, or your ignorance is showing. Libertarians believe in the free marketplace and smaller government. That’s all folks
      Any attempt at trying to distort that view by interjecting morality into it is just more of your socialist propaganda

      • S.C.Murf

        Bill, kgb is a spin mister. He takes the truth, which is staring him in the face, and spins it to suit his goals. I believe he gets paid to do it so he is part of the 47% Romney talked of. kgb is a slob, overweight, overbearing and boring. Don’t waste your TIME

        up the hill
        airborne

    • Frank Kahn

      The use of deception in an attempt to ridicule negates the value of the post. Several facts, in your post, are incorrect, or misleading.

      1. An embassy is a safe house of sorts, that is why people can go there to seek asylum. If you are a U.S. citizen, living in a foreign country, and there is danger, you are advised to either leave, or seek safety in the U.S. Embassy. It is not, generally, protected by the CIA, it is usually some form of military presence.

      2. The “Diplomatic Mission” was not a CIA operation, there was a CIA storage facility in close proximity to it.

      3. The diplomats were not portrayed as SEAL operatives, there was some question as to whether their mission was sanctioned by either the CIA, or covert operations by the State Department.

      4. Former SEAL operatives attempted to secure the facility and rescue the remaining U.S. citizens, who were in grave danger.

      5. The attackers were heavily armed Muslim terrorists, with suspected ties to Alqueda. I have never seen any mention of them being Chechen.

      Morals is based on what is RIGHT. It is largely representative of natural law. If you see two bucks having sex, you say “that isn’t right”. That is a moral judgement based on the knowledge that sex is for reproduction, and two males of a species cannot reproduce together. In case, you have missed it, liberty and freedom are also moral. If you saw a herd of sheep, willingly heading into a wolf pack, so the wolves could eat them, you would say that is not right. If the wolves were using coercion to get the sheep to do this you would say it was bad. It is not NATURAL for sheep to give up their freedom, and willingly act as a food source for wolves.

      So, two mistakes were made there: 1. the person who said it is not about freedom it is about morals, was wrong because they are interdependent and 2. You for claiming that his statement made him someone with a god complex.

      Morals are instilled using common sense and logic, they are not the result of feelgood emotions. Just because, you feel good that you are promoting something, that goes against nature, does not make it moral. Just because, you say it is okay, does not make it moral. Having the freedom to do something does not make it RIGHT. Giving someone the ability to do something that is against nature does not make it RIGHT, or MORAL, or even ACCEPTABLE. Any attempt to force people to ACCEPT UNNATURAL things is an infringement of their right to freedom of choice.

      Your last statement is very apropos. It is, in fact, exactly what Obama’s administration is doing, they always say it is for the good of the people, even though it is constitutionally illegal, and therefor breaking the law. Basic, common sense, morals, as defined in the 10 commandments, are good for us all. What is good for the species is good for us all. What builds a strong character is good for us all. Teaching our young to be free independent thinkers is good for us all.

      What part of morality do you have such a big problem with?

      • WTS/JAY

        Frank, don’t you ever get tired of always being right? (-:

  • vicki

    “Yet 62 percent of us are perfectly willing to hand over the Bill of
    Rights as a marker against future attacks like the ones the NSA domestic
    spying program has already failed to prevent.”

    And now we know how the German people let Hitler happen.

    • Nadzieja Batki

      The question can also be as to why is the NSA willing to wear out their equipment listening to inane conversations.

      • Old Wolf

        Because in the words of Cardinal Richelieu,

        If one would give me six lines written by the hand of the most honest man, I would find something in them to have him hanged.

  • hippybiker

    “Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human liberty; it is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.” William Pitt

    “If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands that feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” Samuel Adams

    • Old Wolf

      I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. and judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these war-like preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force must be called in to win back our love? Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask, gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. — Patrick Henry.

      History comes in cycles. There’s a reason we’re… discouraged… from studying real history. It’ is the window to the future. The names may change, the behaviors and powers and desire for power remains. The constitution was to be a bulwark against human nature, by establishing all of us equally under the law, with equal sovereignty, then limiting our power by law over each other. The real question now.. do we observe the lessons of history, or ignore them, and clutch at the feet of that delusive phantom of hope, hoping for the scraps from the table of our ‘masters’?
      — Edited for formatting.

    • Bill

      Hipshot,
      Is your name from the old comic strip character? I remember reading one of his comic strips that reminded me of the actions of politicians:
      It was morning and Hipshot was waking up with a terrible hangover. His eyes were red and there empty booze bottles on the floor. As he gets up, he says to himself ” This is terrible, I am not drinking any alcohol for at least a year”. He gets up, goes into the bathroom, looks into the mirror and says ” I am not going to drink for at least six months”. He goes into the other room, looks at his cat and says ” I am not going to drink for at least a month”. He starts putting on his clothes and says ” I am not drinking for at least a week”. Next scene, you see him waiting outside the bar and someone comes along and says “the bar does not open for at least an hour” . Hipshot says “I’ll wait”
      Just substitute the words alcohol and drinking with spending and WA-LA,
      you have a politician

  • Al Chemist

    That poll is a little hard to believe. Of course, 47 % of the people in the US are on the dole, and are going to vote ‘yea’ on about anything this POS occupant of the WH and his administration suggest. I guess they don’t know that those Obama Phones are going to be monitored.

  • dan

    If you believe those statistics….unemployment is down , business is booming
    and the housing market has turned around….BWAHAHAHAH!

    • Bill

      It is straight out of a three stooges movie

      • WTS/JAY

        No, i think it’s out of the “Dumb and Dumber” movie.

  • Motov

    It is only a matter of time ,..then when the feces impacts on the fan,.. then you’ll see why Obozo will go down in history as the man who attempted to destroy a nation

    • LarryK357

      Attempted? seems like he’s doing one hell of a job doing it now.

    • Bill

      If there is anything left

  • Robert Smith

    What one thing have you not done because of the NSA surveillance?
    Name one thing where YOUR privacy has been invaded and it cause you any inconvenience.
    Rob

    • jim b

      It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins.

      • Bill

        That is a true analogy

      • Vigilant

        And Rob Smith is a high priest of that religion.

      • WTS/JAY

        Well said!

    • Jake Thomas

      The age olds thing – if you’re not doing it, what are you afraid of. Banning large soda’s – doesn’t bother me, I don’t dring soda. Unreasonable taxes on cigs – doesn’t bother me, I don’t smoke. Cops are supposed to have reasonable cause to search your car – most of the time they don’t but they search anyway – doesn’t bother me, I have nothing to hide. At some point Mr. Smith, something will effect you and then, hopefully, before it’s to late, you will come to your sences

      • vicki

        Many liberals have recently noticed that their ox is being gored. Robert Smith doesn’t seem to be one of them.

    • red neck

      Robert…..
      Are you kidding?…. So what you are suggesting is that it is perfectly legitimate for the government to snoop with some lame brained logic like “if you do nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about”?… You are a disease that has infected America!

    • Nadzieja Batki

      Warped reasoning. If people are not doing anything wrong why do they need to be spied on, just to see that they are not doing anything wrong.

    • Vigilant

      Perhaps you don’t mind if we open your personal mail. Or track your forays onto porno sites. Perhaps your daughter would prefer to keep her communications with her gynecologist secret, etc., etc.

      There are a thousand reasons federal laws were once put in place to make it a crime to open someone else’s mail.

      Didn’t know until now that you supported Richard Nixon in his snooping.

      • WTS/JAY

        Both hands clapping!!!

    • Wiley2

      Some of us object to the idea that politicians and bureaucrats are somehow a superior species entitled to monitor, supervise, judge, and punish us if any of our activities don’t meet with their approval.

      It’s not about inconvenience, but about being treated as intelligent and free adults with the right to think and act according to our own beliefs and conscience, rather than as children, subjects or slaves whose every thought and action must be monitored to be sure it is “correct”, according to the judgement of those who presume to be authorities but who are usually the least qualified for that role.

    • Blank Reg

      I have not (yet) actively agitated for angry armed revolt against all forms of tyranny. I don’t want to give away the strategy. ;-)

    • Sarah417

      Well, not at this point in time, but I have on many occasions stated my absolute dislike and hatred for the Obama administration. they will at some point in time go through my emails and deem me a terrorist and take me to the gulag along with you and you and you.

    • vicki

      And? And? There is nothing in the 4th Amendment about “and it caused inconvenience”.

    • mnkysnkle

      The right to privacy!!! Do you need more? It’s not just an inconvience, It’s a constitutional violation.

  • jim b

    Remembering Ben Franklin:
    When we the citizens can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety we deserve and get neither safety nor liberty.

    A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins.

    Welcome to the new America!

    • KG

      And Ignorance is the commodity that is most abundant in the Conservative world. (Ummm… for you FOX viewers)

      • Bill

        Spoken like a true socialist

        • Vigilant

          As he unabashedly is.

      • Nadzieja Batki

        KG, you are the one watching Fox, you seem to know what is said on Fox.

      • Don 2

        The last time that you recently tried to denigrate FOX News, you made reference to a “John” Hannity and a “Glen” Beck. Since you don’t have a clue who you are talking about, it is apparent that you are the real ignorant fool.

      • WTS/JAY

        Roots of Socialism

        Socialism continues to attract the foolish and the wise in spite of its repeated failures. The breadth and depth of this attraction suggest that it is rooted in some common experience. That experience is childhood.

        Children have food, shelter, education, and medical care provided (well or badly) by adults.

        Socialists want food, shelter, education, and medical care provided for everyone. Families are small socialist societies. Socialists want to treat everyone like family.

        Children want things before they learn about money. When parents say “we can’t afford it” children think they’re cruel or stupid.

        Socialists believe a government that doesn’t give the people what they want is cruel or inefficient.

        Children believe what they’re told. They believe Santa Claus is real and leaders are wise.

        Socialists believe in the wisdom of their leaders. Adults are skeptical of leaders, preferring their own wisdom and beliefs.

        Children can’t imagine human diversity. They assume everyone feels like they do.

        Socialists think the right plan will make everyone happy. In reality our different values, habits, and perceptions make profound disagreement natural and inevitable.

        Children need parents who care about them so elected officials claim to care about the people. Businessmen who care mainly for themselves are like bad parents neglecting their children.

        Socialists respect elected officials and hate businessmen.

        Children should not control adults and socialists should not control society. Socialist thinking regresses us into a state of helpless dependence. The illusion of socialism will only be discarded when people understand its roots and outgrow its childish world view. -Harry Smith

    • Bill

      It is such a shame but America is a declining empire. The people have learned that they can vote to fill their pocketbook from the public till.
      The two characteristics the built our society, rugged individualism and free thinking, are slowly fading away.
      The free marketplace, which created all of the wealth that our government is stealing and giving to the chosen group, is being replaced with socialism.
      Goodbye America, it was nice knowing yo

  • red neck

    http://www.randpac.com/
    Join the suit……

  • Jake Thomas

    Without being long winded, those 62% are idiots.

    • KG

      Quote: “By far the greatest bulk of the political ‘education,’
      which in this case one may rightly define with the word
      1 propaganda,’ is the work of the press. It is the press above
      all else that carries out this ‘work of enlightenment,’ thus
      forming a sort of school for adults. This instruction, how-
      ever, does not rest in the hand of the State, but partly in
      the claws of very inferior forces”

      Adolph Hitler – Mein Kampf

      • Jake Thomas

        I’m just a simple man, what the hell are you trying to say with your Hitler quote.

        • independent thinker

          KG has no idea he just likes the sound of the quote.

  • guest

    I believe in FREEDOM,

    the people ‘looking’ at my ‘stuff’ do not know me and I will never know them. I am not standing naked before them as at the airport, nor are they visibly touching people. They can quickly move off my stuff and move on to the next person’s stuff because it will become quickly apparent that I am anti-terrorism. Now they can quickly also discern that I am not for the powers that be now in charge and would wlecome a regime change (Ithink the terrorists through obomination are in charge, the muslim brotherhood’s leader is o), they can also discern that I am a radical believer in JESUS and an avid conspiracy theorist

    BUT WHY I am a nobody there are millions of us

    it is when they have no oversite and go after say Rosen that the danger is apparent

    when they have everybody mined and can just go through and incarcerate those they do not like (the IRS vs PATRIOTS)
    or genetically engineer harm to one group
    can wipe out everyone’s bank account
    no oversite is the problem

  • TIME

    My Dear People,

    The first question one must ask is, { What is a terriost? }

    Next we must address this part of the equation. { Who is a Terriost? }

    Then the question that ties this all together is. { What makes a Terriost a Terriost? }

    Then you have the What, & the Who, then we only need to understand what the word means.

    So, as you can see the term used by the Defacto Gov also known as the United States Inc. “a Terriost” ~ is anyone who will not allow these criminals to Rape, Plunder, and Pllliage.

    On that note, oddly anyone can fit the profile as in even “”YOU.””

    Will you allow someone to rape your child?

    How about your wife?

    Will you allow someone to rob you?

    Take from you what you worked for?

    If you say no: I will not allow these things ~ Then by the definition of the US Inc, YOU are a Terriost. Thus If you stand up and say NO, Your fit the profile.

    Only when all Americans wake up and understand that you are what you are and they are what they are,~ Only then can you start to fix the problem.

    By closing your eyes and blaming one side of a single coin or the other, rather than understaning that the coin is “ONE” ~~ Also ~~ That you don’t elect nor control the “Law makers”

    They control you and are picked by the true masters of this nation, of whom are not the American people.

    Peace and Love Shalom

    • Cal

      Code of Federal Regulations, 28 C.F.R. Section 0.85: “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or
      coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives”

      Domestic terrorism is the unlawful use, or threatened use, of force or violence by a group or individual based and operating entirely within the United States or Puerto Rico without foreign direction committed against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof in furtherance of
      political or social objectives.

      International terrorism involves violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or any state, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or any state. These acts appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnapping.
      International terrorist acts occur outside the United States or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to coerce or intimidate, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.

      Definitions of Treason: Tucker’s Blackstone Vol. 1 Appendix Note B [Section 3] 1803 – “If in a limited government the public functionaries exceed the limits which the constitution prescribes to their powers, every such act is an act of usurpation in the government, and,
      as such, treason against the sovereignty of the people.”

      Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1856- TREASON, crim. law. “This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of allegiance. 4 Bl.
      Com. 75.”

      Black’s Law 6th Edition – “A breach of allegiance to one’s overnment, usually committed through levying of war against such government or by giving aid or comfort to the enemy.”

      Article VI, Clause 2 of the US Constitution: “This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

      The Constitution of the United States of America and all laws, bills, treaties, etc that are IN PURSUANCE THEREOF are the Supreme Law of this land, NOT those who serve within the federal government to carry out the duties assigned by the US Constitution. The Supremacy Clause of Article VI does not declare that laws passed by the federal government are the supreme law of the land, period. What it says is that the “laws of the United States made in pursuance” of the Constitution are the supreme law of the land. In PURSUANCE thereof, not in VIOLATION thereof.

      Oath of Office lawfully required of all sering within the three branches of our government, the
      military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees
      are required to take an Oath to support and defend the
      Constitution and NOT an individual leader, ruler, office, or
      entity. Once given, the Oath is binding for life.

      5 U.S.C. 3331 provides the text of the actual oath of office the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees are required to take before assuming office.

      5 U.S.C. 3333 requires the three branches of our government, the military, all law enforcement, the heads of the States, all federal employees sign an affidavit that they have taken the oath of office required by 5 U.S.C. 3331 and HAVE NOT OR WILL NOT VIOLATE THAT OATH OF OFFICE DURING THEIR TENURE OF OFFICE as defined by the third part of the law.

      5 U.S.C. 7311 which explicitly makes it a federal criminal offense for anyone employed in the United States Government to “advocate the overthrow of our constitutional form of government”.

      18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath of office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.

      The definition of “advocate” is further specified in Executive Order 10450 which for the purposes of enforcement supplements 5 U.S.C. 7311. EO 10450 provision specifies it is a violation of 5 U.S.C. 7311 for any person taking the oath of office to advocate “the alteration … of the form of the government of the United States by unconstitutional means.”
      Our form of government is defined by the Constitution of the United States. Thus, according to EO 10450 and 5 U.S. 7311 any act taken by government officials who have taken the oath of office prescribed by 5 U.S.C. 3331 which alters the form of government other then by amendment, is a criminal violation of the 5 U.S.C. 7311.

      18 USC § 241 – Conspiracy against rights: If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any
      State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
      If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured—
      They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

      Rost v. Municipal Court of Southern Judicial District of San Mateo (1960): “The Legislature, either by amending or otherwise, MAY NOT nullify a constitutional provision.”

      Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189 (1920): ‘Congress … cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.’

      Fina Supply, Inc. v. Abilene Nat. Bank, 726 S.W.2d 537, 1987: “Party having superior knowledge who takes advantage of another’s ignorance of the law to deceive him by studied concealment or misrepresentation can be held responsible for that conduct.”

      Rubinstein v. Collins, 20 F.3d 160, 1990 “Knowing failure to disclose material information necessary to prevent statement from being misleading, or making representation despite knowledge that it has no reasonable basis in fact, are actionable as fraud under law.”
      It is well established law that Fraud vitiates (makes void) any contract that arises from it.

      Brookfield Construction Company V. Stewart 284 F Sup. 94: “An officer who acts in violation of the constitution ceases to represent the government.”

      The laws are here, starting with the Supreme LAW of this land, the Constitution of the United States. Plus the lawful Constitutions of each state.

      Isn’t it time they were enforced? Shouldn’t we start prosecutions?

      • Wellarmed

        A beautiful display of sufficient precedent.

        I do not believe that justice will be served without a cost measured in human lives.

  • Blank Reg

    “If ye love wealth better than liberty,
    the tranquility of servitude
    better than the animating contest of freedom,
    go home from us in peace.
    We ask not your counsels or your arms.
    Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you.
    May your chains set lightly upon you,
    and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

    — Sam Adams

  • Nick jr

    How can they actually believe this crapola about more surveillance making us more secure it is making me feel more insecure. Its secure in prison or a concentration camp to that is where we are going if this keeps up. Giving up your freedom for more surveillance actually makes us all less secure and more at the mercy of the government, or other unscrupulous people. It is against the law, are they above the law. It is against the counstitution are they above the counstitution. This IRS thing has proven they are not on our side. I find it hard to believe this 62% number. If they get away with this what will they try next. Heaven help us!

  • Paul Anthony

    The majority of Americans are not concerned with privacy. That’s not surprising, considering the vast number of people who conduct
    “private” conversations on their smart phones – in public. And why
    should they be concerned? After all, they’re not saying anything they
    haven’t already posted on Facebook or Twitter!
    And yet, if you’ve
    ever watched a police drama on TV you are familiar with this common
    phrase:

    “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and
    will be used against you in a court of law”.
    The same government that wrote that catchy phrase is recording everything you say.
    You’ve been warned.

  • boyscout

    Ben, I never thought it would happen but on this issue I am in complete agreement. What is it exactly that makes a sheeple? is it ignorance, or apathy, or perhaps a combination of poor diet and bad genes? I relish the exchange of opinion on this site, but to maintain no opinion and blindly accept the way things are is somehow unfathomable. Good luck America.

    • Chris

      An “idiot” makes a “sheeple”.

  • mnkysnkle

    Is this another one of those polls that was taken at the “liberal” same sex latrine on “the hill”? How many people took the survey? 100, 200, a thousand? Is this a cross section of working Americans, politicians, or welfare recipients? Polls are “deception ala-carte”. None of these questions were answered in this article or in the links provided.

  • manuel

    Ben, what a sad commentary on the citizens of this once great nation. The wave of the future is the gov’t dole and “welcome a spy into your home”, or else. What are people thinking? Oh, I know, they are not, having been dumbed down by this nation’s public education system and decades of lies from both sides of the aisle.

  • http://betamaxmas.com/ Major Domo

    I don’t believe these ‘polls’. Do you seriously expect truth out of so many lies?

  • wandamurline

    The 62% should get a “good” history book and read how the Austrians during Hitler’s reign were so devastated economically, that they actually VOTED for Hitler to run their country. Within two years, the had lost their freedom of speech, their guns had been confiscated, their wealth had been confiscated, and over time, many of them ended up in concentration camps. When you give up your freedoms for your security, you are a fool. Let not history be repeated….gun registration is first, then they know who has them, and then there is gun confiscation and then there is genocide. More people have been murdered by their own government after relinquishing their weapons than all the wars that have ever been fought….literally million of genocides from their own government, now Mr. and Mrs. 62%, do you think America would be any different? If so, maybe you should also check out the history of genocide of the American Indians and also the murdering of blacks, and the concentration camps (in America) of the Japanese, Germans and Italians when they were American citizens. America is no different from any other country, with the exception of the right to bear arms ….that is what keeps us free and safe….not our government. Japan would have invaded America had it not been for the fact that every citizen potentially would have been armed. Get the facts, get informed before we become Austria.

  • $36364326

    Has the once great protestant republic of USA gone sissy? Couch potatoes and sheeples are fast becoming the death of our great nation! This statistic goes to show how much support those who care about this country can rely on from the sleeping sector that wants to be slaves. Little do they know that EVERYBODY IS EXPENDABLE. By keeping silent and doing nothing in an emergency situation is far worse than doing something radical enough to get arrested or killed. I will ask this again “how much blood was spilled creating the constitution? How much blood is being spilled losing it?” I know 30 years olds that know absolutely nothing about our great documents that have givne them freedom all their lioves, and the just want to shred it. SAD INDEED!

  • nomaster

    One they these trusting sheep will look back and awe at their simple naivity. Too late to cry the tears when the club of tyranny hangs over your head. What happened to honor, truth and belief in freedom.

  • Guest

    What does one expect when these same group of sheep do not mind being sexually assaulted at the airport? In retrospect, ”only” being spied upon is not so bad, as you can at least keep your clothes on.

  • $36364326

    Surely a sad day in USA. This once great protestant republic use to be a nation of brave men and women and children who fought against the tyranny of the church state of the old world. Now that the church state is knocking at the door in the form of an american pope and a catholic, soon to be POTUS, along with over 150 representatives who are catholic. HAVE WE THE PEOPLE FORGOTTEN from whence we came? We desperately need to return to our protestant roots NOW! before it is too late and Biden shuts down twitter, and all the miracle means of communication we must take advantage of NOW! The papacy has sworn for 1500 years that they will never change, so if 150 million martyrs doesn’t move you to action nothing will! EVERYONE MUST READ FOXX’S BOOK OF MARTYRS TODAY! http://www.ccel.org/f/foxe/martyrs/home.html
    While it is still available. Find out what the vatican does to people that do not join them! THIS IS SERIOUS INDEED! ALL THE SCANDALS ARE SMOKE AND MIRRORS. this is the big picture. Catholic means universal, and they will stop at nothing to achieve this, even a false second coming that will fulfill Matthew 24:24. The great signs and wonders are coming from their ridiculously nonsensical LUCIFER telescope which they are so serious about, and most, YEAH all the world wondered after the beast!