I Don’t Want to Tame Big Government….

So as you awaken to the beginning of yet another week in today’s America, I offer today a bit of a pep talk, a bit of a rallying cry, and a bit of a further explanation for where I want to go, both personally and with Stand Up For America. I can tell you all that the last 14 months has been a tough time for me. Challenged by many of you, those faithful readers that have digested my daily thoughts, and then took off your kid gloves and smacked me around, I have spent the last 14 months challenging myself. I found that the paradigm that I had been living for so very long….. was not entirely flawless (yeah, I know… Shocker). I found that while I still am smarter than the average bear, I still make mistakes, find contradictions in my conclusions, and stumble as I attempt to find the path to personal freedom, individual liberty, and personal responsibility. My most shocking conclusion (at least most shocking to me) came in my conclusion about government in general.

What I found is that I have absolutely zero interest in taming big government…. I want to kill it.

When I started SUFA, I was searching for a political identity. Disgusted with the Republicans and always knowing that the “progressive” movement was absolutely wrong, I did not know where to turn. So I began looking at other parties out there. Libertarians, Constitutionalists, whoever. The idea for me was that both major parties had abandoned the Reagan idea that “government is not the solution.” They both decided that bigger government was better, albeit they each wanted to take away our freedoms and liberties in different ways. But make no mistake, neither is interested in anything other than furthering their own reach, power, scope, and control. The other parties each seem to be attempting to find a niche, corner a market, but they don’t campaign on the idea of actually shrinking government, and the few that do add in some other crazy things that the country either isn’t ready for or that completely contradict their premise. That lead me to fully endorse the concept of VDLG. And be clear… I am not taking back that endorsement in any way here today.

I want all of you to think about something for a moment. Think about the founders and all the folks involved in the discussions back then. There was so much difference in the paths forward that they saw. Some saw a larger centralized government as the path forward. Some saw a small federal government with powerful state governments. Yet others saw the people as the ultimate authority on power, with a government that served and obeyed them. Fortunately, that last group won out in the end, at least to an extent. However, we have danced towards populist ideals ever since, losing sight of the individual liberties that were intended to be protected.

The point is that when you think back to all the discussions we have documented from those debates and arguments, the constant cry was that the intent was to find a path forward that granted the people of this new group of united colonies liberty and freedom. Beyond all else, no matter the path, the founders we remember were those who championed the cause of individual liberty and personal freedom. Those were the principles and values on the tongue of every person who put their name to the Constitution of these United States of America. Was the final document itself flawed? Unfortunately it was. If it weren’t, we wouldn’t be in the mess we are in. A flawless Constitution would not have allowed the interpretations and manipulations that have occurred over the last 220 years or so. We will discuss that fact some other time. The point is that the leaders of that time spoke incessantly about individual rights and personal freedom for all men.

Fast forward to the modern federal government. Take Ron Paul out of the equation. Can you name a single other national politician who has taken the stand that personal freedom and individual liberty are the tantamount goals in today’s America? I can think of NONE. We have two major parties with a couple of independents thrown in for good measure. And there is no one in Washington DC who is interested in protecting your individual liberty. There is no one in Washington DC who is interested in securing your personal freedom. Each party simply talks about how their version of stripping you of those things is better than the other guys version of those things. They both work in tandem with the other, neither ever exposing that the ultimate goal is their power. Neither will ever point out the inherent flaws in the fact that government is infringing on your rights no matter which party tactic is used. They work together to make you all think that they are mortal enemies. But all they are really doing is ensuring that half of America is mortal enemies with the other half. This is why I often refer to them as being one team with two different color shirts (with a tip of my cap to BF for being the first to give me that analogy).

And that, my friends, was why in its initial stages the Tax Day Tea Party movement was so appealing. The idea behind the movement was that government had become too big, too intrusive. I know the folks on the left thought it was about hating Obama, but they were dead wrong. Obama was nothing but a catalyst. An impetus. A poster child for what big government was trying to grow even larger into. No my liberal friends, the tea parties were not an anti-Democrat movement, they were an anti big government movement. Taxes are too high. Government is too far reaching. Congress no longer represents the people. The President no longer is our champion. It is a shame that the left took the movement to be what the MSM told them it was, because a golden opportunity was lost for us to all come together and begin demanding the changes that we all know we need. Big government, with the MSM’s assistance, did what it does best, and kept us all divided.

The unfortunate thing is that the tea party movement has begun to unravel. Hope is not lost for their cause. But the reality is that they are beginning to be embraced by the Republican party. A bit of the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” complex happening there. Tea party dislikes big government (ie: Democrats because they have complete control right now). Republicans dislike Democrats. Therefore Tea party and Republicans should be friends. And there are too many in the tea party leadership embracing this because they believe it makes them mainstream. Acceptance from one of the two major parties “legitimizes” them. That is truly unfortunate, because acceptance from one of the two parties that espouse big government makes the tea parties illegitimate. As I said, it is not too late for them, but they are fading fast.

In short, I have not found that perfect party. I have not found a political set of ideals that I wanted to ally myself with. I found no champion on the national political scene. But I found that I do not need them. I don’t need that champion. I will be my own champion. And I will work tirelessly to ensure that each one of you become your own champion.

What I embrace these days is the concept of individual liberty and personal freedom. I embrace the concept of not initiating violence on non-violent people. I embrace the idea that we were born free, and that the government and its agents do not have the right to take that freedom away, no matter what “greater good” they claim to serve or what impending evil they claim to protect me from. I embrace that I am free. I don’t hold the illusion that I am able to live free in today’s environment. But that does not mean that I don’t have the right to be free. And I will work every day to live more free, to eliminate the obstacles that keep all of you from living free, and to wake up those who don’t yet understand that freedom and liberty are the ultimate goal, not comfort or more equal outcomes.

What I will not do is demand instant perfection. I will not demand that if it is not the perfect answer to the universe, that I must reject it and reach for the unreachable. I understand that small government is still government, and therefore it will probably mean that some folks are not as free as they would be with no government. But small government is a ton better than big government. So given the choice I will champion small over big. The other position to take would be to say no government is the best solution for freedom, and I will settle for nothing less, and will therefore go from big to none or not do anything at all. What I am searching for, my friends, is to begin by making things BETTER. Not perfect, but better. If I start a business, the goal is to get better each year. Sure being a billionaire next year would be great, but highly improbable. That does not mean that I forego starting the business altogether. I look at a transition in government the same way. We need to work to get closer to freedom each day. Take big steps when they are available, take little ones when that is what presents itself, and to hold the line when the populist or progressive movements have a surge in popularity.

And how do we take steps each day to make things better? By taking a stand. By standing up for what America was founded on. By waking America up one person at a time. What we have to do is to once again get Americans to understand and value the concept of freedom.

So what does all of this mean for Stand Up For America? It means little other than I have explained where I stand. The site is not going to see dramatic changes. I am still going to take relevant topics and political discussions and write my articles about them. I am still going to run everything exactly the way that I have done from the beginning. I will still maintain that my only rule is that respect for all opinions is required. I will still welcome those who offer a different opinion than the one that I hold. Because I still believe that the ultimate path forward in America is for the two sides to come together and understand one another. Freedom cannot come at the end of a gun my friends. It can only come with the liberation of minds. It can only come with discussions that foster an understanding of liberty and why it matters. I will still work to educate those who want to understand the political world better. I will still work to bring information to all those who read here, in the hopes that they will digest that information, discuss it, hash out their thoughts, and reach their own logical conclusions. What SUFA has become is a place that I am very proud to be a part of, and I have no intention of changing it in some dramatic way.

And for the record Obama has not stopped it.... weird.And before I forget to do so, I want to say a little something to those of you who fall on the progressive side of the arguments. I realize that some of what I may have written above may lead you to believe that I want to silence you, refute you, or banish you. Please believe me when I say that could not be further from the truth. Ray, Charlie, Bob, Todd, Chris, Mathius, Buck, and others, I have the utmost respect for you all. You come to a forum where you are vastly outnumbered and offer your insights, your thoughts, your wisdoms, and your beliefs. That is not an easy task. But to say that your opinions are highly valued here at SUFA would be a VAST understatement. We cannot come together without understanding each other. You, good sirs, have allowed me to gain a far better understanding of different perspectives than I ever could gain if this forum were filled with nothing but those who agree with me. I cannot thank you all enough for the intellect and massive spirit that you have given to my site. I hope that we will all continue to learn from each other for a long time to come.

So as we move forward, I will expect everyone to come to the table with all their thoughts. I challenge those of you who don’t take part in the discussions to enter into the fray. You have nothing to fear. And you have everything to gain. I challenge each reader at SUFA to look inside yourself and search for the core principles that drive your inner harmony. And then stick to them, explore them, challenge them, and more forward by remaining in harmony with them. I challenge everyone to explore the dogma (political not religious) that has consumed the US, and to find its flaws and then refute them. I challenge everyone to seek to understand the different perspectives offered, and engage them with respect and reason. In short, I challenge each of you to use SUFA for what I intended it to be used for: to take each day and grow and learn and reach for better. Because in the end, the goal has to be to make sure that liberty doesn’t end up floating in the New York Harbor.

I start the new year with a firm understanding that as the size of government continues to grow, the leash on my personal liberty and freedom gets shorter and shorter. I don’t like leashes. I was born to run free. And run free I will.

I don’t want to tame big government, my patriot friends, I want to kill it.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. Happy Monday 🙂

    Good words today USW. Last night I looked at what today is. An important holiday for the black Americans as they celebrate MLK Day. I also thought that if MLK knows whats going on with the Govt., He’s rolling over in his grave. I also think MLK would be discusted at what the people he fought for, have failed to see, much less take advantage of what he fought for.

    As big Government continues to get fatter, the black Americans should step back in time and listen to what MLK said. If they did, they would be as disappointed in them as I feel today. I think MLK would feel the same.

    As we continue to rid our lives of BG, those who could have had the most to gain, have instead embraced it, and for all the wrong reasons, that may someday help in the destruction of all of our freedoms. I say NO to BG, and willing to go with no Govt. over what we have. So here it is, Martin Luther King Jr. Day 2010, how much has really changed the last 50 years?

    Have a great Day!

    Peace and Live Free!

    G!

  2. Being 63 now and having been a political junkie since High School, the old “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty” line is most appropriate for everyone to remember. Having been active in my youth in the New York Republican and Conservative parties there were so many times when candidates won who believed as I and my friends did. We thought that we had turned a corner. back in 1964 when Goldwater won the nomination we thought we had finally seen the party reject liberalism only to see Nixon elected four years later by claiming to be a conservative and then tarnishing the conservative name. In ’80 we supported Reagan and he won. Things or at least attitudes changed but his selection of Bush the elder as VP and Bush’s subsequent presidency wiped out all the gains that Reagan made. Bush the younger ran as some type of “compassionate conservative” but there was little if anything in his governance different from his father. In State races we elected James Buckley, older brother of Bill to the senate on a third party line and then watched him loose re-election because of the Republican Party sitting on its hands. Al Damato was elected senator as a strong conservative who morphed into a liberal with a desire to be “liked” and of course be invited to the right parties in D.C.

    I have come to the conclusion that liberals are a lot like vampires in those 1940’s movies. You have to be constantly ready to drive and then redrive that stake into their hearts. What we see today in Mass. is that this is a right of center country. Not very right, not extreme right but a country whiich favors the individual over government when given the option. MSM and the liberal establishment have for years clouded the issue. I doubt that I in particular would have been a staunch conservative had I not seen those Johnson vs Goldwater commercials in ’64. Tearing up the social security card, sawing off the Eastern seaboard, advocating nuclear war, poisoning little girls with Strontium 90, my God, anybody with half a brain who paid attention knew that was crap but it was piled on, repeated over and over and made Goldwater look like a lunatic. At that point, I swore as they used to say, on the altar of almighty God, that I would always try to do the right thing and oppose the statists, fascists and communists who would rob man of his freedom, dignity and worth and would of course, never watch America’s most trusted bullshit artist Walter Cronkite again.

    The thing that frightens me more than anything else these days is the lack of historical perspective in our young. This includes at least two of my own four children. Ladies and Gentlemen, Obama, Schumer, Kerry, Reid and Pelosi are not liberals and should not be described as such. Jack Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey, Nelson Rockefeller, Scoop Jackson and their ilk were liberals with a profound love of this country, its institutions and a desire to (wrongly I think) improve them. Our latter day leaders are descendents not of these people but more of Jerry Rubin, Abbie Hoffman, Bobby Seale and the rest of the Chicago Seven. They are radicals who despite 60 or 90 or 120 million dead under the failed banner of Communism want to try again. Like those dumb assed 1st World war French generals, it was not that the troops alone could not overcome the barbed wire and machine guns of the Western Front but merely that the troops lacked sufficient elan or spirit. Their spirit will make their vision of Communism work. When they finally are able to try it of course, the body count will merelty rise. there is nothing in Communism or Socialism for that matter that can take human nature into account and good old human nature will always defeat it. .

    USW, I commend you for this site and your passion. I will continue to push my brand of rational anarchy as long as I draw breath or perhaps as long as “they” will allow me. I will probably continue to vote mostly for Republicans in the hope that someone there will finally get it right. I have my doubts, the desire like Senator Damato to be “loved” and invited to the right parties seems with the exception of the aformentioned barry Goldwater to always win out.

    • Amen, Sr. Keep up the good fight.

    • SK,

      Great post, shows me some of what I still don’t know. I have read some accounts of Cronkite’s bias, but grew up with the impression he was a fair and balanced reporter.

      • He was great on the Kennedy assasination, fantastic on the evening of the 1st moon landing. Awesome on his old “You are there” and “Airpower” shows. Anything else, especially where the bias could creep in he was a horror. There was a gun control show where he, in his unctuous voice read aloud these excerpts from a “joke” catalog put out by Service Armament Co. When uncle Wally read them though there was no joking. back in those days you could actually order a real 60mm mortar or 3.5 rocket launcher which they sold. their blurb was “use them to get even with that annoying neighbor” obviously a joke but not when the “voice” read it. He reported on a “Support our Boys in Viet Nam” rally at my very conservative catholic College. He reported it as an anti-war rally with judicious film cutting. Lastly, after Tet, when most of us realized the VC had finally stuck their head up and we cut it off, he went on TV and told America the war was lost. I almost threw my shoe through the set on that one. Could never believe the guy again.

    • Stuck in Ohio says:

      Being of about the same age and going thru the same time period I could not possibly have stated that any better than you just did.

      Well said.

  3. USW,

    I am with you 100% on this. I can understand where Flag is coming from on zero government. But do not see it as being possible in today’s world. Perhaps, if we
    can enact VDLG, that might evolve into no government after 1-200 years.

    Its strange, seeing socialism failing right before our eyes, and yet the liberals/progressives are hell bent on following this path over the edge.

    http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/01/california_an_obituary.html

    • LOI,

      I really like my analogy with the French WW 1 generals, have been pushing it for years, nothing elese even comes close to describing the Charlie Foxtrot liberalism has become.

      • SK,

        I like it as well, NRA’s 1st Freedom has an article in Jan’s issue,
        “The Untold Story of How The NRA Saved the American Expeditionary Force in WW1”, by David T. Hardy. A very interesting story, could not find a link, but have the magazine sitting in front of me. May add more if time allows.been a hour posting this with interruptions)

    • Please, everyone outside of CA, DO NOT BAIL US OUT! Let the us dumb idoits sink on our own.

  4. Praise back at you, USW.

    I’ve learned a bit here myself and the mostly polite discourse is a pleasure.

    On to the post: You wrote (regarding the founding fathers): The point is that the leaders of that time spoke incessantly about individual rights and personal freedom for all men.

    The obvious rebuttal has to do with slavery and how those same founding fathers weren’t too concerned about it. It is the problem of looking too far back (or giving the founding fathers too much weight).

    I’m having big issues with big government myself; mostly the waste and corruption, but I will admit that increasing it (as it is) only furthers the problem. That said, the idea of turning it over to individual liberty only guarantees that the few set the rules (not to my liking).

    Without getting into the moral issues involved (again, because we all have different ideas about what is moral [while I think this country needs to take care of itself before aiding others, I think it is immoral to ignore the victims in Haiti], for one example), I still believe that a more grass roots government is what is required but doubt I’ll ever see it happen. What I do know is the status quo is a rigged game, loaded with unfair advantage for those already in power (old, big money).

    And, hey, how ’bout those Y-E-T-S, Yets, Yets, Yets … Peter, you can’t ignore these kids … they don’t know how much better the Colts are yet.

    I’ll try and pop in and out for comments.

    • v. Holland says:

      “I’m having big issues with big government myself; mostly the waste and corruption, but I will admit that increasing it (as it is) only furthers the problem.” Yea!!!!!!!! Not sputtering anymore 🙂

      • it is very disheartening V, to see how much nonsense goes on regarding waste and corruption, but that includes no bid contracts to gov’t (like Haliburton).

        Mostly I don’t get how we can have such high unemployment with all the welfare and medicaid fraud — why not put some people to work checking on teh fraud — most times all they need do is make a phone call … somehow I think they’ll figure out a way to outsource that too.

        • v. Holland says:

          You give people power and put in law -regulation after regulation after regulation-common sense goes out the window-the ability to make decisions-Gone-all you have left is uncompromising rules which leads to waste and stupidity.

          • Very good point V. Over-regulation leads to a nation full of folks no longer paying attention. They will assume that there is some regulation doing it for them.

            USW

    • Charlie,

      I have had a lot of problems on the slavery issue myself. I have conme to terms by realizing that in the 6,000 or so years of recorded human history, slavery has been outlawed (in civilized countries) for less than 200. Look at that time line. The founders have to be judged by their time and custom. That they agonized over slavery at all speaks well of them. As we know, there are parts of the world today where slavery still thrives and there are places where it has been eradicated where they would love it to return.

      You can think of it this way if you like. the fact that my parents generation (the greatest according to Tom Brokow) was less than stellar on the issue of civil rights does not lessen the fact that they saved the world nor that this then made the Civil Rights movement of the 1950’s and 60’s possible and successful.

      So, all things being equal, that amalgamation of intellect that arrived in Philidelphia in the late eighteenth century was one of the greatest wonders of the world. No other way to look at it.

    • Charlie,

      Most here agree that we are screwed. Right now. As I’m sure you believe the same. We need to move past this spot. I noticed you went right back to slavery. Why can’t you guys quit blaming someone. I’m not dismissing that we have all let this happen. But there always seems to be people passing the blame. I’m tired of that angle. It gets us nowhere, We are here now. Let’s get past the blame game and get on with solutions. We all just need to start saying HELL NO! And mean it. I want to hear our reps saying NO. The more that start saying NO will gain the most support. Start sayin NO, keep saying NO and the people will follow. Then come up with common sense solutions and mean it. Start talking common sense, gain allies and keep moving. That is simple.

      • v. Holland says:

        Good Point-here’s another one-Look at USW article-we know the problem is government has grown too big but we realize it can’t be changed overnight-the Founding Fathers couldn’t fix every wrong over night either. They tried to write a form of government that would led to freedom and Liberty-the people had to do the rest using those principals and we did.

      • I won’t use slavery if you don’t use the Founding Fathers as a beacon of light.

        I understand what V is saying regarding the FF and slavery (but the fact is it was already outlawed in europe). This isn’t about blame, but you don’t get to use the FF as right and just and ignore slavery; they didn’t account for it. It took a civil war to begin to end it.

        • v. Holland says:

          Okay Charlie, than you don’t get to use their lack of getting rid of slavery as a basis to debate whether or not the Constitution is good or bad. Their being a beacon of light, or not, really has nothing to do with weather or not the Constitution or the free market is good or bad.

    • Charlie,

      Yes, slavery is the obvious rebuttal, and the one that I most see used as a reason to discount other things that the founders said and wrote. I don’t discount their views on slavery when discussing or writing about the founders. But I will not allow that flaw in their process to dilute the fact that the founders spoke constantly about freedom and liberty. Today’s political leaders never even mention those two words. We have to let slavery die in our minds rather than continuing to allow it to be an excuse to continue down a certain path. And for the record, I don’t give the founders too much weight. They deserve our respect and admiration for going further in the direction of freedom and liberty than any before them. But they had their flaws.

      What troubles me a bit is that you have issues with big government for waste and fraud, but that I don’t hear you saying that you have trouble with big government for the stripping of individual liberty. All men are endowed with the natural right to be free. The larger government gets, the more that natural right is infringed upon. Those elites that you despise are not in any way curbed by bigger government. It only extends their reach and gives them more power to become even more of what you don’t want.

      The Jets were impressive yesterday. The Colts didn’t impress me all that much in beating my Ravens. But they did get a lot of calls going their way. I hope the Jets get better treatment from the officials than the Ravens did.

      USW

      • I’d like to add that, though it frequently feels like the battle of Thermopile, I am always happy to duke it out with my right-leaning friends here at SUFA. So, thank you, Weapon, for your note of thanks. When I first came here, I would have called the lot of you wingnuts. Now, though I still think you’re out in the wings, I don’t consider you nuts. You have helped me get a clearer understanding of the opposing viewpoint. Though I doubt I’ve dissuaded any of you from any of your views, I hope that I’ve at least helped you to see my side as less of a caricature.

        So now, I have to say that we are perfectly free and have plenty of liberty. I know it’s a matter of taste, and I do sometime feel that government oversteps itself, but such is the price of a civilized society. I, too, have issue with the waste and fraud, but would choose to continue it in lieu of abandoning all that government does for us. I think the alternative to big government would be chaos, destruction, massive fraud (though little waste), and a return to the bad-old-days that many here seem to idolize. Sure, Little House on the Prairie has it’s appeal, but we should remember that life expectancy was in the 20’s. We can remember the magnificence of free enterprise, but we should not forget that the terms “snake oil salesman” has its origin in this time, nor should we forget our reading of The Jungle. We can drool over the freedom of men being men, but we should remember that they worked 15 hour days in crude (often unsafe and unsanitary) conditions for meager wages while the “elite” took flagrant advantage of them. I don’t say that big government should necessarily be our nanny, but let us not forget what it has given us in our rush to return to those halcyon days. As always, I will ask: how are things working out for Somalia these days?

        Finally, being from LA, I can’t really appreciate the football. Alas, my friend has informed me that, because I am now a New Yorker (unlike certain people I could name), I am obligated to root for the Jets. So if anyone feels the urge to give me a brief summation of everything I need to know in order to not appear to be an idiot when everyone is talking about the game, they should feel free to do so.

        • Buck The Wala says:

          Don’t begin to think I missed that snipe on my behalf. I am more of a NY’er than you will ever be.

          And what’s this football you speak of?

          Also, as much as I’d love to add to your post in regards to liberalism and the benefits of government, I am up to my eyeballs with work at the moment and am just trying to read along today.

          • I’m sure I have no idea what you’re talking about. I was referring to err.. um… Robyn The Wala

            And just what is it that you think makes you a New Yorker? We can take a vote here:

            Ladies and Gentlemen of SUFA, what constitutes a “New Yorker”?
            A. Born in New York
            B. Lives in New York
            C. Yankees Fan
            D. Other

            • Buck The Wala says:

              Choice (D) — “New Yorker” is a state of mind. It takes more than merely living in New York. You, my friend, are a Los Angelosean or however you crazy kids say it.

              • Some folks like to get away
                Take a holiday from the neighbourhood
                Hop a flight to Miami Beach
                Or to Hollywood
                But I’m taking a Greyhound
                On the Hudson River Line
                I’m in a New York state of mind

                I’ve seen all the movie stars
                In their fancy cars and their limousines
                Been high in the Rockies under the evergreens
                But I know what I’m needing
                And I don’t want to waste more time
                I’m in a New York state of mind

                It was so easy living day by day
                Out of touch with the rhythm and blues
                But now I need a little give and take
                The New York Times, The Daily News

                It comes down to reality
                And it’s fine with me ’cause I’ve let it slide
                Don’t care if it’s Chinatown or on Riverside
                I don’t have any reasons
                I’ve left them all behind
                I’m in a New York state of mind

                It was so easy living day by day
                Out of touch with the rhythm and blues
                But now I need a little give and take
                The New York Times, The Daily News

                It comes down to reality
                And it’s fine with me ’cause I’ve let it slide
                Don’t care if it’s Chinatown or on Riverside
                I don’t have any reasons
                I’ve left them all behind
                I’m in a New York state of mind

                I’m just taking a Greyhound on the Hudson River Line
                ‘Cause I’m in a New York state of mind

            • I vote other.

              To be a New Yorker, one must live/work outside of the lower Manhattan business district or midtown district. Queens, Bronx, Brooklyn and Staten Island are all ok.

              The borough of Manhattan extends from the battery to West 218th Street. Those misbegotten souls who live in the west 70’s, 80’s or 90’s consider themselves residents of THE UPPER WEST SIDE. What exactly does that make me who was born on 171st Street and lived on 204th Street after I was married?

            • Here’s Carlin’s take on New York vs L.A.

            • I will vote for D, and note that Yankees fans are only fans when they are winning. LOL

              And for the record, real fans can tell me their entire roster. I can do that for the Red Sox and their farm teams.

        • Matt,

          We’re past all that now. We have technology to keep us moving foreward. You are afraid of “SIMPLE”. Why? Because choas is the adrenaline you need to sustain yourself? Don’t you enjoy the simple things anymore and can’t even relate to the concept. I don’t get it.

          • Technology will not save you.

            In fact, technology will make things worse.

            We have the technology to keep the rat droppings out of your food, but will factory owners bother to do so if it costs them additional investment of time and or money? Or will they commission a study to find out exactly how much they can get away with and do just that? You think power plants will voluntarily cap their emissions (forget CO2, I’m talking about other things here: lead, mercury, arsenic, et cetera)? You think car companies will build to code? Remember how they fought against being made to include seat belts? And factor in an absence of tort law… oh boy..

            But now there are whole new ways to screw you and take advantage of you. Things you and I could never have imagined when we were young. Imagine what Microsoft would have done if the justice department weren’t there? You’d only be able to use internet explorer (and I hate IE), which means that Microsoft would control everything that you are able to see and do on the internet. You think Gates, out of the goodness of his heart, would choose to let you visit Apple.com? Think Standard Oil.

            • Matt

              With respect– blah, blah,blah. Do you need a babysitter to pull you along. No. It still all boils down to saying NO. That means being informed and being responsible enough to not support trouble. No sales = no revenue= no trouble. Its on you to say no.

              • Kristian Stout says:

                I agree with you Anita, we have the ability to say no. No one who is in business, I don’t care how big the business is, is going to put out a bad product if they have competition that is doing it the right way. They lose money that way and the whole point of being in business is to make money. It’s up to the consumer to keep them honest, not government. We decide what we buy and who we buy it from and if what we are looking for isn’t out there then we make it ourselves. They say the mother of invention is necessity…lol!

              • Thanks Kristian.. I beginning to think it’s me losing my mind.

              • Kristian Stout says:

                Nope! Not losing your mind! Although with everything that is going on these days that is almost a pleasant idea…LOL!

            • See, here is where I can agree with Matt!!! Somewhere out there, there has to be a balance.

              This morning I heard that Justice leaned on three universities who were about to require that their students use the new electronic portable book (its name escapes me) Well, because the portable book does have a verbal feature for the blind but does not yet have a proper way of indexing it so the blind can find it without help, the universities faced federal lawsuits if they used the system. Yet another case where the 99% must suffer for the 1%. I do not think that the Theodore Roosevelt progressives ever thought that common sense was to be thrown out, No more than Bob Dole thought ADA would apply to drunks and junkies. .

              • Kindle?

              • I have an eReader (the sony version of the Kindle) and it’s one of the best things I own. I never go anywhere without it and I love, love, love it. I had one of the first versions and they had a lot of kinks to work out, but now I’ve got a new one and it’s amazing. The future cometh. It reminds me of the data pads they used to use on Star Trek.

                All they lack is color screens and a faster refresh rate. But I’m not willing to sacrifice battery life for it.

                Adding, Emilius bought it for me as a gift. What an amazing wife, no?

              • Yes, that’s it. Now that I have heard it twice in one day, I will remember.

                Thanks

              • BALANCE!

                Can I get an AMEN?

                Or at least a huzzah!

              • Both!!!

            • So Standard Oil is the big mean brute once again. A few facts to chew on:

              1) JD Rockefeller retired before 1900 and was not involved in daily company operations after that but certainly was well informed and probably influential.
              2) SO was declining since lamp oil was being replaced by electricity. It wasn’t until gasoline sales (a waste product) took off in the teens and twenties that the company came back to real prosperity. JD made more money after 1900 then before.
              3) The interlocking trusts were a means to create a national corporation before there were laws that permitted it. Before that, companies were incorporated in each state making for a managment nightmare. SO pooled their stock in SO of NJ and ran the individual companies from there. They pioneered the modern corporation but got pilloried for it.
              4) SO was an early member of the Southern Improvement Co. for only a short period of time. SIC was the one accused of the railroad kickbacks involve the NYC & PRR.
              5) JD pioneered the use of chemists to improve his products. SO lamp oil was low in sulphur and a much better product than most of the competition. R&D reamins an important part of all the baby SO’s.
              6) SO salesmen would follow the competition’s and undercut them. They would also threaten to pull their products from an outlet’s shelf if they sold competing products. They were not choir boys for sure.
              7) JD by controlling refining stabilized the oil industry and stopped the frequent boom and bust cycles. Of course he used secrecy and other questionalble means to put together his dominant company.
              8) In 1912 SO was broken up into SO of NJ (Exxon), SO of NY (Socony Vacuum, later Mobil), SO of Ohio (Sohio or Boron), SO of Ind. (Amoco), SO of CA (Chevron), Atlantic (ARCO), SO KY, Continental (Conoco), Ohio Oil (Marathon), et. al. plus pipeline, shipping and Cheesebourgh (Vaseline, Unilever).
              9) Chief domestic rivals were Texaco & Gulf, both started by the Mellons of Pittsburgh
              10) Chief foreign rivals were Royal Dutch Shell (50-50 Holland & British until the Brits sold out) and BP (50% British Govt.).

              If you think about it, this was an amazing accomplishment for one man and his partners. Now contrast the success of the baby SO’s to the baby Bells. AT&T did not survive. They were eventually bought by SBC who changed their name. And Bell Labs, one of the greatest assets in this country is a shadow of what it once was.

        • Matt,

          A little help for you on football.

          Football finally makes
          sense!

          A guy took his blonde girl friend to her first football
          game. They had great seats right behind their team’s bench.
          After the game, he asked her how she liked the experience.

          “Oh, I really liked it,” she replied,” especially the cute
          guys with all the big muscles; but I just couldn’t
          understand why they were killing each other over 25 cents.”

          Dumbfounded, her date asked, “What do you mean?”

          “Well, I saw them flip a coin and one team got it and then
          for the rest of the game, all they kept screaming was:

          ‘Get the quarterback! Get the quarterback!’

          Helloooo? It’s only 25 cents!”

        • Mathius,

          I can certainly appreciate your view on things. But I certainly do disagree. This is a different world that we live in than the times of Standard Oil and the other “robber barons” that became the rallying cry for government intervention.

          I would say that first and foremost, the majority of the bad big business folks in history were not nearly as bad as the history books have written them to be. To accept that they were evil personified would mean you accept all versions of history as written. Unfortunately that would eman that you must also accept that history shows bigger government and the move towards a more socio-fascist system is historically a bad move as well.

          What we must not to is continue to make excuses for government to take away freedoms and liberties. If government must exist, then we must demand that they stop the truly evil folks through non-violent ways and not restrict freedom and liberty. Bad big business has been used as an excuse to take liberty for too long. There is a better way. Our job is to find it and demand it.

          USW

          • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

            USW

            1870’s and 1880’s, Molly McGuires, Pennsylvania Hard Coal region, Coal and Iron Police, Pennsylvania railroad, Pinkertons and even a Sherlock Holmes story based and biased on the events as well as a Sean Connery/Richard Harris movie probably biased in the other direction. Truth as usual somewhere in the middle.

            It is all fascinating and the cradle of the American labor Movement. For an encore try the Triangle Shirtwaist Company Fire. Had you and I been immigrants or children of immigrants back then, I daresay we might be on the other side.

            The answer, as always, is Balance.

            The evil Corporate types have been replaced by the evil union types even in the coal region. My uncle, the 26th ID vet designated sniper type told me years ago that as a coal miner before and after the war, he would have had great pleasure taking out John L. Lewis if he had the chance. Lewis had sold out the membership. Whole thing came to an ethnic head around 67 or 69 when Tony Boyle UMW Union Head took out Jock Yablonsky and his family because Yablonsky challenged him for the leadership of the union. .

            It’s that damn pendulum which refuses to stop in the middle.

            I just love history.

          • This is a different world that we live in than the times of Standard Oil and the other “robber barons” that became the rallying cry for government intervention.

            See, here is where our paths diverge. I agree that this is a different world than that of the Robber barons BECAUSE of government intervention. I think it is the only thing standing between the two worlds.

            And again, I think technology only exacerbates things. In ye olden times, a regional company was king – today, we can have multinationals with economic powers orders beyond Standard Oil.

            To accept that they were evil personified would mean you accept all versions of history as written.

            I hardly think they were evil. I think they were out to make a buck (or a few million bucks). I think they did that at the expense of their workers exactly as they do today, bu they were more free to take advantage of the workers back then. Image in a city like Detroit where there is next to no work available what would happen if a company moved in and offered lots of work, but the wages could only be used in the “company store.” We forget the past, but it doesn’t forget us. We find the restrictions we have place on ourselves onerous only because we have forgotten why they are there in the first place.

            There is a better way. Our job is to find it and demand it.

            Agree. So let’s find it. But it’s not in gutting government for the sake of gutting government. Government is a means to an end, and killing it is not an end in and of itself (unless you’re Flag). You want more freedoms, fine, identify a specific issue and we can see how we can scale things to protect what needs to be protected with the minimum of imposition on you.

            • Matt:

              Aside from the fact that your view of history is distorted by the “statist’s” interpretation, you are wrong in your solution.

              You do not kill govt just to kill govt., Matt. That has been the point of this entire journey the past 14 months (less for some of us). You kill it to be FREE. Freedom, liberty and justice for all demands that we kill it. You are applying your pragmatic beliefs upon a very philosophically rooted proposition. You have not come to trully understand the motivations. That is obvious by your comments yesterday.

              You need to start with NO Govt and work up. Not the other way around. To do otherwise will result in nothing but rationalizations to NOT MOVE.

              New paradigms require gaming and brainstorming from a clean slate. That is how you build the Desired Condition. You start with real freedom and liberty and then you MUST JUSTIFY anything called Govt., no matter how small. And I mean truly justify. You do not start with slavery and then justify giving back some freedoms.

              Then you work out the options for getting there. That is more in tune with your methodology.

              Yours is the typical solution of the pragmatist. It leads to failure.

              Yeah. Lets imagine a Detroit where people have jobs and are buying their goods from a company store. Oh my god, they have very little money saved, those evil bastard companies. But alas poor Matt, they do HAVE jobs, they are no longer sitting around and killing each other out of boredom. They are making their way as best they can within a reality that was better than what they had before. Oh!! And of course the govt doesn’t have to steal from me to support them anymore.

              But then some young leftist, like yourself, will come along and convince them those greedy capitalists are just using them. They are robbing from them, treating them like slaves. And they will rise up and demand change, and the companies will move away. And once again Detroit will return to its hey days of murdering, raping, and pillaging. A life of glorious despair and anger.

              Yep, that is just such a God awful picture I am completely depressed.

              Hope your weekend was good.
              Best to you this morning.
              JAC

      • USW: I don’t have as much a problem with some liberties being “stripped” (I’d call it curbed) for the sake of the greater good … but the gov’t today (all of it–both sides of the aisle) aren’t there for our liberty (you’re right). Maybe Ron Paul is, but even there I’d argue that money rules the roost (in a totally free society, the power will always veer in one direction).

        We’ll always need some form of government but it won’t work for the greater good (my concern) so long as it represents the already powerful. In a capitalism system, that will always be the end result.

        I can live with capitalism and smaller government, but not without some very significant basic entitlements (nasty word that it might sound like). One cannot be free if he/she is born under a rock and conditions aren’t there for them to climb out from under it.

        • Charlie

          As usual your conclusion: “One cannot be free if he/she is born under a rock and conditions aren’t there for them to climb out from under it.”, is based on a faulty definition of freedom.

          Freedom = Living without fear of the use of coersive force against me by others.

          Liberty = Living without the fear of the use of coersive force against me, by government.

          Both of these are supported by the moral principle that no one may impose upon another. That is a prohibition on the initiation of force against another.

          Freedom has nothing to do with economic opportunities, abilities or outcomes. It has everthing to do with dealing with your reality in your own way to achieve what you decide you want, based only on the limits of your abilities and the real world around you. Without interference of others, whether that is your socialist neighbor or govt. It is in essence the opportunity to truly live.

          If you wish to help less fortunate get up that is certainly possible. A free man can do such a thing without worry of being jailed. A free man can also decide NOT to do such a thing without being jailed.

          You accept the socialist’s distorted definition of Freedom. By doing so you can get no answer other than socialism. Despite the fact it brings with it all the evil you tell us you oppose.

          You, sir, need a moral philosophical base to build from. One that DOES NOT condone vioelence against innocent people in the name of justice.

          Best to you and yours
          JAC

        • Kristian Stout says:

          Charlie,

          I’m still trying to figure out exactly what your definition of “Greater Good” is. Is it Spock’s definition, the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the few? From reading some of your posts I think that may be it. Here’s the thing, who gets to decide whose need is greater, the government? Seems to me they’ve been doing that for a while and doing a piss poor job of it at that. So why would we continue to trust them to do a job they have proven a million times over that they can’t do?

  5. Judy Sabatini says:

    Morning All

    After I read the article, I was doing some thinking about this. If we really, really need to have a government, why can’t we just have a one party system? I recall somebody a while back had mentioned it, but I don’t recall what any of you said.

    My thoughts are this. Do away with both parties, and just have one, and call it The Party For America. Let the American people decide who they think would be the best candidate, but just narrow it down to just a few, and the people could vote for who they think would be the best for that party and if one got the majority, then that one is in. No president, or vice president, no speaker of the house, just those few who could maybe get along and come up with what’s best for America and the people. Do away with the unnecessary parts of government where it wouldn’t matter, but keep the parts of government that does.

    Yea, I know, in my dreams, and just maybe someday after I’m long gone, it could happen. But, that was just my thinking of a way to make government smaller.

    Hope you’re all having a good day.

    • Actually we did have basically one part for a while. From the break of the Federalists (~1816) to the formation of the Whigs (~1833), the Democratic-Republican Party reigned supreme. It took the formation of the Republican in the 1850’s party cement system we now have. I can’t say it was an improvement.

  6. v. Holland says:

    Gotta agree with you USW-I am really hoping that Brown wins in Mass. it may not make our government smaller but it just might keep it from getting bigger and unless our politicians are truly blind and deaf they should be getting a huge message from the people.

    Democrats consider backup plan for health care reform
    From Dana Bash and Ed Henry, CNN
    January 17, 2010 9:21 p.m. EST

    * White House spokesman: The plan is to still pass health care reform with 60 votes
    * Sources on the Hill say “what-if” discussions are taking place about reform
    * One unlikely option is to pass the reform bill before a Republican is seated
    * Another unlikely option: The House passes the Senate health care bill

    (CNN) — Faced with the once-unthinkable prospect of losing the Massachusetts Senate race, Democratic officials on Capitol Hill are quietly talking about options for passing health care reform without that critical 60th Senate vote.

    Top White House aides insist they are not engaging in any talk of contingency plans, because they believe Democrat Martha Coakley will beat Republican Scott Brown in Tuesday’s crucial Senate battle.

    “We are not having any discussions like that,” White House spokesman Bill Burton told CNN. “We believe she is going to win.”

    Asked about potential contingency plans as Air Force One returned to the Washington area after President Obama’s Sunday campaign rally for Coakley in Boston, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs insisted to reporters the plan is to still pass health care reform with 60 votes. “We think Coakley will win this race,” Gibbs said.

    But Democratic sources on Capitol Hill say “what-if” discussions are taking place about how they could proceed with health care if Coakley is defeated, and they privately admit none of their alternatives is very good. According to senior Democratic congressional officials, here are options under discussion:

    Pass health care reform before Scott Brown is seated.

    But multiple Democratic sources say this is unlikely. Even if House and Senate Democrats could reach a deal to meld their bills and pass them in the next couple of weeks — a big if — there would be a huge outcry from not only Republicans, but also an increasingly distrustful public.

    For that reason, one senior Democratic source says some Democratic lawmakers who voted yes last time have already warned they would vote no if health care is voted on in advance of any swearing in of Brown.

    The House passes the Senate health care bill.

    Democratic sources also call this extremely unlikely, because House Speaker Nancy Pelosi likely wouldn’t have the votes to pass it. Many House Democrats have major differences with several provisions in the Senate bill, especially the way the Senate structured a tax on high-cost insurance plans.

    Revisit the idea of trying to push health care through the Senate with only 51 votes, a simple majority.

    But to do that, Democrats would have to use a process known as reconciliation, which presents technical and procedural issues that would delay the process for a long time, and Democrats are eager to put the health care debate behind them and move onto economic issues such as job creation as soon as possible this election year.

    Try once again to get moderate Maine Republican Olympia Snowe’s vote. They could try for a compromise health reform plan with the independent-minded Republican, but multiple Democratic sources say they believe that is unlikely now.

    Their health care overhaul dies.

    Although some Democrats are not ruling out this possibility, numerous top Democrats say not passing a health care bill for the president to sign is unthinkable after he put so much political capital into passing a reform bill, and congressional Democrats spent much of last year working on it.

    http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/17/dem.backup.healthcare.plan/index.html

    • Unfortunately, at this point I don’t trust that there is any tactic that the Congress would not stoop to in order to get their agenda through. What we need is to educate and enrage Americans to demand better from Washington. A tough task, indeed.

  7. Judy Sabatini says:
  8. Judy Sabatini says:

    What Washington Post Story Did Not Say about Its Own Poll: Most Americans Say They Want a Smaller Government
    Monday, January 18, 2010
    By Terence P. Jeffrey, Editor-in-Chief

    [Correction: Although the Washington Post’s Sunday story that focused primarily on a new Washington Post-ABC News poll—“Poll Shows Growing Disappointment, Polarization Over Obama’s Performance” by Jon Cohen and Jennifer Agiesta—made no mention of the fact that the poll found that 58 percent of Americans say they favor a smaller government that provides fewer services, another story in Sunday’s Post—“One Year Later Assessing Obama; Testing the Promise of Pragmatism” by Dan Balz–did mention that finding.

    The tenth paragraph of Balz’s story said: “The poll also shows how much ground Obama has lost during his first year of trying to convince the public that more government is the answer to the country’s problems. By 58 percent to 38 percent, Americans said they prefer smaller government and fewer services to larger government with more services. Since he won the Democratic nomination in June 2008, the margin between those favoring smaller over larger government has moved in Post-ABC polls from five points to 20 points.”]

    (CNSNews.com) – A large majority of Americans say they want a smaller government that provides them with fewer services, according to a new poll from the Washington Post and ABC News. But the Washington Post story about the poll makes no mention of this fact.

    The poll asked: “Generally speaking, would you say you favor smaller government with fewer services, or larger government with more services?”

    Fifty-eight percent said they favor a smaller government with fewer services, and only 38 percent said they favor a larger government with more services.

    The Post did not mention the results from this poll question in its news story about the poll.

    The poll surveyed a random sample of 1,083 American adults from Jan. 12-15, 2010.

  9. You know that scene in Pirates of the Caribbean #3 –

    …where the Empire’s fleet, led by the Mighty Flagship, is bearing down on the lonely and damaged Black Pearl after the Flying Dutchman has disappeared into the violent water eddy.

    And then, explosively, re-appears the Flying Dutchman out of the depths to the surface – to the initial cheers of the Empire!

    — the Black Pearl’s crew sigh, disheartened at the prospect of another withering onslaught from the Dutchman…

    …But, there’s a new captain at the helm!

    …and the Dutchman wheels aside the Black Pearl – to face together – head-on – the Leviathan!

    PS: I’ve posted your new flag on my blog-site… 🙂

    • Ooh, am I the Leviathan?

      Adding, Pirates III was lousy by comparison to Pirates I.

      • Judy Sabatini says:

        Hey guys

        I heard the are making Pirates 4, the fountain of youth. Either one of you hear that? I liked one and two, wasn’t to thrilled with 3 myself.

        Hope you’re doing well today.

      • Matt,

        Not THE leviathan – but a member of it.

        Here’s your part: 🙂
        http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0001227/quotes


        Officer: [after getting out of the maelstrom Captain Black Flag orders the crew to wait] What is he waiting for?

        Lord Mathius Beckett: He actually expects us to honor our agreement. Nothing personal, BF… it’s just good business.

        ….
        Officer: Which ship do we follow?

        Lord Mathius Beckett: Signal the Dutchman to track down Sao Feng. We follow the Pearl. How soon can we have the ship ready to pursue?

        Officer: [Officer looks back towards a cracking sound, and watches as the large mast falls down. He looks on towards the Black Pearl, admirably] Do you think Black Flag plans it all out, or just makes it up as he goes along?
        ……

        Davy Buck the Walla: I cannot be summoned like some… mongrel pup!
        Lord Mathius Beckett: Apparently, you can.

        …..
        Lord Mathius Beckett: [Black Flagis about to light a cannon that’s pointed at the mast] You’re mad.

        Black Flag: Thank goodness for that, ’cause if I wasn’t this would probably never work.
        [fires the cannon, which catapults him onto his ship, landing safely on his feet behind his crew]

        Black Flag: And that was without even a single drop of beer.
        …..

        Lord Mathius Beckett: Black Flag has opted for oblivion! Prepare the fleet!

        …..

        and finally….

        Lord Mathius Beckett: The Leviathan has need of your services. We wish for you to act as our agent in a business transaction with our mutual friend Captain Black Flag.

        USWep Turner: More acquaintance than friend. How do you know him?

        Lord Mathius Beckett: We’ve had dealings in the past. And we’ve each left out mark on each other.

        USwepTurner: What mark did he leave on you?

        Lord Mathius Beckett: By your efforts, Black Flag was set free. I would like you to go to him and recover a certain property in his position.

        USWepTurner: Recover? At the point of a sword?

        Lord Mathius Beckett: Bargain! You will offer what amounts to a full pardon. Black Flag will be free. A privateer in the employ of the State.

        USWep Turner: Somehow I doubt BF will consider such employment the same as being free.

        Lord Mathius Beckett: Freedom! Black Flag is a dying breed. The world is shrinking. The blank edges of the map filled in. BF must find his place in the new world or perish.

    • Remember this post awhile back, USWep?

      Black Flag
      Look are you just fiddling around with me or what?

      USWep
      I just want you to feel you’re doing well. I hate for people to die embarrassed.

      They get set to begin again. Then suddenly –

      USWep jumps forward with stunning speed for anyone his size and reaches for Black Flag who drops to his knees, spins loose, and slips between the Giant’s legs.

      USWep
      You’re quick.

      Black Flag
      And a good thing too.

      USWep
      (getting set for another onslaught)
      Why do you fly that flag? Were you beaten as a child, or something like that?

      Black Flag
      Oh no. It’s just that they’re terribly attractive. I think everyone will be flying them in the future.

  10. Judy Sabatini says:

  11. clay barham says:

    GONE TOO FAR
    As a nation, we have allowed ourselves to drift too far from our roots, those established when the Pilgrims arrived and when our system was codified by the 19th century Democrats from Jefferson, Madison on to Cleveland, as cited in The Changing Face of Democrats on Amazon.com and claysamerica.com. We’ve allowed the Old World ideas of Rousseau and Marx to infect our politics through the 20th century Democrats, and now we are paying the price for it. Whether we will regain our proven way again remains to be seen. Whether enough of the electorate will choose the New World way or stay the course being laid down by Obama and become just another nation ruled by the few elite over the wishes of the many with individual freedom a thing of the past is yet to be decided. America proved prosperity comes from freedom, not dictatorship. Claysamerica.com

  12. Judy Sabatini says:

    January 18, 2010 10:34 AM EST by John Stossel
    Stealth Propaganda

    An obscure 2008 academic article gained traction with bloggers over the weekend. The article was written by the head of Obama’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Harvard Law Professor Cass Sunstein. He’s a good friend of the president and the promoter the contradictory idea: “libertarian paternalism”. In the article, he muses about what government can do to combat “conspiracy” theories:

    …we suggest a distinctive tactic for breaking up the hard core of extremists who supply conspiracy theories: cognitive infiltration of extremist groups, whereby government agents or their allies … will undermine the crippled epistemology of those who subscribe to such theories. They do so by planting doubts about the theories and stylized facts that circulate within such groups, thereby introducing beneficial cognitive diversity.

    That’s right. Obama’s Regulation Czar is so concerned about citizens thinking the wrong way that he proposed sending government agents to “infiltrate” these groups and manipulate them. This reads like an Onion article: Powerful government official proposes to combat paranoid conspiracy groups that believe the government is out to get them…by proving that they really are out to get them. Did nothing of what Sunstein was writing strike him as…I don’t know…crazy? “Cognitive infiltration” of extremist groups by government agents? “Stylized facts”? Was “truthiness” too pedantic?

    Salon.com’s Glenn Greenwald explains why this you should be disturbed by this:

    This was written 18 months ago, at a time when the ascendancy of Sunstein’s close friend to the Presidency looked likely, in exactly the area he now oversees. Additionally, the government-controlled messaging that Sunstein desires has been a prominent feature of U.S. Government actions over the last decade, including in some recently revealed practices of the current administration, and the mindset in which it is grounded explains a great deal about our political class.

    … What is most odious and revealing about Sunstein’s worldview is his condescending, self-loving belief that “false conspiracy theories” are largely the province of fringe, ignorant Internet masses and the Muslim world.

    It’s certainly true that one can easily find irrational conspiracy theories in those venues, but some of the most destructive “false conspiracy theories” have emanated from the very entity Sunstein wants to endow with covert propaganda power: namely, the U.S. Government itself, along with its elite media defenders. Moreover, “crazy conspiracy theorist” has long been the favorite epithet of those same parties to discredit people trying to expose elite wrongdoing and corruption.

    It is this history of government deceit and wrongdoing that renders Sunstein’s desire to use covert propaganda to “undermine” anti-government speech so repugnant. The reason conspiracy theories resonate so much is precisely that people have learned — rationally — to distrust government actions and statements. Sunstein’s proposed covert propaganda scheme is a perfect illustration of why that is. In other words, people don’t trust the Government and “conspiracy theories” are so pervasive precisely because government is typically filled with people like Cass Sunstein, who think that systematic deceit and government-sponsored manipulation are justified by their own Goodness and Superior Wisdom.

    Read more: http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/01/18/stealth-propaganda/?test=latestnews#ixzz0d02uZttk

    • Hi Judy!

      This post is going to have some interesting relevance in future discussions, so don’t forget about it.

      I read this last week, I think Kathy posted it one evening when it was slow. But I thought long and hard about what this may mean. When a person with political aspirations such as this makes this kind of a comment, then many people should rethink their thinking about “conspiracy theories”. By wanting a ban, it gives conspiracy theories legitimacy, much like voting give government the same. We can apply Black Flags ideals here in a big way that should say to all of us who oppose this lefty group of government folks, that maybe these crazy conspiracy theories have something. If they are nothing more than the wild imaginations of a few, there would be no need to ban them, or the people or groups that are in these circles.

      Sunstein has given legitimacy to what most sane people would outherwise cast off as rediculous babble.

      I’m sending you an E.

      G!

      • Judy Sabatini says:

        Hi

        I don’t remember seeing that, either that, or I’m losing my mind and have gotten some of mom’s Dementia going on.

        I just happen to see that today, and thought I would post it. One question though. Just how the heck are they going to ban conspiracy theories? They can’t stop anybody from coming up with those, and I don’t care what they do. They’ll always be conspiracy theorists out there.

        • My guess is that they only want to ban the one’s that could be exposing them. As far fetched as some of these theories are, one must consider some legitamacy to them, if the left leaning political types want them to go away.

          G!

        • The conspirators will suddenly come up missing forever

      • Hi G-Man,

        As time goes on, I feel more and more vindicated. My friends think I’m nuts, but more and more, I see that I have more situational awaresness than anything else. I’ve pretty well given up trying to point things out to them. In other words, I’ve gone silent except for here. I wonder what happened to Nubian. I’ve not seen her posts in months. Does she feel the same as I do? Nubian, are you there?

  13. Hi USW,

    You’ve made some very astute observations. I wonder if the majority of Americans will wake up to this or continue to be dismissive of how we’re been manipulated. I’m guessing that most will remain willfully ignorant until the bitter end.

    • That could be the case, Cyndi. But I will cling to the hope that we can wake up a large enough group to stop the country from descending into madness even further than we already have.

      But in the end, whenever that may be, I can live with having lived my life trying to constantly learn, understand, and accept truth. I can live with having been true to the belief that liberty and freedom are precious and hard to get folks to value. But I will live free, even if only in my mind.

      • You’re a good man, USW. I agree that getting people to understand that liberty and freedom are precious, is hard. I’m glad that you’re free, if only in your mind. So many people are in mental prisons of their own making. Sadly, most a quite content to stay there.

  14. Judy Sabatini says:

    Sources: Obama advisers believe Coakley will lose
    Posted: January 17th, 2010 04:22 PM ET

    From CNN Senior White House Correspondent Ed Henry

    Washington (CNN) – Multiple advisers to President Obama have privately told party officials that they believe Democrat Martha Coakley is going to lose Tuesday’s special election to fill the Massachusetts Senate seat held by the late Ted Kennedy for more than 40 years, several Democratic sources told CNN Sunday.

    The sources added that the advisers are still hopeful that Obama’s visit to Massachusetts on Sunday – coupled with a late push by Democratic activists – could help Coakley pull out a narrow victory in an increasingly tight race against Republican state Sen. Scott Brown.

    However, the presidential advisers have grown increasingly pessimistic in the last three days about Coakley’s chances after a series of missteps by the candidate, sources said.

    But White House spokesman Bill Burton told CNN: “The President is in Massachusetts today because he believes Martha Coakley is the right person for the job and indeed will be the next senator from Massachusetts.”

  15. Anyone one know where I can buy one of these?

    In 1992, just days before my birthday, I had the priviledge of flying in one one these. I’ve put this up before, but it gives me chills everytime I watch it. What a ride!!!! 🙂

    • Judy Sabatini says:

      Just as cool as the first time G.

      Maybe you can look on Craig’s list. LOL! Sorry, I couldn’t resist. But, you know how they sell everything there.

    • SK Trynosky Sr. says:

      I understand there are some su-27’s up for grabs at 5 mil per.

      • I’d take one F-15 over a squadron of any Russian MiG’s. Biased? Damn right! 🙂 I have been enjoying your posts today, I’ve always loved history told by those who have first hand knowledge.

        Peace and Live Free my Friend!

        G!

  16. Posting for comments…

  17. Judy Sabatini says:

    Hope this works. It was on my face book.

    An Insult To Our Democracy
    http://www.youtube.com
    Rep. Jack Murtha presides, ignores reality to push through his preferences without a vote.

  18. Hi Ya’ll,

    As anyone who’s been following the chaos in Haiti been wondering how much of that would happen in the States if the worst happens economically, or if political violence gets out of hand? That’s some crazy stuff going on there. I’m somewhat surprised that there are accusations that the US is using the chaos as an excuse to occupy Haiti. Some countries seem willing to politcize the disaster.

    I thought we wouldn’t have these sort of problems now that O is in charge (she said, dripping w/sarcasm)

    • haiti was not prepared, internally to deal with this kind of a disaster. We need only to look a the now destroyed Presidentail Palace, before it was leveled to see why. An economical collapse here would decimate our cities. There are too many hands sticking out, in good times, too not see this. In a few days, be patient. It will get discussed. 🙂

      G!

      • You’re such a tease, G-Man! Always tellin’ me to wait, LOL!

        😉

        • I believe I have mentioned my level of patience not long ago, although it was disputed by some 😆

          There have been some that would question my patience, but I am unwavering 🙂

          G!

  19. Bonnie Carniello says:

    I do think there will be a revolution this year in all political races across the states. People are paying attention and the ones who are not paying attention are being told by their children they should be paying attention!

    I really hope Scott Brown wins as it will send a message plus make the voting more favorable for the Republican party.

    I started out as an Independent, became a Democrat and was so disgusted by the lack of morals in Bill Clinton, I changed to the Republican Party.

    To the people who love the Pirate movies, my assumption is that most of you are young and do not know the legend of The Flying Dutchman. First of all, it was an opera in the 1800’s. Then it was made into a movie probably in the late 1930’s. It was the first movie my Mother took me to see when I was six. Many times in my life, I have used Omar K-saying about the moving finger writes, etc., which is in the movie with James Mason. It made a huge impression on me. The legend says that until The Dutchman could find a woman who would love him enough to die for him, he was destined to sail the sea forever without end. I always loved pirate movies. Check out what Jeff Chandler did-he had a couple of pirate movies that I loved as well.

    All of you young enough to do so, become a member of a school board, County Council, run for Representative, Senate or whatever your life can stand.

    I am so proud that my youngest daughter is running for House of Delegates in Baltimore, Maryland’s District #8 in 2010. It started out because she was seeing all of the wrongs in government and felt she couldn’t voice an opinion unless she was willing to step up. She has two small boys, but wants them to respect the right things, not the graft we see or the backroom deals. This reminds me of the 50’s when people were paid off to accommodate other people and businesses. I believe the people we put in office are supposed to be above that. I’m sure the founding fathers (even with their faults)are spinning in their graves. The measure of love is what one is willing to give up for it! I believe that’s from The Flying Dutchman.

    • Bonnie,

      What a wonderful post! 🙂

      It’s Americans like you, who continue to give me the inspiration to “Fight On, and Fight hard” for everything that our ancestors gave us. Rest assured, we will not go quietly, and we won’t go without one hell of a fight!

      May God bless you! Live Free!

      G!

    • Right on G-Man! Good luck to your daughter Bonnie

      • Judy Sabatini says:

        We will not go quietly into the night. God Bless you and your daughter Bonnie, and good luck to her.

    • Great post Bonnie. I am glad to see you involved and passionate and paying attention. I too love the pirate movies.

      I have all the confidence in the world that Rani is going to do great. She has a lot of supporters on the site as I posted a bio on her a couple of months ago. She is an inspiration to us all. A regular mom who wants to make the world better for her children.

      I hope all is well with you! I miss you and love you!

      USW

  20. Judy Sabatini says:

    Good night all, see you tomorrow.

    Judy

  21. I’m pretty new to posting on this site but I’ve been reading along faithfully for most of the site’s existance. I have read most of the aricles in the archives. I’ve reread many of them. I started reading with only a sense that something is wrong in America and was really looking to see what others were thinking. HA! Boy have I learned some things around here. And I’m proud to say it.

    People here at SUFA have all different views on where we are in America today. I don’t know exactly what to call myself right now although JAC thinks I’m a radical right wing liberal. I guess I can live with that.

    I hope I’m not out of line here saying that Matt really gave me an attitude yesterday. (Hi Matt). So much so that I was mean to my kids and woke this morning with the same attitude. As they get ready for school I’m forcing myself to be nice. He seems to think that I’m living on the prarie and my views are naive. I know better and can sleep with a good conscience.

    I can even understand how Charlie and Ray feel and its cool because opposing views are helpful to progress.
    It’s fine if you wish the current administration well but Matt’s comments yesterday were dangerous.
    To say that there is plenty of freedom and liberty is ridiculous. Can you not see, Matt, where we are headed? You missed Cyndi’s post a couple days ago about the woman fleeing Austria for the US. I suggest you go find it and read it several times. She explained in detail how socialism affected the life of the people there and she bailed to save her own life. It is a matter of life and death. The path of the current administration leads us directly over the cliff. I refuse to follow that path. It’s that frame of mind that just makes me furious. Matt, I think it is you living in a dream. You want it to be different than what it actually is. Keep an open mind. Look forward. Where do their ambitions end up?
    With all those kook czars dictating policy it scary. There is more to it than Obama preaching peace and happiness. It ends up in you being dead. Ie: population control. Ridiculous! I’m done

    • Anita:

      Good morning my dear. I see it is time for deep breathing exercises again.

      In the mass of humanity there will be those that get it and those that don’t. And there will be those that just can’t handle the search.

      Matt’s statements are in fact dangerous, but only if ignored, like they have been in the past. But think about this. Would YOU have recognized the fallacies in his argument 12 months ago? I’m betting not.

      So find those who will listen. Present sound, logical and well informed arguments. Pass on your new knowledge and committment, but not the panic or stress. There is time because in this country (USA) there is a large remnant. I even see it in some of the young ones. Somehow they understand, even with an education system loaded against them, they still figured it out.

      And don’t worry about the “population control” thing. It’s impossible to execute. A large scale die off is more likely due to meteor or some new disease, and that would probably happen regardless of the politics of the world. The power of life is that it is relentless in trying to live. These dopes also don’t grasp the basic reality of humanity. The better off we are, the less children we produce. There quest to make us all the same by reducing our prosperity will only increase our fertility rates.

      You have already taken the most important step in your own quest to act. That is to never, and I mean never, again stand by and let those types of statements go unchallenged. Even if all you say is “I absolutely disagree” or “I believe your statements to be false” (use fallaceous if you think they are an ellitist. Drives em crazy ha, ha, ha). If they are open and you have time go ahead and make your counter points.

      But no longer stand by and let evil have its way uncontested. Don’t panic and don’t over stress. Just speak up. Just as you have here.

      Big pat on the back and a hug on the side.
      Warmest wishes and thoughts to you and your family this morning.
      JAC

      • Thank you so much “dad”. I needed that. Like I said I’ve been reading here for some time as has Matt. Seems he would have learned as much as I have. I’m just speechless. Hopefully I get myself together and have a good day. 🙂 🙂

        • Buck The Wala says:

          I think one of the problems here is that you equate learning with not only seeing others’ views but with changing your own views to agree with those other views. There is nothing wrong, and everything right, with rethinking your own views. There is nothing wrong with reaching the conclusion that you were wrong before and changing your views. But there is also nothing wrong with coming to the conclusion that your old views are still your views.

          I also have spent some time on this site and feel I have learned a great deal through conversations and debates. I have been challenged to reassess my own views. I have walked away with a greater understanding and respect for opposing views – but that does not mean that I have come to agree with those views on government and where we are heading.

          Matt’s general point yesterday was a very valid one which I completely agree with. There must be balance. For all the problems you and others cite, government has also done tremendous good.

          • v. Holland says:

            I also agree that government is necessary and I believe in the free market up to a point but the word balance, it equates that scale being in the middle-I personally believe it should be weighted way to the side of freedom. I also realize that leaving that door open leaves room for people to push that scale to the opposite side which is wayyyy to close to total socialism. Which is what is happening in this country right now and has been happening for a long time. But BF is right when I argue that government is necessary-I am giving the liberal viewpoint a way to change this country from a free Republic to a government run pretend democracy. So balance not sure it’s the right word.

            • Buck The Wala says:

              My main point is that reasonable minds will differ.

              By balance I mean that there must be government tempered with a respect for privacy and freedom. Where that line is drawn is exactly where reasonable minds will differ.

              • v. Holland says:

                I suppose my question is where do you draw that line, although I realize that is a hard question to answer. You too Matt, you say tax everything that moves-is that just a joke or are you serious?

              • Buck The Wala says:

                I believe different lines need to be drawn on different issues. There is no bright line rule that could possibly apply to everything.

                As to where the line should be drawn on any specific issue, that would need to be debated on a case-by-case basis.

              • v. Holland says:

                Do you agree, in general, that State rights have been usurped by the Federal government?

              • Usurped?

                Nope.

                Seized by victory in 1865.

              • v. Holland says:

                You make a valid point but I still believe usurped is an appropriate word choice.

              • The line wherever it is drawn always lands on enslavement of man.

                No reasoned man can justify using violence on non-violent men.

                The claim that reasoned men can find such an excuse is irrational – and evil if manifested.

          • PeterB in Indianapolis says:

            I am certain that you believe that government has done “tremendous good”. It is even possible that this is true. However, much more often than not, it is not the government, but PEOPLE who do tremendous good.

            I don’t want an exhaustive list or anything of the sort, but at least in your own mind, come up with some things that government has done that you believe to be tremendously good, and then see if you can come up with ways that this either could be done or has been done by the people (not the government). You might find it interesting.

            • v. Holland says:

              Great suggestion!

            • Buck The Wala says:

              Some things that government has done that are ‘tremendous good’ = establishing labor standards, food/drug standards, etc.; public works programs; providing help for the most needy; etc. The list can go on and on.

              I don’t refute that it is PEOPLE who do tremendous good, but often GOVERNMENT provides the vehicle. The fact that people can (and do) do tremendous good outside the government is irrelevant. Just because people can conceivably do good without there being a government does not take away the fact that government has done tremendous good.

              • Take just one of such a list of Buck’s

                Food standards —

                Yet, the FDA allows the poisoning of the people by allowing growth hormones into cattle.

                The government is not there to protect the People – it is there to allow the poisoning.

                It grants the right to the food industry to inject poison into our food. The FDA simply tells the Pharms how much poison they are allowed to use.

                That is not protecting nor is it good.

          • Government has done nothing ‘good’.

            To make such a claim requires the admission that crushing the heads of innocent people accomplished a ‘good’.

            To make such an evil statement to be declared ‘good’ means that the only sight you used was whether such a beating did NOT apply to you.

            You closed your eyes to the evil as it descended upon your fellow man.

            At the end of the day, their bodies buried and out of sight – you declared “hey, it’s good”

          • Buck,

            I agree completely that it is not fair to equate learning with a change in position. I do not, at any point require that you or anyone else AGREE with me, only that you spend each day attempting to better understand the realities of the situation. We have much to learn from each other. So long as we all strive to do so, we remain open to different perspectives and thus remain open to different paths forward.

            • Buck The Wala says:

              That is exactly my point and exactly why I keep coming back to this site.

              It just seemed to me that some of Anita’s frustration (and sorry if I was wrong) stemmed from the idea that Matt has not learned anything from coming to SUFA. I maintain that he has, much like everyone here. But that doesn’t mean that he has changed his views.

              • My frustration stems from the fact that Matt’s views could get me dead.

              • Buck The Wala says:

                How so?

                How specifically can Matt’s or my views get you dead?

              • Buck and Matt:

                Your views support govt. Your views contribute to govts continued authority to use its monopoly power against its citizens.

                It can litteraly get us killed. Not directly but through your sanction.

                If you give the beast the means to rationalize its violence, then are you not complicet in its violence?

              • Buck,

                As I suggested to Matt I suggest the same to you. Go back and read the article from the other day about the woman from Austria. That’s all I need to say. Happy reading.

              • You go girl!

                I don’t think our gentlemen friends Matt and Buck are looking far enough ahead.

                I’m 47 years old, and am amazed at the changes that I’ve seen just since my late teens. Many of these changes have not been for the better in my opinion. If some of these changes continue on the same path, we’re going to have some serious problems to deal with in the not too distant future. So, I’m with you Anita, the views of Matt and Buck could be our demise someday.

              • It is tough though, to pin in into a statement such as Matt and Buck will be our demise. It is the mindset that the government is the option that would be our demise or the mindset that giving up freedom for security or comfort that would be our demise. On the contrary, folks like Matt and Buck, as misguided as you may find them to be, are the ones that are actually here standing up for themselves, discussing their thoughts and ideas with us, looking for a better path forward. Folks like Matt and Buck are the ones who will eventually be the reason that the two different political factions in America learn to understand and appreciate one another. Folks like Olbermann and Hannity have zero interest in hearing a different viewpoint, let alone discussing it or considering it. We shouldn’t be too quick to alienate those who think differently yet are willing to discuss rationally.

                USW

              • I’m not trying alienate anyone. I’m just saying what I think. I give Matt and Buck a lot of credit for their contributions here. That said, as long as they support HUGE government, and Obama, they are contributing to the demise of our nation and her citizens, us included. That’s just how I feel about it. I can see WHY they feel the way they do, but that doesn’t change what I believe will be the outcome.

        • Anita:

          I too am amazed and sometimes frustrated by the lack of change. But then I’m sure you remember the saying “I buy em books and buy em books and they do is eat the covers”.

          It is evidence of a closed mind. It may not be a deliberate thing on his part but it is essentially closed to these new ideas. It is crippled by the belief system imposed upon it. Do not despair. Some will become active when you least expect it. The biggest thing is for YOU to keep an active mind. That means don’t ever close yourself off to the possibility that you may be wrong. Test and re-test. This is how you become stronger.

          As for Matt, Buck and Ray, they are very smart fellows and may awaken some day. I suspect there are more cracks in their armor than they realize. It is actually the Charlie’s of the world that scare me more. When I read his arguments I can’t help but visualize a monster octopus flailing around, swinging its arms wildly in anger and frustration. And at the end of each arm is a sharp weapon. The only question is whether the creature will slay all of us, or itself first.

          I have full confidence you will be together in short order. Remember, courage to change the things we can, serenity to accept the things we can not change, and the wisdom to know the difference.

          JAC

          • v. Holland says:

            Hi JAC,

            I have read most of your post for many months now and I have always been of the opinion that you believe that some government is necessary or at the least you are struggling with that question. Am I correct?

            • V.H.

              YES.

              But differing amounts at differing levels.

              At the Federal we start with Army for defense. Then try to justify anything past that. I support Army only because I do not think with todays high tech that we can train and mobilize fast enough from a purely individual citizen stand point. BF is correct in that nobody could probably invade and hold the US for a long period. But I don’t want to let the SOBs step on shore, period.

              Good morning my dear V.Holland.
              JAC

              • But, 9/11 proved you wrong, JAC.

                With the largest and most advanced standing army in the world,

                it was wholly incapable of even protecting itself.

                You claim that ability is what justifies it.

                It cannot do it, either.

                Ergo, standing army is good for only one thing – enslaving its own citizens when the time comes to do so.

              • BF

                It did nothing of the sort.

                No Army invaded our shores did it.

                An Army can do exactly what it is designed to do. And stopping things like 9/11 is not part of that mission.

                That is the responsibility of the CIA and FBI. There, that ought to get your keys working.

                And of course you condemn my concept of Army wihout recognizing that the motivation for 9/11, as proposed by you, wouldn’t exist. Because we won’t be poking others in the eye.

              • JAC,

                You said that the standing army would be required to repel an attack before it got started.

                9/11 was not repelled.

                Nor would any attack either. Otherwise it wouldn’t be an attack, would it?

                An invasion of the US would be obviously underway months before landing.

                It would take, litterally, months to accumulate the landing craft, aircraft carriers, support fleets, the hundreds of thousands of troops, and their supplies and weapons to even mount such an adventure.

                This would be obvious.

                A militia would be watching and waiting. And as the enemy approached would be well aware of which coast it was going – 200 million guns on target.

                As the Swiss said to the Germans whose General said “How are you going to stop my million man invading army?”

                “We will shoot twice”.

              • BF:

                “You said that the standing army would be required to repel an attack before it got started.”

                Did I?

              • we can train and mobilize fast enough from a purely individual citizen stand point. BF is correct in that nobody could probably invade and hold the US for a long period. But I don’t want to let the SOBs step on shore, period

                The “step ashore” comment infers it, not?

              • BF:

                No! You mixed up the result with the means.

                I did not use the term “standing army”. I used just “Army”, for a reason.

                I think the structure and organization needs to be invented around the VDLG concept. The standing part may be small compared to the entire part, for example. Or it might refer to parts, such as a Navy, that can’t exist within most states.

                I do not believe a simple militia would be able to repell an invasion by another large force. That is the point. And until the world wakes up to the linkage between liberty and peace, I am not willing to trust others to simply fear our citizen with rifles.

                Of course I am guilty here of assuming much about your militia concept. I expect it has more than old rifles. Right?

              • The error of assumptions was mine, old friend.

                And yes, our militia most certainly has more than single shot .22 🙂

                Indeed, it probably has the best weaponry free men, wholly free to pursue, design and build have to offer.

                From the Colt .45 to the machine gun was all invented by non-government men.

                I just can only wonder what great weapons of DEFENSE free men would design to arm their militia!

              • Flag,

                Re your guns by non government men,

                Let me pop in here, snipe and then pop out again.

                John Garand

                Employee of the US Armory at Springfield and a Canadian no less!

                I think it was that Patton fella who called it the best battle implement ever devised by man.

              • Indeed!

                And let’s never forget…

                Kalashnikova

                He invented his AK-47 (and interestingly from a man born in one of the most oppressive regimes of the modern times) a weapon for…


                Freedom.

                His quote:

                I invented this assault rifle to defend my country. Today, I am proud that it has become for many synonymous with liberty.”

          • JAC: I gotta tell you this. Not looking for a pity party. Today is the 16th anniversary of my dad’s death. His name was JAC K ! I think I am freaking out. Probably has something to do with my short fuse. 🙂

            • Anita:

              My condolenses and best wishes are with you. I fully understand and will give you a little more Quiet support the rest of the day. A little freaking out once in awhile is OK. Just lock up the knives and guns first, heh, heh, heh.

              No pity given by me. I will give sympathy once in awhile, to those who have earned it.

              I suggest you take the day off to reflect on someone who was obviously very important to you. The waves of sadness will then not drown you as they will be mixed with the warmth of fond memories.

              Extra big hug. Now go curl up with some hot cocoa and watch some mindless movie.

            • v. Holland says:

              I’m sorry Anita-good memories that make you smile-try to remember the good.

      • JAC says: And don’t worry about the “population control” thing. It’s impossible to execute. A large scale die off is more likely due to meteor or some new disease, and that would probably happen regardless of the politics of the world.

        D13 says: Oh, hecky dern…..what am I going to do now with my secret weapon if a meteor or some disease hits? All this planning and you throw a meteor at me? And a disease? And I was going to make you my population control Czar.

        How are you today, my friend? This has not been a good couple of weeks for my beloved Texas…Colt McCoy gets knocked out and we lose to Bama. My beloved Cowboys had their hats, horses, and guns handed to them in Minnesota, and my Longhorn BB team loses to Kansas State last night…..SIGH.

        • D13:

          I am very well, sir. Thanks for asking.

          Your forgot one……………….TCU the only Mtn West team to lose a bowl game……..to who? Oh yeah, Boise State.

          It was a strange football weekend though. I thought the cowboys/vikings game would come down to the wire. I picked Dallas to win at the wire. Didn’t think the viking defense would be that good. I picked the winners in New Orleans and Indy but thought they would be closer as well. The only blow out I picked was San Diego. It turns out to be the best game (close) and the only upset. Of course the Chargers are a Southern Cali team so I guess we shouldn’t be surprised.

          P.S.: I think the Viking staff will come to regret that last touchdown next year. I guarantee it will be on the pre-game films shown just before the game.

          • Yessir….that was for Favres statistics….as always, it will come back and bite them in the butt….with his own pants on the floor. I thought the game would have been close….but, that Viking defense was like hungry Texas Mosquitos….would not be denied.

            Looked like the Saints defense on the Cards.

            We shall see….how much do you think that “pants on the floor” statement is a rallying cry for the Saints now? 🙂 Should prove interesting.

            I did forget about TCU…my own home college….although I am a UT grad. Yes…we had a lot of Texas in the playoffs…just could not pull it off. Basketball season still in full swing…maybe something here.

            • D13:

              You also forgot SMU. They kicked the crap out of my old school. Just as Hawaii did when the SMU coach was there.

              Figured we should end on one high note.

              I don’t think the Vikings run up on Dallas will affect the Saints. I think its going to be a good ol’ fashion bull fight. That is if both teams show up and play their best. I give the edge to Saints if their O line is healthy. They were more pass happy all year, meaning better at protection. And Breese can get it down field or short.

              I was also thinking two things on that last TD for Vikings. Favres stats wasn’t it, I don’t think. Perhaps a chance to reward someone other than Rice with a chance for a TD. But mostly I think it was pay back for some very nasting things being said and done on the field all day. I watch the inside game close and alot of the goins on around the pile after. Dallas was getting pissed off and there was alot of talk, pushing, cut blocks, etc.. Emotions were running hot. That and the constant holding of recievers down field and the smack talk after may have taken a toll on DISCRETION.

              The play was so out of the ordinary that there has to be something more to the story than Oh we were just playing to the end. Know what I mean?

              Even the Pros can act like kids when it gets to this time of year.

        • All is right in Bama land as the glow has not yet worn off.

          • The glow may not be worn off there….but that damned red t-shirt I had to wear is gone. Oh…how embarrassing….but I lost the bet fair and square and even have a good picture of it…My Bama friends here are still hoopin’ and hollerin’ here….but it is winding down.

            Enjoy your victory…it was well deserved…but no matter who won…there is still the lack of a playoff system that will always taint the college football scene. AND, Texas voted for the BCS system, have to admit.

            Have a wonderful day, my Bama compatriot.

      • Greetings JAC, and everyone.

        JAC I have to disagree with you about the population control people not being a threat. True, their plan may be impossible for them to realize, but that doesn’t mean that can’t kill alot of people trying. I see them as being a much of a threat as the AGW crowd. Look at how close that bunch of SOBs came to seizing power. I see the population control advocates gaining popularity if the global economy, or at least the Western countries economies collapse. If that happens, there will be of people in serious need, and not much in the way of resources. That’s when the POPCON message will get some traction.

        • Cyndi P:

          The population control people have been in controll for almost 100 years.

          They are the same as the AGW people. They are the key players in the environmental movement.

          I never said to ignore them or that they are not dangerous. I am simply saying they can’t make it stick for long.

          My other point is this. If we know they, whoever they are, are evil. Then why spend valuable time and mental health agonizing over things like population control when we can do nothing about it and its not important.

          If you know you must kill the snake it doesn’t matter whether it has 2 rattles or 10 rattles. You still need to kill the snake.

          Said a different way. We need to stay focused on the task at hand and not be distracted by these types of issue.

          We have plenty of evidence as to why we need to CHANGE the paradigm. Stuff like the 9/11 conspiracy and population control, and FEMA camps and, and, and, are not necessary to tell the story. They can in fact be used against us just as they are being used. To make every freedom loving American look like a nut job.

          Take careful note here. I am not saying there is no truth to any of these. I am saying they are not needed and they can be used against us.

          Hope your day was great.
          JAC

          • JAC,

            Your strategy works as long as most Americans don’t feel threatened by what’s going on. I agree that right now, anyone who raises the alarm looks like a nut. No one is agonizing over POPCON, at least I’m not, that said, I am concerned about the potential threat. It bears watching. If your strategy fails, by that I mean changing the paradigm, then free thinkers better be ready for what comes next. I have observed that most Americans think population control is a wonderful idea. On the surface, it makes sense, but when you really think about what it CAN lead to, things get scary. I don’t consider this a near threat, I do consider it a distant threat.

            Thanks for the good day wishes. Its still early here, Wednesday 0530…..

            🙂

    • Anita,

      I wonder what did Matt say that set you off so? If you examine his statements, you see there is no substance to his thoughts.

      (So now, I have to say that we are perfectly free and have plenty of liberty. I know it’s a matter of taste, and I do sometime feel that government oversteps itself, but such is the price of a civilized society.)

      Take a hard look, and ask yourself, what would you like to do that you are not “free” to do right now? What has the government taken from you?

      For myself, the government has taken my money, under threat of force, and used it in ways I do not approve. Nor do I approve them making non-violent persons into “criminals”. From drug users to the Branch Davidians, if they are not harming anyone but themselves, why should government force its will upon them?

      (I, too, have issue with the waste and fraud, but would choose to continue it in lieu of abandoning all that government does for us. I think the alternative to big government would be chaos, destruction, massive fraud (though little waste), and a return to the bad-old-days that many here seem to idolize. Sure, Little House on the Prairie has it’s appeal, but we should remember that life expectancy was in the 20’s. We can remember the magnificence of free enterprise, but we should not forget that the terms “snake oil salesman” has its origin in this time,)

      Wow! Without BIG government, we will return to a prairie life existence?
      Did government create Ford Motors? No, so why would smaller government result in no automobiles? Microsoft? Your local doctor? Drug companies?
      All would do just fine without big government. Its likely they would also do well in Flags world, and not exploit their workers nor sell intentionally harmful products. Henry Ford raise the working standard before unions became a force.

      Obama claimed we needed the stimulus to keep unemployment from going higher than eight percent. Gee, that really worked. And history has told the same story, socialism has made worse every “problem” they tried to fix.
      I hope all will watch Glenn Beck on Friday, he’s doing a special on socialism that will be very educational.

      Matt’s just doing what works well for liberals, if you don’t have facts, make up a scary story.

      • LOI, my illustrious friend, how are you today? Hope things are finding you well.

        Good call on Matt….he is a neat person but just philosophically astray…I just need to get him down here and breathe some “relatively free” air…may clear the cobwebs some.

        However, LOI says: “For myself, the government has taken my money, under threat of force, and used it in ways I do not approve. Nor do I approve them making non-violent persons into “criminals”. From drug users to the Branch Davidians, if they are not harming anyone but themselves, why should government force its will upon them?”

        D13, a Texans perspective says: As long as the drug user does not endanger me on the road (like alcoholics do)and does not steal to support his/her habit, and we do not use tax money to “save” them from themselves….leave em alone. No prob. The minute they endanger me or cause me harm in the form of MORE taxes…lock em up..lose the key. Ahhh, the Branch Dividians…..what would Janet Reno have screwed up without them? Personally, if they were staying in their enclave and paying their taxes (as they were), then leave em alone as well. But, the minute they kidnapped or enslaved, and used weapons to scare away the postal service, lock em up….lose the key.

        I hate big government myself and even limited government scares me because like adolescents that grow up to be teenagers….so does limited government grow up to be big and intrusive government.

        LOI says: “I think the alternative to big government would be chaos, destruction, massive fraud (though little waste), and a return to the bad-old-days that many here seem to idolize.”

        D13 closes eyes and wonders: Hmmmm. Perhaps there is another alternative that does not eliminate government altogether but returns it to the intent it was supposed to be. (Please notice the word intent). Unlike some, I do not feel that the intent of the organization of our government a mere 250 years ago was to run the lives of everyone. I do not think that no government will work either..I would be very concerned of that but I do not think that stifling free enterprise and free trade among individuals is governments role. Making me wear a seat belt is not helping anyone else and is intruding on my free choice, however, I do not feel that in today’s time, that we should not have a government that provides for common defense. Unlike some, I do not buy the theory at all that if we were totally passive and bothered no one, that we would be left alone. We would not. We would be brutalized BECAUSE we would be passive and for no other reason.

        LOI says: “Sure, Little House on the Prairie has it’s appeal…..”

        D13 shudders: Cannot have that….it would take way too long to say goodnight.

        LOI observes: Obama claimed we needed the stimulus to keep unemployment from going higher than eight percent. Gee, that really worked. And history has told the same story, socialism has made worse every “problem” they tried to fix.
        I hope all will watch Glenn Beck on Friday, he’s doing a special on socialism that will be very educational.

        D13 responds: Yep….but I think that the real unemployment is being overlooked. The only measure of unemployment is the compensation side. How many have quit looking and how many benefits have run out and are not counted? I have seen some estimates that it is 18-20% and I think that it is higher. I really feel 1 in 4 is out of work.

        I am looking forward to Beck’s special. I have seen some of the stuff that he is going to present….very scary. This progressive movement in its current state, is very, very wrong.

        • Hang on D13. Some of what your directly saying to LOI goes to Matt. LOI was quoting Matt

        • D13,

          I’m trying to keep myself positive, lots of cranky people here at work today, I thought Monday was yesterday!

          Sorry I did a poor job copying quotes.

          LOI says: “I think the alternative to big government would be chaos, destruction, massive fraud (though little waste), and a return to the bad-old-days that many here seem to idolize.” That was Matt on #4. I think just the opposite.

          Branch Dividians…, I admit to little knowledge on this except it seems the government was heave-handed. In another country, we would be calling for human rights investigations.

          LOI says: “Sure, Little House on the Prairie has it’s appeal…..” Matt again, not me. I cannot understand his reasoning here unless its some far-fetched movie theme.
          How will less government result in loss of technology? It doesn’t come from the government anyway.

          Looking forward to the weekend, have all my new toys in and should reload and fire some 7 mags if the weather will co-operate.

          • Perhaps, I am the one that should apologize….ummmm…I confess I did NOT read Matt’s text.

            I did the MSM thing and jumped to a conclusion on the basis of inadequate facts. I stand before both you and Anita with sheepish grin, an awww shucks head down look, and hat in hand.

            Now, on to more important things….windage and elevation….have fun with the Mags. Ahhh, the feel of a resounding recoil and the smell of cordite and gunpowder….the only thing better would be a little Napalm on the horizon in the early morning dawn…..

            WHOA>>>>FLASHBACK….sorry.

            • D13
              What John Wayne movie was it that he keep saying “windage and elevation” in?

              • Bama:

                “The Undefeated” with Rock Hudson. I think. He says it to a the widow of a Confederate man who died in a battle where he was one of the Union commanders.

              • Kristian Stout says:

                I think it was The Searchers, he was a conferderate officer searching for his niece that was abducted by indians.

              • Bama:

                The Undefeated. For absolute sure.

                Sorry Kristian.

                “”Windage and elevation, Mrs. Langsdon, windage and elevation.”

                The Confederate wagon train is surrounded by Commancheros. John Wayn has taken a likin to Mrs. Langsdon and her to him. Despite his connection to her husbands death. She is also I believe the sister of the Confed. Officer leading the troup (Rock Hudson). Some of the other souther belles can’t pull the trigger. But Mrs. Langsdon has no problem. She is a Westerner in the making, right there on the spot.

                By the way, this movie also include an ex-NFL quarterback as Wayne’s adopted Indian son. And another ex NFL star as a part of the Confederate group. Quick…..can you name them both?

                Hint, hint: They played for the same team.

                JAC

            • D13,

              It’s all good, I may be a little full of myself at times, hope all will call me if I get overblown.

        • Search the Web on Snap.com says:

          It took too long on the Walton’s to say goodnight, not Little House on the Prairie. Remember goodnight John-boy, goodnight Jim-bob, goodnight grandpa and so on. They say that memory is one of the first things to go as we get older.

    • Hi Anita,

      Some thoughts:

      Firstly, I didn’t see this until just now. There is a lot of writing on this site and I search for comments with my name in them. Matt is too common (it appears in the words like ‘matter’ far too often to be useful as a search tool), so if you want a response from me in a more timely manner, just address it to Mathius.

      Secondly, I don’t think I ever referred to you as living on a prairie. If I did, I apologize, and no offense was intended. My reference to prairie living is simply that people seem to idolize a ‘simpler time and place’, so I used the prairie as a hyperbole. People always want ‘the good life’ where they were free and self-reliant, but that world is, to quote Thomas Hobbes, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

      Nobody’s arguing for population control (despite the fact that I do think the world needs it). Please point me at a single quote or reference by Obama or his administration which seems to support this view being forced by law on the American people.

      JAC: “As for Matt, Buck and Ray, they are very smart fellows and may awaken some day.” I find this very condescending despite the fact that you acknowledge my intelligence. I acknowledge that you, too, are intelligent, but can you tell me why you are so certain that you are right and I am wrong? It’s like hearing a Muslim tell a Jew about how he alone knows the truth and the other just doesn’t see it. You cannot claim the corner on truth and dismiss me as someone who is simply not awake to reality. Rational, intelligent minds, can disagree on the correct interpretation of the same set of complex data.

      JAC: “If you examine his statements, you see there is no substance to his thoughts.” Again condescending. Simply because you disagree is not justification to dismiss my rational as “without substance.” There is plenty of substance, and if you wish to argue point by point, I am always happy to do so, time and work permitting.

      Bah Humbug.

      • It’s all good Matt. You are just the perfect punching bag. And I did literally punch our punching bag here at the house today. Strange. Your face was on it! 🙂

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        Hi Matt,

        Matt says > “People always want ‘the good life’ where they were free and self-reliant, but that world is, to quote Thomas Hobbes, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”

        Not tying to prove a point or anything but if you get the time, try reading “The Good Life” by Helen and Scott Nearing. A couple quite far left types.

        Scott died at the age of 100 when he decided to stop eating. Helen died after him when she ran her car into a tree.

        They did all work by hand. Quite a tough couple even if they were Leftys!

      • Matt,

        “If you examine his statements, you see there is no substance to his thoughts.” Again condescending. Simply because you disagree is not justification to dismiss my rational as “without substance.”

        Twas I, not the ever polite JAC. You said,

        “I think the alternative to big government would be chaos, destruction, massive fraud (though little waste), and a return to the bad-old-days that many here seem to idolize. Sure, Little House on the Prairie has it’s appeal, but we should remember that life expectancy was in the 20’s.”

        An alternative to big government is small government. What is your rational for a return to small government resulting in a return to post-modern society? I am sorry if I come off condescending, but
        see nothing but conjecture in that statement.

      • Mathius:

        “JAC: “As for Matt, Buck and Ray, they are very smart fellows and may awaken some day.” I find this very condescending despite the fact that you acknowledge my intelligence.” Of the things I said I find it funny this is what you choose to be offended by. Your offense requires the comment to be taken completely out of context, doesn’t it? You obviously have not awakened to the concept that your belief in govt is antithetical to freedom and liberty. A statement made to Anita regarding her frustration that you have not “awakened” in the same manner as she has given the same informaton.

        You either ignore or forget that I came from your reality. I to was once a lefty, liberal, Democrat convinced of the effacacy of govt. Then I started thinking about what was actually happening as opposed to what I had been told. Next thing you know I find myself here. Looking across the valley at a village where Black Flag lives. Wondering whether to go stay or just visit for a beer before returning to my village.

        “I acknowledge that you, too, are intelligent, but can you tell me why you are so certain that you are right and I am wrong?” I DO NOT know that I am RIGHT. I am POSITIVE that you are WRONG. Based on what I know and believe today. But you see I am willing to dig into new ideas in a very deep manner. To check and re check my assumptions and conclusions.

        “It’s like hearing a Muslim tell a Jew about how he alone knows the truth and the other just doesn’t see it.” Ahh yes, the fallaceous argument of using religeously based positions to criticize conclusions reached by reason and logic. You can do much better than that.

        “You cannot claim the corner on truth and dismiss me as someone who is simply not awake to reality.” Actually I can do just that, its called judging. However, I don’t think I have dismissed you at all. I just don’t think you have awakened to the true meaning of freedom nor the implication of what your belief in government really means regarding freedom. It is possible you never will.

        “Rational, intelligent minds, can disagree on the correct interpretation of the same set of complex data.” Alas, but either one will be correct or they will both be wrong. But both CAN NOT be right. But what I am talking about here is if one of us simply ignores some of the data in reaching the interpretation. You say provide a solid case or argument. It has been done here hundreds of times. By me, BF, Peter and others. I have yet to see you prove the truth or fallacy in the core concepts we have presented. In fact, I see you ignoring the very definitions and concepts we present in order to argue against them. Such as constantly presenting freedom as a “do anything you want” concept. So, you either don’t accept them or you are simply deaf to the concepts and unwilling to pursue a reasoned evaluation of the same.

        You wish to support a system that rationalizes the use of force against innocent people. All in the name of justice, stability, protection, or what have you. But your defense appears to be to deny that such a system is in fact the use of force against the innocent. That dear sir is illogical and irrational.

        Now, if you wish to admit it is what it is, and that you are willing to use force against the innocent then that is your philosophy. It is not new nor unique. It is in fact the oldest moral principle known to man.

        But how do you defend such a moral principle?

        “JAC: “If you examine his statements, you see there is no substance to his thoughts.” I didn’t make this statement.

        So humbug back at ya. Whats the matter. Feelin a little tense cause Mr. Obama has got you in his cross hairs?

        • JAC

          Looking across the valley at a village where Black Flag lives. Wondering whether to go stay or just visit for a beer before returning to my village

          As you know, you’re always welcome.

          The village is always a buzz when you come and visit – celebrations spontaneously explode everywhere! And, of course, the beer flows freely those days….

          …and you can stay as long as you wish. You’ll always find a welcome room in any home at the village.

          …and if, one day, you decide to make it your home – there is a nice piece of property (for sale, of course) just over there that’ll fit you just fine, I reckon!

          🙂

          • I’ll come for a visit.. just let me get my tetanus booster first.

            I’m very curious to see how things work over there.. for example, who cleans up roadside litter? And given that the beer factory is massively polluting the river, is the solution just to locate the town upstream?

            Also, is there a generally agreed upon designated area for duels so as to avoid death by stray bullet?

            These questions and more.. I shall have to bring a notepad..

            Maybe I’ll also bring some new technology as gifts since your abhorrence of the concept of intellectual property will stagnate R&D. And maybe some books too, since nobody there is likely to spend a year writing and have someone else just sell copies on the internet without royalties.

            Anything else you need before I head over? Let me know. I’m scheduled for some time off the week of Feb 14.

            • Mathius,

              I’ll come for a visit.. just let me get my tetanus booster first.

              Yuck.

              Please stay away for at least two weeks after that shot. We wouldn’t want you infecting the rest of us with all that crap you just shot into your arm.

              I’m very curious to see how things work over there..

              Equally, we’ll ask you to forgive all the strange stares from us. It’s not often we see a wandering ‘slave’.

              🙂

              for example, who cleans up roadside litter?

              Those that are annoyed by litter either do it, or pay someone to do it.

              And given that the beer factory is massively polluting the river,

              NOT HERE!

              Poisoning someone else is strictly forbidden. It is an act of violence against another person.

              The beer plants are all prestene. Yeah, we had a few others try to come in here and sell their crap, but it wasn’t long before the People realized they were merely poisoning everything.

              Most of the people simply stopped buying their stuff. They went bankrupt eventually – bought up by some group from JAC’s tribe – they’ve made a real go of it!

              is the solution just to locate the town upstream?

              If you can tell the difference, let us know!

              It’s probably cleaner downstream.

              Also, is there a generally agreed upon designated area for duels so as to avoid death by stray bullet?

              There’s an area over yonder called “Slave-land” that some sneak over to duel. Most “duels” here are debates in the middle of town square where the one with the best facts, reasoning and truth mixed with the best rhetoric usually wins.

              Not always though. That’s what makes it fun! 🙂

              These questions and more.. I shall have to bring a notepad..

              More than one I’d suggest…

              Maybe I’ll also bring some new technology as gifts since your abhorrence of the concept of intellectual property will stagnate R&D.

              Are you kidding??? We’re so far beyond what you’ve dreamed!

              Ya see … when we see genius, it’s popular. The stuff he invented gets built and rebuilt and copied so its everywhere.

              But everyone knows where it came from. He’s the talk of the town, rarely pays for anything – heck, the amount of money that just drops at his door anonymous is staggering! He wouldn’t want it any other way!

              He loves seeing his inventions EVERYWHERE – nearly everywhere his eyes falls he can say – “I invented that!!”

              Richest man in town, I’d guess….

              And maybe some books too, since nobody there is likely to spend a year writing and have someone else just sell copies on the internet without royalties.

              Books are for pansies… but the blogs are rich – flowing with free thought and debate – one of the fav’s around here is some strange blog called “SUFA” – everyone’s always there throwing their free ideas around – purifying them with the test of the real flame of unfettered thinking – USWep is some what of a hero around these parts….

              Anything else you need before I head over? Let me know. I’m scheduled for some time off the week of Feb 14.

              Bring gold – your paper money doesn’t carry here.

              • Now its starting to come into focus more clearly for me BF 🙂 🙂 :). I will visit regularly

              • You will find many doors to homes welcoming.

                And you can stay as long as you’d like.

                Be cautious though, one day you’d have to earn your keep.

                But always know that day would be never, if you so wished it.

                But I’m certain, one day, it would come because you wouldn’t stay for long without it.

              • I’ll work my ass off ya BF, have fun, party, then head back to home to JACville 🙂

              • **He loves seeing his inventions EVERYWHERE – nearly everywhere his eyes falls he can say – “I invented that!!”

                I put that in because it is personal.

                I invented “something” and it went viral.

                I didn’t get any “extra” money for it – I got paid my consulting fee for solving a problem. Yes, my solution was totally new and unique and then copied infiniteum.

                But, for me, seeing MY SOLUTION being deployed “everywhere” was personally – wonderful!

                I dented the universe.

                As they say in the commercial…

                …PRICELESS…

              • The differance between the living death of slave land and the “flourishing life” in the land of the free.

                Those in my village share your wonderous joy. And send thanks for your great inventions. That is why the beer flows freely when you come to visit as well.

              • BF

                Now I know why I must visit but not stay.

                “Books are for pansies… but the blogs are rich”

                Books, sir are for real men. It take long arms of great strength to hold a book far enough away to see the words and steady enough to read the passages.

                And I do love my books.

              • We have books, don’t worry.

                Most of the stuff is already scanned into the WEB though and its a lot faster to search note and study from there 🙂

            • Mathius:

              “who cleans up roadside litter” Don’t know about all the time, but I usually pick it up on the way to visit. My way of saying thanks for the great hospitality and fun provided whenever I go to visit.

              • I would like to inite all of you to my village as well. During the day, you can practice at our state of the art shooting range, attend survival courses, learn to build booby traps, learn to hunt and care for your harvest, learn to cook and make your own clothes. We provide classes on building shelters, fishing, moving about without leaving signs of your presense, guerilla warfare, sniperology 101, camouflage and it’s uses, and many other wonderful things. At 3:30 each day, the perfect clean beer I purchased from my friends flows freely, and live bands each night. Come on and join the party! 😆

                G!

              • Are you kidding?

                One of the fav’s spots is G-Man’s tribe!

                More info on preparedness and self-reliance than one individual can withstand!!

                There are waiting lists to apply to his college….

              • Have fishing pole, own knife, and own shelter. Will Travel. Where did you say it was? Left of the 3rd deer blind 23 degrees due east, Right?

              • close, but you’ll need help. which one of the six blinds is #3? 😆

  22. Liberal: open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/18/olbermann-scott-browns-irresponsible-homophobic-racist-teabagging-sup

    Olbermann: Scott Brown’s A ‘Homophobic, Racist, Teabagging Supporter of Violence Against Women’
    By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
    January 18, 2010 – 23:14 ET

    “In Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees.”

    Such was actually said Monday evening — on national television!!! — by a person currently employed by one of America’s largest corporations, General Electric.

    If the following “special comment” by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann is considered acceptable discourse on a cable news network today, there really is something very wrong in our nation

    Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/18/olbermann-scott-browns-irresponsible-homophobic-racist-teabagging-sup#ixzz0d4KT90CP

  23. Liberal: open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.

    http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/01/18/olbermann-scott-browns-irresponsible-homophobic-racist-teabagging-sup

    Olbermann: Scott Brown’s A ‘Homophobic, Racist, Teabagging Supporter of Violence Against Women’
    By Noel Sheppard (Bio | Archive)
    January 18, 2010 – 23:14 ET

    “In Scott Brown we have an irresponsible, homophobic, racist, reactionary, ex-nude model, teabagging supporter of violence against woman and against politicians with whom he disagrees.”

    Such was actually said Monday evening — on national television!!! — by a person currently employed by one of America’s largest corporations, General Electric.

    If the following “special comment” by MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann is considered acceptable discourse on a cable news network today, there really is something very wrong in our nation

    Sorry all, this will end as a double post. And I realize there are those on the right who are just as bad, but are they on national TV?

    • Buck The Wala says:

      Last I checked Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, and Glenn Beck are all on national TV. 🙂

      • Buck:

        Rush is not on TV, except interviews once in awhile.

        Don’t recall ever hearing something quite like that from the other two. Beck will call them socialists, fascists, communists and the like. But they are so I don’t know how that equates to “teabagging supporter of violence against women”.

        I was curios though as to what you thought about Mr. Obama’s campaign comments this weekend. Seems to fit the discussion about evil companies and the robber barons of the past.

        Seems your friend Matt is in the cross hairs. Can you explain to me how the NEW APPROACH to civil discourse requires the president to call out wall street and bankers as the Evil SOB’s who are destroying our lives?

        Just curious.
        Hope your morning is going well.
        JAC

        • Buck The Wala says:

          I believe you can watch Rush’s radio show on TV. Even if not though, my point remains as Rush is nationally syndicated and listened to on a daily basis by millions of people.

          As for O’Reilly and Beck, I’ll try to compile some quotes for you, but they most certainly have made statements similar to Olbermann’s.

          Matt does seem to be in the cross hairs a bit this morning. Not sure what he’s up to – probably under a pile of work at the moment. I’m sure he’ll add his opinion later on.

          I didn’t have a chance to read/hear Obama’s comments this weekend. You have a link to the text?

          My morning is alright – about to go for another cup of coffee; work to keep me busy but not so much that I can’t weigh in today. Yours?

          • Buck:

            I couldn’t find the juicer quotes from the weekend. This mornings news sites have trimmed them all and are focused on the election and other matters. Did find the following, which gives only a small flavor of the ones I read.

            “Martha’s opponent already is walking in lockstep with Washington Republicans,” Obama said, criticizing Brown for opposing the president’s proposed tax on Wall Street. “She’s got your back, her opponent’s got Wall Street’s back. Bankers don’t need another vote in the United States Senate. They’ve got plenty. Where’s yours?”

            Some of the others were touting Coakley’s suiing the pants off the corrupt bankers and finaniers of wall street, recovering millions for the people. Anyway, I found it interesting that Mr. Healer was directly attacking the bankers, insurance companies and wall street again. Total campaign mode. NOT leadership mode. Unless of course you are in fact a left wing idealogue.

            I don’t need you to waste time finding quotes of Beck, OReilly or others. I listen to them all enough to know. Olberman is a special case. You see it is not just the words but what appears to be obvious hatred that he spews along with the words that make it especially vile, even to me.

            I to have work to do today. May be in and out. Still have to chase down stuff on that grand jury and the UN Agenda also. Busy, busy, busy. Keeps me from finding real work though. LOL.

            Best to you and yours.
            JAC

        • Nope, I think that you will need to dig real deep to find anyone on the right who would equal the tripe spilling from that moron’s mouth. That’s usually the way it is. We have all heard that “Rush” said somethiong or “O’Reilly” said something but we never heard it ourselves. Reminds me of the apocryphal stories about Viet-Nam where someone always knew someone who was there and saw……

      • Buck,

        I thought Rush was radio only? Don’t know, don’t care for him with the little I have heard. Beck wears on me at times, just how he goes on and on, saying the same thing. And I have heard Beck and O’reilly use the term racist, and back it with a reason for saying it.

        Does Olbermann have a reason for all these character assaults?

        In Scott Brown we have an
        irresponsible(what has he done that’s irresponsible?)
        homophobic( I do not support gay marriage, but have gay friends. Am I also homophobic?)
        racist( I don’t like Obama’s policies, OK, I must be a racist)
        reactionary (???)
        ex-nude model (??? might make him popular with female voters)
        teabagging (that’s so intelligent a comment. anyone who opposes a wasteful government is into kinky oral sex)
        supporter of violence against woman(is this tied to the nude model thing?)

        • Buck The Wala says:

          I don’t know enough about Brown to comment. But I do know that O’Reilly, Beck, and of course Rush have made similar comments about liberal politicians in the past that are just as baseless. Will try to find some quotes.

          • I do not get Fox so cannot say anything about O’Reilly or Beck but if you listen to Rush (radio or webcam but not TV) and not just to quotes taken out of context by the MSM, you realize that many of his most “outrageous” comments are repeats and expansion of comments made by the MSM or liberals. It is done sarcasitically and oft times just to tweak the MSM. He often warns the audience that a tweak is coming then a few minutes later makes the outrageous statement. This gets picked up by the MSM and gives him more fodder for the next day. It is a game. All of this is in the transcripts of his show if the MSM and others would bother to read them. I points out the stupidity of the MSM because they keep making the same mistakes and Rush keeps depositing more money in his bank account.

    • Republican Scott Brown has been running ads in Massachusetts where he is out driving around in his old pickup truck while campaigning for US Senator. Brown released this ad on January 3. Around this same time Martha Coakley reportedly went on vacation.
      Here’s that ad again:

      Republican Scott Brown is a regular guy who drives a truck with nearly 200,000 miles on it. He says the truck has brought him closer to the people as he’s traveled around Massachusetts during the special election to replace the late Ted Kennedy in the U.S. Senate.

      Today Barack Obama campaigned for Martha Coakley in Boston and bashed Scott Brown and truck owners several times during his speech. Obama told the crowd, “Anybody can own a truck.”

      Of course, Obama’s latest attack on middle class Americans surprises no one.
      Obama has a history of this.

      Later Scott Brown responded to the president’s attack.
      FOX News reported:

      Brown took that opportunity to slam the president on government spending..

      “Mr. President, unfortunately in this economy, not everybody can buy a truck,” Brown said in a statement. “My goal is to change that by cutting spending, lowering taxes and letting people keep more of their own money.”

      http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/01/elitist-obama-bashes-truck-owners-anybody-can-buy-a-truck-scott-brown-responds-unfortunate-in-this-economy-its-no-longer-true/

      • v. Holland says:

        I heard the Presidents whole talk about the truck and I have to say I thought it was kinda cute and funny-the part about anybody can own a truck wasn’t thought out but it gave Brown a great come back line.

    • v. Holland says:

      I was channel surfing between stations and I heard this tirade from Olbermann and I’ve gotta say he picked every stereotypical piece of garbage he could think of to throw-he even attacked the south-I have heard many of our commentators say things that have irritated me to just making me shake my head but this rant made me sick.

      • He has to say that much to get fox news to talk about him, meanwhile the conservatives say something a lot less offensive and they get blasted by MSM.

  24. PeterB in Indianapolis says:

    This is for everyone, but mostly a response to Charlie.

    The Jets/Colts game should be interesting. As long as the Colts don’t underestimate the Jets, I think that they will win. The Colts vs. either the Vikings or the Saints would be an interesting Super Bowl. I suspect it will be Colts/Vikings because the NFL would LOVE the hype of a Favre/Manning match-up.

    As for government, you have made a start! You have realized that what we currently have is not working! I know you still don’t agree with the solution proposed by some of us, but take a minute to think about something:

    You contend that the problem with “no government” is that the power would be in the hands of “the few”. First of all, I don’t think that that would NECESSARILY be the case (although I am sure that “the few” would attempt to monopolize power), but more importantly, I think it is important for you to examine who is really in power right now? Is it the people, or is it “the few” already?

  25. Bravo USW, I applaud your site, your resolution, your words in this article. While my own site is more party focussed, in the end I hald similar sentiments, and have essentially put forth my own political stances and associated them with the libertarian party because it was the easiest one to associate with, and it was one that I might most be able to help. You are likely right that the country is not ready for many of those things, and I often write strategy that softens those things, not to compromise my priciples, but to, as you said so eloquently, make things better in the route towards perfect, rather than being so idealistic that I never even try.

    I also want to echo your sentiments towards those who disagree with you and I and others. The outnumbered are indeed the brave ones in many cases, and they are an instruction for the rest of us. Hopefully, they are not only braving the onslaught to make a point, but to seek answers of their own. Both the progressives and the idealists like BF are what make the discussions here happen, no one would read a list of attaboys and hurrahs, there is always room for debate. “The debate is over” or “this is settled” are statements only made by bigots and fools and those who cannot really back up their positions with substance.

    I hope to continue to be able to be a part of the discussion here as my life progresses, and I will never stop striving for my freedom.
    Cheers all
    Jon

  26. Mathius

    I agree that this is a different world than that of the Robber barons BECAUSE of government intervention.

    Gentleman,
    Let’s be REALLY clear here.

    Robber barons existed BECAUSE of government intervention.

    Sherman’s administration is considered the most corrupt in American history.

    He gave government money and free land to his cronies(who became robber barons) who built railways in direct competition to non-government railways.

    In the end, every one of the government railways went bankrupt or was acquired.

    And again, I think technology only exacerbates things. In ye olden times, a regional company was king – today, we can have multinationals with economic powers orders beyond Standard Oil.

    Multinationals existence has nothing to do with the lack of or expansion of technology.

    They exist solely because of global mercantilism.

    Big business needs big government, and big government needs big business.

    Big business needs government troops to enforce their expansion into ‘resistive’ market places.

    Big government needs the loot of big business.

    Eliminate big government and big business collapses.

    Image in a city like Detroit where there is next to no work available what would happen if a company moved in and offered lots of work, but the wages could only be used in the “company store.”

    But Matt, how can that be enforced?

    How can only the “company store” be the only retail?

    In a free market, it could not be. If by force (government force) it could be.

    So your complaint is not about the company, but one about government force.

    Government is a means to an end, and killing it is not an end in and of itself (unless you’re Flag).

    Nope, wrong again.

    Though Government IS a means to an end it is a very immoral and evil means to achieve that end. Killing the government destroys evil means.

    I have many ‘ends’, but they can only be achieved by moral means.

    Using government to achieve them destroys the ‘ends’.

    You want more freedoms, fine, identify a specific issue and we can see how we can scale things to protect what needs to be protected with the minimum of imposition on you.

    The minimum is zero.

    There is no ‘protection’ worth you imposing it upon me. None.

    You imposing ‘protection’ on me is exactly the same force that enslaves me.

    You can keep it to yourself, thanks!

    • And again, I think technology only exacerbates things. In ye olden times, a regional company was king – today, we can have multinationals with economic powers orders beyond Standard Oil.

      Multinationals existence has nothing to do with the lack of or expansion of technology.
      They exist solely because of global mercantilism.

      They exist also because of real-time communications and long-distance travel technologies. The world is shrinking and it isn’t just a fluke, but a function of the internet and commuter jets.

      How can only the “company store” be the only retail?

      Because the company pays in “company dollars” which are valid only at the company store. And the prices at the store are marked up so that they make even more money. This forces workers to spend all their money back into the company turning employees into virtual economic slaves – sure they can quit, but they have no savings to start over elsewhere. And the company owns your home, so quitting immediately makes you homeless as well as poor.

      In a free market, it could not be. If by force (government force) it could be.

      Government prohibits this type of behavior. Ask yourself: is this currently going on in the US? No? Why not?

      So your complaint is not about the company, but one about government force.

      No, and further, companies historically used private ‘security’ forces to bust up strikes – it required government intervention to protect striking workers for them to be able to get some traction. Yes, I know, sometimes the police worked the other way too, but the unions could never have succeeded without them.

      Government is a means to an end, and killing it is not an end in and of itself (unless you’re Flag).

      Nope, wrong again.

      Well you’re Flag, so I don’t think you’ve disproven anything here. In fact this confirms my assessment.

      You want more freedoms, fine, identify a specific issue and we can see how we can scale things to protect what needs to be protected with the minimum of imposition on you.

      The minimum is zero.

      There is no zero. It is not an option. The only condition a human ever has where there is zero imposition on him is as a baby. As a baby, you get what you want or you cry until you either give up or get it. As a baby, you poop in your pants and then someone else cleans up the mess for you. As a baby, you play with your food, you throw your food, you do whatever pops into your baby head – and no one does anything about it. You are truly free.

      But then the world changes. They make you go the bathroom in the toilet. And then they stop letting you throw your food. And then they make you *GASP* eat your veggies. And then they make you bathe yourself. And then they make you brush your teeth. And then they make you comb your hair. Play nicely with your brother. Be polite. Go to school. Do your homework.

      And then the world changes again. You get a job. Now you have to do whatever your boss wants whenever he wants however he wants. And you need to meet your mortgage payments. And you need to make your car payments. And you need to pay your electricity bill. Your water bill. Never mind taxes for now, there are plenty of things you have to do. And if you don’t? They’ll come and forceably take your car, or your house, or your stuff to pay for you back owed electricity bills.

      You’re not so free after all. The only difference I can see is that you want all the chains that are placed on you to be economic chains that are not backed up with threat of jail. You have said that the price for unacceptable behavior should be social ostracism, which is equivalent to financial ruin. Sure no one locks you up, but you still have the chains – they’re just made out of a different material.

      You imposing ‘protection’ on me is exactly the same force that enslaves me.

      I’m not protecting you. You don’t need protection. I’m protecting myself and my way of life. I am protecting, also, those who cannot protect themselves.

      You can keep it to yourself, thanks!

      It doesn’t work that way or I promise you I would.

      • Matt

        They exist solely because of global mercantilism.

        They exist also because of real-time communications and long-distance travel technologies. The world is shrinking and it isn’t just a fluke, but a function of the internet and commuter jets.

        So, let me offer this rebuttal.

        Hudson Bay Company, founded in 1670, owned 10% of the land mass of the Earth. It is still the oldest operating company on Earth.

        Mercantilism on a global scale is not constrained by the lack of technology.

        They are not inter-correlated.

        The only thing mercantilism requires is government force.

        Hudson Bay owned all that land due to the power of the British Empire’s armies to enforce it, and nothing less.

        How can only the “company store” be the only retail?

        Because the company pays in “company dollars” which are valid only at the company store. And the prices at the store are marked up so that they make even more money. This forces workers to spend all their money back into the company turning employees into virtual economic slaves – sure they can quit, but they have no savings to start over elsewhere.

        Then the company dollar becomes money, and other retailers will appear and use it to trade. Money traders will appear.

        Soon, the company store will be swamped with competition.

        It is impossible to enforce a monopoly on money, commerce or retail without violence.

        And the company owns your home, so quitting immediately makes you homeless as well as poor.

        Therefore, do not subscribe to such a lousy deal. Those that do, so be it.

        Government prohibits this type of behavior. Ask yourself: is this currently going on in the US? No? Why not?

        But sir, it is going on in the USA! Where are you looking? Are you so easily fooled by the blanket over an elephant?

        No, and further, companies historically used private ‘security’ forces to bust up strikes – it required government intervention to protect striking workers for them to be able to get some traction.

        What part of “using violence” did you miss?

        A company using violence on workers is either:
        (1) illegal
        (2) legal

        If (1), the company is criminal and will b dealt with as such.

        If not (1), it is thus (2). Who gives a company ‘legality’?

        Well you’re Flag, so I don’t think you’ve disproven anything here. In fact this confirms my assessment.

        You stated that government dying is my “end”. I demonstrated it is not.

        To declare that your assessment is ‘confirmed’ is ludicrous.

        There is no zero. It is not an option.

        It is the only option.

        To allow anything above zero is to agree that men have the right to enslave other men.

        YOU can agree to that for yourself. But you cannot agree to that on my behalf.

        You’re not so free after all.

        You discussion of impositions does not disprove my freedom.

        The difference is that you accept it, and I do not.

        That is the whole and complete difference between slaves and free men.

        I promise you it would

        It is most fortunate that I do not depend on mere promises of men for my freedom.

        • Mathius,

          Look above.

        • Dale Albrecht says:

          This discussion brings to mind and old song called “16 Tons” The verse goes as follows “tell St. Peter I can’t come, I owe my soul to the company store”.

          Freedom comes from having zero financial liabilities to anybody or any entity.

          • SK Trynosky Sr says:

            Based on conversations with my parents and uncles and aunts who grew up in the coal region in the teens, twenties and thirties, that is pretty much the way it was for the generations before them and not a hell of a lot different during the height of the depression.

            Thanks for reminding me, I’ll have to go through my stacks of vinyl and listen to old Tennessee Ernie again.

  27. For our more progressive participants who want to control or eliminate guns as a means to protect society because guns are bad, here are some quotes from an AP Article. Citizens are not allowed to own guns in Haiti.

    Haiti – “If you don’t kill the criminals, they will all come back,” a Haitian police officer shouts over a loudspeaker in the country’s most notorious slum, imploring citizens to take justice into their own hands.
    “The problem is they have weapons … so we cannot send the population or (just) any policemen” to capture them, Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive told The Associated Press on Monday.
    Until then, much of the neighborhood’s security will be in the hands of local populations, who are forming night brigades and machete-armed mobs to fight bandits across the capital.
    Just saying I would hate to have to carry a machete to a gun fight.

  28. For those who may not have read this, it is a very interesting editorial. I would take some of the conclusions with a grain of salt, given the authors obvious bias, but the details of his piece are insightful.

    Its a story of how the Republican leadership really want health care reform to pass.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odonnell/will-scott-brown-ruin-rep_b_426604.html

    happy reading
    JAC

  29. “What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires – desires of which he himself is often unconscious.

    If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it.

    If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence.

    The origin of myths is explained in this way.”–

    Bertrand Russell, philosopher – “Roads to Freedom”

  30. Ellen Spalding says:

    Good Day All!

    I think MA will be interesting to watch, no doubt. My issue with protest is that I fear that the Republicians that are joining their ranks are doing so just to get into office. That their motives are not the same as the everyday people who are there. I hope I am wrong on this account. I do think that people are in general angry over the spending and over growth of the government, no question about that. But I also think that if a politican shows up at a tea party protest and claims to believe in this, then does something else in office. People will be beyond pissed off then.

    • Ellen,

      You are more right then you know.

      This is why I suggest the ‘collapse’ will not happen until after 2012.

      There will be a political turn-over; the voters exhausted by huge deficits and massive economic problems will once again turn to the Reps. to fix it.

      They will only increase the deficits and destroy the economy like the Dems.

      The people will realize the hopelessness and then achieve a tipping point. An entire segment will disavow politics as an agent of change.

      The political agents will fail across the board, across all parties, across all levels of government.

      Then we’ll see some fire works. What happens after that is…

      …up to you.

    • Ellen,

      Agree, good points! Myself, even if he does stay a fiscal conservative, I hope both parties loose influence and independents become the dominate force.

    • The swell is beginning. The most massive tidal wave started out as a ripple.

  31. The Democratic party’s problems, crystallized in the last-ditch scramble to save Ted Kennedy’s Massachusetts Senate seat in a special election Tuesday, can be traced to a simple mistake: Many in the party misread voters’ desire to switch parties in recent years as an ideological shift to the left.

    In fact, there is little sign that Americans’ ideological tendencies changed much at all, even as voters gave control of Congress to Democrats in 2006 and handed President Barack Obama and the rest of his party a massive victory in 2008. Ideologically, the country remained throughout this period what it was at the outset: a center to center-right nation.

    hroughout this period of Democratic rise, America was instead a centrist nation that simply had become fed up with Republican rule, largely because of concerns about the GOP’s competence and its tone deafness. Voters’ response was to shift parties more than ideologies.

    In retrospect, the problem for Democrats was that some in the party—particularly in the liberal wing that is dominant in the House of Representatives—seemed to read this shift away from Republicans as a shift to the left. That became apparent first in the early-2009 construct of an economic stimulus package, written initially in the House. It went heavy on the kinds of public-spending programs liberals favor, and light on the tax cuts and small-business incentives that even more moderate Democrats like.

    That mix subsequently was adjusted somewhat by the Senate and White House, but an impression was set. It then was cemented in the health-care debate, where the preference for larger over smaller, and an insistence on the so-called public option, or government-run insurance alternative, suggested a continued belief that the country had shifted toward these priorities of the left.

    Yet the absence of an ideological shift can be seen by looking inside Wall Street Journal/NBC News polling throughout the last four years, the period when political winds were shifting so dramatically. The one constant has been voters’ ideological balance, which is virtually unchanged.

    Continue reading at The Wall Street Journal

    LOL…if I knew how to post links I would. Interesting article.

    • D13

      Colonel, here is how I do it.

      simply copy the address line (htpp//www. ???) once your on a page you want to link.

      Then come back here and after picking REPLY, Past into the box.

      After you hit the submit comment button it will show up highligted as a link.

  32. Interestingly, Sobran had a similar epiphany as USWep. He, too, was a solid Conservative Constitutionalist.

    Now, he declares himself a new-born Anarchist.

    Excerpts…

    [It was up to] Hans-Hermann Hoppe, to finish my conversion.

    Hans argued that no constitution could restrain the state.

    Once its monopoly of force was granted legitimacy, constitutional limits became mere fictions it could disregard; nobody could have the legal standing to enforce those limits.

    The state itself would decide, by force, what the constitution “meant,” steadily ruling in its own favor and increasing its own power. This was true a priori, and American history bore it out.

    What if the Federal Government grossly violated the Constitution? Could states withdraw from the Union? Lincoln said no.

    The Union was “indissoluble” unless all the states agreed to dissolve it. As a practical matter, the Civil War settled that. The United States, plural, were really a single enormous state, as witness the new habit of speaking of “it” rather than “them.”

    So the people are bound to obey the government even when the rulers betray their oath to uphold the Constitution.

    The door to escape is barred.

    Lincoln in effect claimed that it is not our rights but the state that is “unalienable.” And he made it stick by force of arms.

    No transgression of the Constitution can impair the Union’s inherited legitimacy. Once established on specific and limited terms, the US Government is forever, even if it refuses to abide by those terms.

    As Hoppe argues, this is the flaw in thinking the state can be controlled by a constitution. Once granted, state power naturally becomes absolute.

    Obedience is a one-way street. Notionally, “We the People” create a government and specify the powers it is allowed to exercise over us; our rulers swear before God that they will respect the limits we impose on them; but when they trample down those limits, our duty to obey them remains.

    Yet even after the Civil War, certain scruples survived for a while.

    Americans still agreed in principle that the Federal Government could acquire new powers only by constitutional amendment.

    Hence the postwar amendments included the words “Congress shall have power to” enact such and such legislation.

    But by the time of the New Deal, such scruples were all but defunct. Franklin Roosevelt and his Supreme Court interpreted the Commerce Clause so broadly as to authorize virtually any Federal claim, and the Tenth Amendment so narrowly as to deprive it of any inhibiting force.

    Today these heresies are so firmly entrenched that Congress rarely even asks itself whether a proposed law is authorized or forbidden by the Constitution.

    In short, the US Constitution is a dead letter. It was mortally wounded in 1865. The corpse can’t be revived. This remained hard for me to admit, and even now it pains me to say it.

    The essence of the state is its legal monopoly of force.

    But force is subhuman; in words I quote incessantly, Simone Weil defined it as “that which turns a person into a thing – either corpse or slave.”

    It may sometimes be a necessary evil, in self-defense or defense of the innocent, but nobody can have by right what the state claims: an exclusive privilege of using it.

    It’s entirely possible that states – organized force – will always rule this world, and that we will have at best a choice among evils.

    And some states are worse than others in important ways: anyone in his right mind would prefer living in the United States to life under a Stalin.

    But to say a thing is inevitable, or less onerous than something else, is not to say it is good.

    For most people, “anarchy” is a disturbing word, suggesting chaos, violence, antinomianism – things they hope the state can control or prevent. The term “state,” despite its bloody history, doesn’t disturb them.

    Yet it’s the state that is truly chaotic, because it means the rule of the strong and cunning.

    They imagine that anarchy would naturally terminate in the rule of thugs. But mere thugs can’t assert a plausible right to rule.

    Only the state, with its propaganda apparatus, can do that. This is what “legitimacy” means. Anarchists obviously need a more seductive label.

    “But what would you replace the state with?” The question reveals an inability to imagine human society without the state.

    Yet it would seem that an institution that can take 200,000,000 lives within a century hardly needs to be “replaced.”

    Christians, and especially Americans, have long been misled about all this by their good fortune. Since the conversion of Rome, most Western rulers have been more or less inhibited by Christian morality (though, often enough, not so’s you’d notice), and even warfare became somewhat civilized for centuries; and this has bred the assumption that the state isn’t necessarily an evil at all.

    But as that morality loses its cultural grip, as it is rapidly doing, this confusion will dissipate.

    More and more we can expect the state to show its nature nakedly.

    For me this is anything but a happy conclusion.

    I miss the serenity of believing I lived under a good government, wisely designed and benevolent in its operation.

    But, as St. Paul says, there comes a time to put away childish things.

  33. D13 and all vets,

    In an effort to move to VDLG, could the standing army be replaced with National Guard?

    • LOI,

      Wholly depends on the terms of enlistment.

      A militia is a lousy invading army because the men in the troops would withdraw their enlistment and go home.

      This is why the US lost the 1812 war against Canada. As soon as they had the Canadians over a barrel, the US militia troops happened to decide to go back home (for various reasons), ending the assaults.

      But militias make a humdinger of resistance. Recall again 1812 – a handful of English and French Canadian militia men withstood the mighty US army.

  34. Political positions

    Brown has positioned himself as an independent conservative counterweight to Massachusetts’ current all-Democrat, 12-member Congressional delegation.[11][1] Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne has called Brown “an insurgent who was somewhat disconnected from the national Republican Party”.[31] Brown has said, “I’m going to be the only person down there who is going to be the independent voter and thinker” and “I’ve always been the underdog in one shape or form”. Brown’s are in the libertarian mold, which he has called “fiscally conservative and socially conscious.”[1]

    Brown opposes a proposed tax on big banks that is designed to regain billions of taxpayer dollars in TARP funds and to curb bank executive compensation practices since Brown, through a spokesperson, has said that “he is opposed to higher taxes, especially in the midst of a severe recession”. As well, he has argued that the taxes would likely be passed onto consumers in the form of higher service and ATM fees.[32][33]

    In the special election campaign in 2010, controversy erupted over an amendment Brown had sponsored in 2005, which, according to The Boston Globe, “would have allowed a doctor, nurse or hospital to deny rape victims an emergency contraceptive if it ‘conflicts with a sincerely held religious belief.'” Coakley ran a television advertisement charging, “Brown even favors letting hospitals deny emergency contraception to rape victims.” Brown’s daughter Ayla called the Coakley advertisement “completely inaccurate and misleading”, and Brown criticized Coakley for running what he described as “attack ads”.[34] FactCheck.org also criticized Coakley’s ad as “misleading” since, according to the website, it did not mention that contraception could still be administered by other personnel.[35] Brown is filing a claim of defamation in court in response to a Massachusetts Democratic Party mailer reading “1,736 women were raped in Massachusetts in 2008. Scott Brown wants hospitals to turn them all away.”[36]

    Brown has argued that his military experience gives him a wider perspective on national security issues.[15] He supports President Barack Obama’s decision to send more troops to fight in Afghanistan. He has said, “[t]he mission is not over”. He has also cited Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s recommendations as a reason for his support.[11] After Martha M. Coakley stated in their campaign debate that she opposes sending more troops because terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda “are gone” from the country, Brown, along with a group of veterans, attacked her statement .[37] Brown advocates that suspected terrorists be tried in military tribunals and not civilian courts.[15]

    Brown supported the 2006 landmark health care reform in Massachusetts, which requires all residents to purchase health insurance. He opposes the bills approved in late 2009 by the Democrat-led house and senate as fiscally unsound. He has remarked, “Our taxes are going to go up dramatically… It’s not good for Massachusetts individuals and businesses.”[11] In an interview with Neil Cavuto of Fox News, Brown argued that the two reforms are very different since the Massachusetts program is a “free market enterprise” designed to help individuals purchase their own health insurance plans.[38] In an interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News, Brown stated that the Congressional reforms would “cut half a trillion for Medicare and then cut tri-care for military people and then have higher taxation about $1 trillion plus”.[39]

    Brown has stated that he personally believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. However, he has also referred to the currently legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts as a settled issue, which he does not wish to change.[11] Earlier in his career, he favored a amendment to the state constitution barring same-sex marriage but allowing the provision for civil unions. During a state senate debate in 2001, Brown referred to the decision of his lesbian Democratic opponent, Cheryl Jacques, to have children as “not normal”. He also described her parenting role as “alleged family responsibilities.” Brown quickly apologized for the statement and commented that his view is the same as President Obama, both anti-gay-marriage and pro-civil-unions.[1] He opposes ending the Defense of Marriage Act, and generally favors leaving the issue to the states to decide.[6]

    Brown supports Roe v. Wade, calling it “the law of the land”, and the right to legalized abortion. He endorses restricting or banning intact dilation and extraction, known by its opponents as partial-birth abortion, and creating parental consent laws for minors who seek an abortion. He opposes the idea of a litmus test on abortion-related issues in Supreme Court confirmations.[1] He also opposes federal funding for elective abortions in accordance with the Hyde Amendment.[6] The Boston Globe has described his positions on abortion as “nuanced”.[1]

    Brown has voted for a regional cap-and-trade system, and he later commented that he regretted the vote. He opposes putting up a wind farm on Nantucket Sound, remarking that “[i]t’s like putting turbines on Boston Common”. He supports expanding solar power, wind power, nuclear power, and offshore drilling exploration as a means to reduce the country’s dependence on foreign oil.[1]

    Brown’s work in the Hidden Wounds of War Commission focuses on improving the access to mental health services available to veterans. In 2007, Brown wrote a law establishing a check off box on State income tax forms to allow a filer to indicate if he or she is a veteran of the Iraq or Afghanistan wars. Known as the “Welcome Home” bonus, the measure was passed with bipartisan support.[2]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_P._Brown

  35. v. Holland says:

    Darn it-discussions today are extremely interesting and I have to leave 😦 USW the only thing wrong with this blog-is that it can become addictive.

  36. Mathius

    But we should remember that life expectancy was in

    So, to be clear.

    As long as you live long, slavery is a good life style? Is that what you meant here?

    • Not exactly. Just that people should keep in mind the cost-benefit ratios in their rush to abandon the shackles – sometimes those shackles are actually a good thing.

      • Mathius

        That sure looks like “not exactly but yes”.

        Can you explain just what it is that is so good as to NOT remove the shackles.

      • Mathius,

        I, sir cannot fathom a time when the shackles are actually a good thing. Ever. You might even be able to make an argument whey they could be a necessary thing, but never a good thing.

        USW

    • Could someone please explain these shackles that you are experiencing that cause you to lead a life of slavery?

      Maybe it’s just me, but overall I feel pretty free right now…

      • Hi Todd! Hope your getting the snow you enjoy so much. 🙂

        I think your answer is simple. Start with taxes and government fees, on mostly everything. Regulation on EVERYTHING. Do you really feel that you need the Govt. to tell you to wear your seatbelt, or can you make that wise decision on your own?

        We cannot do anything without government being involved in some form. It’s most likely going to get much worse, where even the staunchest on the left will feel it. By then it’s too late.

        Peace and Live Free!

        G!

      • Well I’ll discuss a shackle that makes me a slave to just the county government. I own my house and 10 acres outright, don’t owe any money on it, it is all mine. Now if I want to build a shed on my property I must go and pay for a county building permit and when I am done building said shed I must pay the for a county inspector to come and inspect it. Other than a money source why does the county care about my shed? Oh BTW I built my own shed and didn’t get any of the required stuff so I guess that makes me a bad boy.

      • Todd:

        The forfieture of 50% of my income without my consent.

        What is a slave but someone who’s fruit of labor is taken by another, against their will?

        Can I build a house anywhere on any property I own without govt permission?
        Can I build any kind of house I wish without govt permission?
        Can I drive without the govt permission?
        Can I hunt or fish without govt permission?
        Can I start any business I want without govt permission?
        Can I marry someone without govt permission?
        Can I sue the govt, without the govt’s permission?
        Can I educate my child without govt permission?
        Can I plow my field, irrigate my crops or livestock without govt permission?
        Can I cut my own trees without govt permission?
        Can I swim anywhere I wish without govt permission?
        Can I even walk anywhere I wish without govt permission?

        etc
        etc
        etc,

        But I love this one the best;

        I can die without govt permission but,
        I can’t be buried without govt permission!

        I urge you to go through this exercise yourself. Look around and tell me where Govt DOES NOT have some say or control over your everday life.

        Hope you are well.
        JAC

      • Buck The Wala says:

        To add to Todd’s point (which I agree with), can someone please also explain how life looks without such slavery?

        How would your society be run?

        Many here have advocated an extremely small and limited government. But wouldn’t anything that government does result in slavery to you, no matter how small or limited? For instance, some have argued for the need of an army as the only function of federal government; you would have to pay for that army through I am assuming taxes of some sort; how would that not constitute slavery under your definition?

        • Hi Buck!

          Ask yourself why you feel you need the government to tell how you live, take your money, regulate your life, and imprison or fine you if you fail to comply.

          Free men would be very busy providing services and good, so they can purchase services and goods. They keep everything they earn, to trade for what they need or want. Many men volunteer to organize a defensive unit that protects against those that want to enslave us. Since I wish to be a free man, if that day ever comes, I will be on that defensive unit. I don’t fight fair either! 🙂

          Hope your day is good my friend (as I now duck the stones!)

          G!

          • Buck the Wala says:

            Hey G. Hope your day is going well. I’m just glad to be home and relaxing.

            I do not feel the need to have anyone tell me how to live; I choose to live in a society with others. I recognize the cost of such society but I also recognize the benefits. I then choose to accept those costs.

            • I can respect that! Is the cost/loss = benefits equation been looked at deeply, or are you just accepting what it is without question?

              Relax and enjoy!

              G!

        • Ah, Buck

          Slowly the prey circles the vortex.

          Once you realize that slavery is not a gray, but binary black/white, you’ll fall – entrapped forever – into the grips of … (horrors)….

          … freedom ..

        • For Black Flag, you have the answer that all tax is theft and all government imposition is slavery.

          That is not the answer you will get from me. I think JAC said it best when he explained that the mistake most often made is starting with government and working backwards. I choose to start with freedom and work forward.

          I do not see a way to adequately protect the country without an army funded and organized at the federal level. Therefore it is needed in my own mind. The key being that the first question I ask in that situation is can I do this without government?

          We must stop believing that the answer is government for every situation. Government is only the answer in a VERY FEW instances, in my opinion.

          USW

          • t is only the answer in a VERY FEW instance

            What and Where?

            (bear in mind DEFINITIONS… government as a monopoly on initiation of violence…)

          • USW,

            I’m on the fence here. Our Govt. was given the job of maintaining an armed forces, which became the most powerful armed forces on the planet. Having that authority, we are still where we are. Did the Govt. utilize the armed forces to expand their power? Did they engage other countries citizens wrongly, at the direction of govt.? I’m in the middle here, to amny bad things can happen by allowing a small group of men control something so powerful. I would like some solutions as to avoiding this, so we don’t end up back where we are, if we can fix this mess. Food for thought! 🙂

            G!

            • GMan

              What we know, from history.

              Some men will use what ever authority govt is granted to their own purposes.

              Some men will take what ever authority they can that may not be granted but is not explicitly prohibited.

              Here lies the answer to what is required to have any chance of building a strong enough cage to hold the beast.

              Anyone who thinks you can create broad guidelines within which govt can then operate is simply placing the hangman’s noose around his own neck.

              Peace and freedom my friend
              JAC

              • I agree! Learning from past mistakes is a rarity, learning from history seems not to exist.

                We must learn the enemy, and what they stand for and intend, without the knowledge, VLDG is doomed.

                Let freedom reign!

                G!

          • Buck the Wala says:

            Very well put USW.

            But from where I sit I am relatively happy with the balance that we currently have. Sure there are problems. Sure the government infringes a bit too much in some areas. As such, to me, it is a question of starting with what we have and tweaking it to make it better by expanding certain programs and limiting others.

        • Buck:

          Very serious answer here. No tax in the traditional sense.

          How about a National Defense Lottery?

          How about private funding of certain defense material? Just like the good ol’ days.

          You know, when the rich guys paid for the cannons.

          Do you really think the citizens of this country would stand by and let the military starve to death?

          As has been proposed before. A stamp tax to pay for the court system. And the only way to guarantee access to the same.

          Your turn. Come up with some ideas that don’t require govt confiscation.

          JAC

          • Buck the Wala says:

            The problem with such a system lies in the fact that I could easily benefit without contributing a dime.

            I don’t view taxation as ‘government confiscation’. To me taxation is the system to pay for such things as common defense.

            • Buck:

              Here’s a very, very critical point in a free society of men and women who truly cherish their individuality that stems from their liberty.

              I DON’T CARE IF YOU BENEFIT WITHOUT CONTRIBUTING.

              Trust me, if you are a free loader you will be exposed and you will perish of your own INACTION.

              Taxation is confiscation when it takes property without the consent of the owner. That is the definition of theft ie. confiscation. You can not escape that reality.

              You can pretend it is something else but it is not.

              Why is taxation needed for national defense? With millions more in disposable income do you think USA citizens will not play the lottery or give donations to our defense. Especially if much of that is housed in their own state?

              Your arguments defy logic witnessed by human history.

              • JAC,

                Trust me, if you are a free loader you will be exposed and you will perish of your own INACTION.

                Can you expand on this JAC?
                Who will decide if I’m contributing my fair share?
                How will I perish from my own INACTION if those around me have setup a defense to protect the area that I happen to live in the middle of?

                The lottery is an interesting idea, but that has been shown to be very regressive. Those who can afford it least are willing to roll the dice on winning big. Those who are more well off know it’s a waste of money. And the amounts raised in the current system are pretty small – not sure how that would change if there were no taxes and only a lottery…

              • Todd:

                If you do not take action, in a peaceful way, to survive you will perish. That is the ultimate arbiter of free loading. Unless of course you can convince others to support you just for the privelege of good conversation or your company. You will decide if you are contributing your fair share.

                We will defend the space you inhabit. But you will starve unless you take action to feed yourself.

                Only in the left wing world can a voluntary action be considered “regressive”. What you say about who plays is true. But it is still a “free choice”. Don’t you think that is a lousy argument to justify taking my property without my permission?

                You also ignore the fact that due to vast reductions in income tax and a non inflationary money supply, there are far fewer folks in the “desperate” or “down and out” seat.

                To my knowledge the proceeds from every lottery established have greatly exceeded expectations. Perhaps it won’t fund everything, but it will cover something.

                But before we toss out these ideas as impracticle, perhaps we should decide what it is that govt should do first. Maybe the cost can be covered by a lottery.

      • G-Man,
        Haven’t had a decent snowfall in January yet. The storms that hit the rest of the US bypassed us. Still 12″ on the ground and the trails are in great shape, but we could use 3-4″ to freshen things up a little bit. If you have extra, sent it my way!!! 🙂

        I don’t need the government to tell me to wear my seat belt, but I would like them to outlaw texting while driving. I realize that might infringe on your freedom, but if you kill me while “driving while texting”, it’s kind of late for me to redress my grievance.

        At least with the law, you might think twice…

        Bama Dad,
        You certainly are a trouble maker!! 😉 I’ll be calling your Zoning Commissioner first thing in the morning!

        I understand the inconvenience and in many cases the absurdness of some laws, but zoning protects you from your neighbor building a huge factory right next to your house. The inspection stops shoudy construction that could be a hazard to you and your neighborhood (collaspe, electrical fire, etc).

        JAC,

        The forfieture of 50% of my income without my consent.

        50% of your income??? You need a better account!! No wonder you’ve been so crabbie lately!! 😉

        What is a slave but someone who’s fruit of labor is taken by another, against their will?

        And against your will? Are you not aware of tax laws? You could avoid/reduce taxes if you wanted.

        Can I build a house anywhere on any property I own without govt permission?
        Can I build any kind of house I wish without govt permission?
        Can I drive without the govt permission?
        Can I hunt or fish without govt permission?
        Can I start any business I want without govt permission?
        Can I marry someone without govt permission?
        Can I sue the govt, without the govt’s permission?
        Can I educate my child without govt permission?
        Can I plow my field, irrigate my crops or livestock without govt permission?
        Can I cut my own trees without govt permission?
        Can I swim anywhere I wish without govt permission?
        Can I even walk anywhere I wish without govt permission?

        Some of these are yes, some no. Some are government, some are private property issues.

        I can die without govt permission but,
        I can’t be buried without govt permission!

        Yes, seems absurd, but do you want your neighbors dumping their dead on your property line?

        I urge you to go through this exercise yourself. Look around and tell me where Govt DOES NOT have some say or control over your everday life.

        Yes, there are laws about many things. Many are absurd, but don’t really infringe on my freedom. They also make it possible for a large, organized society to exist relatively peaceful. If you removed the majority of the laws, society would break down rather quickly.

        Most/many of the shackles listed above are local and state issues, but the federal government seems to be the target of most of your complaints (I have doubt you can come up with a long list of federal issues).

        But are these really worth throwing out most of government and starting over? Do you think the 300 million people in the US could agree on a new government structure? Or would it de-volve to chaos and be built back up in local government, militias’, etc?

        It’s interesting the zoning and building codes show up on 2 out of 3 lists. A look at the top headlines for the past weeks makes me happy we have high standards. I’m sure there are people in Haiti who wish they had higher standards.

        • Sorry Todd, no snow to offer. The last week has been normal temps with little precipitation. Normal for here, we seem to always have thes weather cycles that just make matters worse in February. This weather pattern has always been bad for this area since the 60’s, maybe longer. A early cold snap, normal temps, then all hell breaks loose and we get the double dose of a cold front then lake effect snow. Did the same last year, cold and lots of snow early in Jan, a 2 week break, then blasted. Our problem is we get it all at once!

          If I’m correct, your in Wisconsin. I’d like to visit you state once, always heard good things about the people there.

          I don’t use a cell when driving. I turn it off. Age has it’s advantages, smarter than them youngsters. Instead of making a new law, maybe the companies that make the phones can make it so they don’t work when traveling beyond normal walking speed? Problem solved, no govt. needed.

          Stay onboard, your input is vital, and respected.

          G!

          • G-Man,
            Yes, northwest Wisconsin. Away from the tourist areas. Don’t like noisy jet skis – someone should pass a LAW!! 😉

            Come on up – we have a small cabin you can use!

            It seems our weather has been much more variable the last few decades too. More warm/rain spells in the middle of winter than I remember as a kid. But I may be biased!!

            Texting was just an example, and shouldn’t inattentive driving laws cover that? But that’s not obvious to some – I remember being young and invincible…

            Instead of making a new law, maybe the companies that make the phones can make it so they don’t work when traveling beyond normal walking speed? Problem solved, no govt. needed.

            But what if I’m in the backseat while you’re driving? (I’d probably be too terrified to text, but that’s a different issue!) Or on a train or bus, or in a taxi? And if it’s voluntary for the companies, in a free market, someone will make one without the controls to meet demand…

            • Thnaks for the invite! The cabin sounds great, all I really need is a small patch of earth to erect a small tent and build a small fire, then I’m good to go!

              I do laugh at the cell phone issue. I didn’t grow up with one, because they didn’t exist. I lived without them then, I can manage 😆 without them now. (I only have one for emergencies, it never goes off cuz only a few have the number, for emergencies.

              I would bet we would enjoy each others company.

              God Bless!

              G!

        • Todd:

          Can you provide any proof, either by example or by logic argument, regarding the validity of either of these claims?

          “They also make it possible for a large, organized society to exist relatively peaceful. If you removed the majority of the laws, society would break down rather quickly.”

          Seems to me that every breakdown of society has occured with these laws and govt in place. So that can not be the cause of such break down.

          You are locked in an illusion. Look to your fellow humans. You will find that the vast majority of them are completely capable of taking care of themselves and working with others in a peaceful manner. Just as long as Govt or some other entity is not standing in their way of solving their problems. Only by using violence can others stop such a cooperative solution from occuring.

          Look to New Orleans. The result was not the loss of laws. It was the result of a society made helpless by the belief in government.

          The claims you make to defend violence against the innocent are simply false. They are not real. I don’t know how to show you any other way than to point to history. There is nothing there to support your assertions.

        • Todd:

          The federal govt is involved in almost every restriction I have listed. Perhaps you just don’t realize their power.

          By the way. Do you know that virtually every federal agency and dept now has employees who are authorized to carry firearms and to use them when THEY deem it necessary. Right down to the Ag. inspectors.

          And I don’t care where the nieghbors bury their dead relative, if it is on their place. If the result is measurable damage to my property, ie water supply, then we will have a problem. Otherwise, who cares?

          You asked for examples of how govt shackles my freedom. I provide the list and you say, well that is not big enough or that includes state and local. Asside from not realizing the federal influence on the list, what difference does it make? But just for fun…

          What my kids learn in school is dictated largly by the Feds, through their grant funding.

          My ability to get good care for my Autistic son is directly controlled by the Feds through their medicaid, medicare, social security funding programs. They set the standards and procedures that are then passed through the states to control and restrict private competition.

          How fast I drive on the highway is determined by the Feds, through their appropriations and grant funding. I must wear a seat belt, thanks to fed blackmail by grant funding.

          I have to traverse round abouts all over my town because some Federal engineer required them in ALL federal grants for road improvements. Each property owner on corner of the intersection lost property beyond the normal right of way.

          My lake is polluted by sediment from highway construction because the federal grant required a standard exceeding what the county needed. And yes, the State failed to adhere to its own pollution control standards (surprised?).

          I have three Superfund sites located on major waterways within 3 hours of my house. Each one was authorized and in one cased operated by, the federal government. Now the river I used to fish is polluted by sediments released by the Federal Clean up project. Oops they said. We didn’t anticipate the channel changing and the run off we got last year (well within the 100 year event).

          I pay federal flood insurance because the Feds drew a line on a map cutting the corner of my property. Regardless of the fact there are now structures equal to or lower in elevation than that line. And, the line was misdrawn. The County has been waiting 3 years for FEMA to adjust the maps once the error was identified. Meanwhile I am out 3 thousand dollars.

          I have literally chocked on the smoke in our valley two of the past three summers, along with each fall, from the fires the Federal govt decided to let burn for their ecosystem restoration goals.

          Yet the same Federal govt imposes burning bans on me during the same period of time. And the same federal govt prohibits me from travelling on public lands where they let the fires roam.

          The Forest around us are dying from bark beetle infestation, because the Feds couldn’t/wouldn’t harvest the trees. And Congress did nothing to make it possible once the road blocks were identified.

          The federal govt introduces wolves into the areas where I traditionally hunt, decimating the deer and elk herds. Freedom to harvest while hunting…gone.

          The federal govt constructed and operates the hydro system on the columbia river. Essentially destroying Salmon and Steelhead runs. The solution to the problem. Virtually prohibit logging and grazing in all streams and rivers draining into the Columbia system. Thus destroying an entire segment of the economy in the northwest and intermountain regions.

          The federal govt is about to dictate what type of car I can own, again through its use of taxation and bank financing.

          The federal govt dictates the price of my gas and electric through control of access to resources and costs imposed through regulations.

          The federal govt is taking my money to subsidize windmills along the Columbia river, where the hydro electric system already exists and exceeds demand. This same govt prohibited and severely restricted private development in the same corridor for “visual impacats”.

          I pay exhorbitant fees for drugs thanks to Fed govt controlled competition for Pharma.

          How much more do you want Todd?

          Tell you what. Contact your State or even county budget person and ask them how much Federal money they get each year. Make it a percentage of the total as the details don’t matter. Every federal dollar passed to the states included restrictions and controls. Many aren’t even included in regulations. That is where the govt/private partnerships come into play. Use a non-profit to pass the money and have them impose the restrictions. Ever hear of “smart growth policies”?

          In the modern society we have Todd, there is very little in my opinion that should fall to the federal govt. The old excuse for centralization was our “uneducated backwater” states and lack of communications. Well that excuse is long gone. So now they have come up with new ones. I am throwing the BS flag on their excuses. Because that is all they are, excuses. They are not rational reasons.

          I challenge you to try the exercise. Start with NO Federal govt. Then realy think hard about every federal control you can think of and try to prove that federal govt control is the ONLY way it could be achieved. Don’t be to quick to declare it so. You are fighting against strong indoctrination and habit. I do not deny you may come up with a few. But the list should be much smaller than anything you are currently accepting as acceptable.

          Good thinking Todd.
          I know from the questions you ask you are up to the task.
          By the way, I loved that part of Wisconsin when passing through on the way to Michigan last year.

          Getting late, so I’ll see ya tomorrow.
          JAC

        • Todd:

          One more, because I missed your comment after my first list. You said.

          “Some of these are yes, some no. Some are government, some are private property issues.”

          You are absolutely wrong.

          Every one of those I listed requires govt permission in some form. The feds are included in most. None of these are private property issues, except in that the right to own and use is restricted by govt (local, state and federal).

          • JAC,
            I think my typ-o set you off. Does this make more sense:

            (I have NO doubt you can come up with a long list of federal issues).

            Sorry, you didn’t need to type a long list of federal grievances. I have experienced some of the same things, but I have also experienced the same types of things caused by lack of regulation or lack of enforcing regulations. Both in industry and government.

            I started to reply to all your posts, but don’t have the time, so I’ll cut-to-the-chase.

            Since those in the majority here are the ones who constantly talk about smaller government, I’ll pass your exercise back to you.

            1. Define what each level of government should do.
            2. Define specific things government should not do (for clarity).
            3. Define who will do #2 and how.
            4. Define how #1 and #3 will be paid for.

            Federal Government
            State Government
            County Government
            Local government (city, township, etc. Varies by location)
            Private Business
            Private Groups
            Individuals
            Others?

            I’ll try to do this too, but since I’m not a member of VDLG, I’m not the one pushing this agenda.

  37. Judy Sabatini says:

    War Room
    Monday, Jan 18, 2010 20:19 EST
    Pelosi: “We will have healthcare — one way or another”
    House speaker sounds confident of reform passage, even with a big loss for Democrats possibly on the horizon
    By Alex Koppelman

    Given what looks like the impending loss of the party’s Senate supermajority, Democrats have reason to be down in the dumps about healthcare reform. But if that’s the way House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s feeling, she’s not showing it publicly.

    “Let’s remove all doubt, we will have healthcare one way or another,” Pelosi said during an event in San Francisco on Monday. “Certainly the dynamic would change depending on what happens in Massachusetts. Just the question about how we would proceed. But it doesn’t mean we won’t have a health care bill.”

    There is one way to pass the bill, even without 60 votes in the Senate, that’s getting a lot of attention now. But Pelosi probably won’t like it, and neither will a fair amount of her members.

    The procedure in question would involve simply having the House vote on the bill that the Senate has already passed. That would mean avoiding yet another cloture vote in the Senate, one Democrats would be likely to lose if their caucus is down to 59 members after the special election in Massachusetts on Tuesday.

    House liberals will be upset about this idea, and progressive activists would likely be angry as well, but it may well be the only option left, and Democrats are reportedly leaning towards it. On Monday night, the New York Times reported: “The White House and Democratic Congressional leaders, scrambling for a backup plan to rescue their health care legislation if Republicans win the special election in Massachusetts on Tuesday, are preparing to ask House Democrats to approve the Senate version of the bill, which would send the measure directly to President Obama for his signature.”

  38. Judy Sabatini says:
  39. Can the Washington politicians still be this blind to the voter’s anger with what is going on in Massachusetts?

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0110/31658.html

    Steny Hoyer’s reason for voter anger is things are moving to slow and it was the other guys fault.

    Quote
    “I think the electorate, American public, is very concerned about the direction of their country and that is the central motivating factor, I think, for voters today; What does that mean? They’re looking for change in direction. I would opine and believe strongly that President [Barack] Obama has brought that,” Hoyer said.
    But such change has been slower than Democrats would’ve liked, Hoyer said, because of the depth of problems inherited by this Congress and the Obama administration.

    • Bama!

      I’m inclined to believe that they don’t care what the voters think. I’m slowly starting to realize that they really aren’t working for us, and haven’t been in a long time. 😦

      G!

  40. Interesting article about our ever growing government. Can they be equated to a leach field? 🙂

    Published on DickMorris.com on January 19, 2010

    After Obama succeeds in jamming health care changes down the collective throats of his embattled constituents, his next move will be to bring overt socialism to the United States in the guise of regulatory reform.

    The legislation he seeks to pilot through the Senate (it already passed the House) literally gives the Secretary of the Treasury the power to seize any company in any sector which, in his judgment, is in danger of insolvency and whose failure would cause systemic damage to the national economy (aka – too big to fail).

    Once the government has seized a private business under this horrific law, the Secretary of the Treasury is empowered to fire its management, replace its board of directors, wipe out the equity of its shareholders, and close any divisions or parts of it he wishes. Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez would envy such power.

    Exploiting concerns that another global meltdown might be around the corner, the Obama legislation effectively brings socialism to the United States.

    There’s no other term for it.

    Even the existence of such enormous power will have a chilling effect on economic decisions and political freedom.

    CEOs of large companies will be constantly looking over their shoulders, worried about government seizure. Since there is no objective standard built into the bill – such as bankruptcy – they will never know when the feds will swoop down and lock the doors. This policy of economic terrorism will influence investment decisions, lead to companies scaling down their size just to avoid seizure, and refusing to take risks which, while good for job creation, might mark them as potentially insolvent.

    Politically, corporate executives will have to think long and hard before they donate funds to Obama’s political opponents or antagonize the Administration. The standards for government seizure are so flexible and judgmental that a political conflict can easily escalate into a corporate seizure.

    This bill is Obama’s plan to bring socialism to America. He will use the power this legislation confers widely and ruthlessly to force corporations to do his bidding, follow his policies, or face the prospect of seizure.

    Corporate executives, in particular, will come to feel – rightly – that their jobs are on the line if they don’t keep their relations with the Administration calm and smooth. Imagine if JFK had had this power when he balked at steel price increases in 1962. Or, if LBJ had used this power to coerce support for the War in Vietnam. Of if Nixon was able to use this kind of power in pursuit of those on his list of enemies.

    This legislation, while cloaked in obscure language and replete with bureaucratic gobbledygook, is a dire threat to our freedom.

    It is part of the socialist trio that animates Obama’s program: regulatory “reform”, cap and trade, and health care. Among them, these bills will give him power over all major businesses, all utilities, all manufacturing industries, and all health care providers. There’s not much left.

    If Massachusetts delivers for democracy and elects Scott Brown to the Senate, we have a good chance of stopping the two legs of this triad that are still pending – regulatory reform and cap and trade.

    Parts of the regulatory reform bill are OK. The consumer agency it contemplates could do good things. But one suspects that these provisions are just window dressing to disguise the massive power grab behind the bill. Never before has our government had the power to seize corporations at will. And it certainly has never before been based on such subjective criteria.

    We are SO SCREWED!

    G!

  41. Judy Sabatini says:

    Black Conservatives Take Lead Role in Tea Party Movement

    By Judson Berger

    – FOXNews.com

    Though the tea party movement has attracted criticism for its supposed lack of diversity, minority activists who are involved say the movement has little to do with race, and that it is attracting a more diverse crowd every day.

    Lloyd Marcus is shown here at a March 2009 tea party rally in Orlando. (Courtesy of Lloyd Marcus)

    Lloyd Marcus’ conservatism started when he was 9.

    His family had just moved out of the “ghetto” to a brand-new high rise in Baltimore — within months, he said, the “dream come true” turned into a nightmare, as the building of welfare-collecting black residents became a den of crime.

    His father moved the family out as soon as he got a job with the city fire department, but “my cousins never escaped,” Marcus said. He cried as he told the story.

    Marcus, a black conservative who is now involved in the growing tea party movement, attributes the problems of his childhood neighborhood, his extended family and the black community in general to a “cradle-to-grave government dependency” that in the case of his cousins enabled an idle life of crime and drug abuse.

    To Marcus, President Obama’s policies perpetuate that dependency. That’s why, he says, it baffles him and other black conservatives when the tea party movement is dismissed as somehow anti-black, as a rowdy bunch of ignorant, white protesters who have it in for the nation’s first black president.

    “This is the nicest angry mob I’ve ever seen,” Marcus said.

    Marcus is one of a number of black conservatives who have joined up with, and helped lead, the conservative tea party movement since its inception. Though the movement has attracted criticism for its supposed lack of diversity — MSNBC host Chris Matthews recently called the groups “monochromatic” and “all white” — those minority activists who are involved say the movement has little to do with race, and that it is attracting a more diverse crowd every day.

    “I think a lot of black people are waking up from their Obama night-of-the-living-dead fog,” Marcus said. “They were walking around like zombies going Obama, Obama, Obama.”

    He and other black conservatives connected with one of the hundreds of tea party groups across America were largely active in conservative and Republican causes before the movement’s start in early 2009. They spoke and wrote about the need for smaller government, lower spending and lower taxes and warned that Obama’s candidacy would pose a threat to those values.

    But in the tea party movement they found a group that not only reflected their views but provided a platform.

    Marcus campaigned with a group against Obama in the 2008 election. But the Florida resident, who is a musician, gained a degree of fame in the tea party world a year ago when he cut a “tea party anthem” song — in it, he belted about the dangers of wealth redistribution to a gospel-sounding backup track.

    “In less than a week, the song was national,” Marcus said. He was asked to sing at an Orlando tea party rally last spring and has since performed at rallies across the country. He’s traveled cross-country on both Tea Party Express tours and plans to join up for the third tour this March.

    Marcus does not advocate for the creation of a third party, but said the tea party groups should serve to pull the Republican Party back to the conservative roots from which it has strayed.

    William Owens, a black author and publisher who with his wife traveled on the Tea Party Express tours with Marcus and has spoken at just about every stop along the way, also came out strongly against Obama in 2008. He published the book, “Obama: Why Black America Should Have Doubts,” before the election, in an attempt to address what he called a “misguided passion” toward the former Illinois senator in black America.

    When the tea party movement started, he said he found a way to build on what he was already doing, outside the Republican Party system which he calls out of touch. He first spoke at a rally in Las Vegas on tax day last April.

    “It was just a natural fit,” Owens said.

    He said the rallies are still “mostly white,” but that more blacks are getting involved. He took particular umbrage at Matthews’ comment, blasting out a press release that criticized the MSNBC host for “pushing conservative black Americans to the back of the media bus.”

    Owens now publishes a journal documenting the tea party cross-country tours. The Multi-Cultural Conservative Coalition is also sponsoring the next leg of the Tea Party Express.

    Despite the enthusiastic involvement of black conservatives in the tea party rallies and trips, Obama still enjoys seemingly unshakable support from the majority of black Americans. A recent poll from Gallup put Obama’s approval rating among blacks at 91 percent. Among whites, that number was 42 percent.

    Tea party groups also might not be doing themselves any favors when some of their supporters are photographed holding somewhat shocking signs at rallies — such as one last year that said, “The White House has a lyin’ African.”

    But such demonstrators may be the exception.

    Charles Lollar, a Maryland-based tea party supporter who is black, said there’s no validity to the racism charges.

    “I’ve seen black faces in the crowd. I’ve seen Latino faces in the crowd. … It’s not a movement of color. It’s not a movement of party. It’s a movement of principle. It’s a movement of America,” Lollar said.

    Lollar started speaking at tea party events last winter and said his biggest motivation is opposition to the stimulus package — both the $787 billion package that passed last February and the sequel that some Democrats are trying to push this year.

    Lollar has since parlayed his activism into a high-stakes campaign. The Charles County businessman is hoping win the GOP nomination to challenge House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., in the congressional midterm this November.

    “When we beat him in November, it’s going to send a strong message across the country,” he said.

    Lollar, whose previous post was as chairman of the Charles County Republican Central Committee, has an uphill battle to unseat the nation’s second most powerful House Democrat.

    Hoyer has been in office nearly three decades, and his latest campaign finance report put his available cash at $1.3 million. Lollar said he’s raised $40,000 — he aims to raise $2.5 million by fall.

    Lollar is running from within the GOP apparatus. But it remains to be seen whether the party establishment will reach out to other tea party conservatives like him to ensure they stay loyal to the Republican Party and not challenge it like Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman did in New York state. Hoffman, who is white, pushed out the Republican candidate in the race for Congressional District 23, and ended up losing narrowly to Democrat Bill Owens.

    David Avella, executive director of Republican recruiter GOPAC, said his organization hasn’t been actively mining the tea party movement for state and local candidates but that the groups could prove fertile ground for candidates.

    “Many in the tea party movement are Republicans who want to make sure the party gets back to its fiscal discipline days,” he said, calling those activists natural “allies.”

    Tea partiers point to recent political coups they say demonstrate the movement’s broadening influence and appeal. And they say they feel a certain freedom in the scattered leadership of the movement, as opposed to the top-down style of the GOP.

    “I think it’s great that we have all these different organizations and they have nobody in charge,” Marcus said.

    Marcus cited Hoffman’s influence in the New York race as well as Republican Scott Brown’s bid for the Massachusetts Senate seat once held by Ted Kennedy. Brown, while not sprouting from the tea party movement, is supported by it as he enjoys a late-in-the-game surge in the race.

    “This is a movement that has swept the country,” Marcus said. “It has really been the rebirth of conservatism in America.”

    Interestingly, Marcus said he used to work with one of Obama’s biggest supporters, Oprah Winfrey, decades ago at a local station in Baltimore before she moved to Chicago.

    The two have since lost touch, he said.

  42. Judy Sabatini says:

    A top Senate Democrat for the first time Tuesday acknowledged that the party is prepared to deal with health care reform by using a controversial legislative tactic known as the “nuclear option” if Republican Scott Brown wins the Massachusetts Senate election.

    Calling the state’s special election “an uphill battle to put it mildly,” Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., said “there are options to still pursue health care” should Democrat Martha Coakley lose to Brown.

    Congressional Democrats have been discussing several options, since a Brown win would break the party’s 60-vote, filibuster-proof majority at a critical time for health care reform. Durbin, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, described a combination of tactics to get what his party wants out of health care reform.

    First, he said the House could simply approve the Senate bill, sending it straight to President Obama’s desk.

    Then, Durbin said, the Senate could make changes to the bill by using the nuclear option, known formally as “reconciliation,” a tactic that would allow Democrats to adjust parts of health care reform with just a 51-vote majority.

    “We could go to something called ‘reconciliation’, which is in the weeds procedurally, but would allow us to modify that health care bill by a different process that doesn’t require 60 votes, only a majority,” Durbin said. “So that is one possibility there.”

    Though House Democrats have major misgivings about the Senate version, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer on Tuesday suggested they’d be willing to consider approving the Senate bill intact, if the alternative is no bill at all. A majority of Democrats in that chamber are opposed to many provisions in the Senate-passed bill, including the controversial tax on high-cost insurance plans which the unions are vehemently against.

    Though Democrats, including Durbin, have previously insisted reconciliation would not be used, key aides have quietly pointed to a change in circumstances with the unexpectedly competitive race in Massachusetts.

    But reconciliation is not easy under any circumstances. Any measure that is passed under the process requires 51 votes for passage, but that measure’s authors must pass strict legislative tests to show the bill deals only with taxes and spending to bring the legislation in line with the budget — a move that its creators made back in 1974 to keep extraneous provisions from being passed under this expedited process.

    Reconciliation might allow for Democrats to modify the excise tax, but it would not appear to allow for changes to abortion and immigration language, among some of the hot-button issues.
    Republicans have decried the use of reconciliation for such a massive re-ordering of the nation’s economy. To be sure, Republicans were the first to use the tactic outside its intended purpose, and they have used it most often for tax relief, but they say health care reform is different.

    Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., the primary point person in the Senate for reconciliation matters as the top Republican on the Budget Committee, has called this “Chicago-style politics” and has vowed to raise scores of objections, called “points of order.” There are about 13 different ways Republicans can challenge Democrats, and nearly all of these will require votes.

    Durbin, in Chicago, said Democrats “haven’t given up on finding other options. I hope some of the Republican senators who have at least been in conversations with us in the past will join us in passing health care reform.”

    But that’s not too likely. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., could possibly have pushed away the only Republican in that chamber, moderate Olympia Snowe of Maine, open to working with the Democrats on health care. She told The New York Times that she had “no intention of ever working anything out,” calling it “a waste of time dealing with her.”

    Under the current process, negotiators are trying to hammer out a compromise that both chambers would still have to vote on. But if Brown wins, this laborious process could drag on past his swearing-in ceremony.

  43. Judy Sabatini says:

    This is for all my friends older than me!!!…HAH!

    OLD people have problems that you haven’t even considered yet!

    An 85-year-old man was requested by his Doctor for a sperm count as part of his physical exam.

    The doctor gave the man a jar and said, ‘Take this jar home and bring back a semen sample tomorrow.’

    The next day the 85-year-old man reappeared at the doctor’s office and gave him the jar, which was as clean and empty as on the previous day.

    The doctor asked what happened and the man
    explained, ‘Well, doc, it’s like this–first I tried with my right hand, but nothing. Then I tried with my left hand, but still nothing.

    ‘Then I asked my wife for help. She tried with her right hand, then with her left, still nothing.
    She tried with her mouth, first with the teeth in, then with her teeth out, still nothing.

    ‘We even called up Arleen, the lady next door and she tried too, first with both hands, then an armpit, and she even tried squeezin’ it between her knees, but still nothing.’

    The doctor was shocked! ‘You asked your
    neighbor?’

    ‘Yep, none of us could get
    the jar open.’

  44. D13, looks like you called it.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/19/watchdog-group-raises-concern-dead-voters-massachusetts-rolls/

    A conservative watchdog group on Tuesday blasted the Massachusetts secretary of state for dismissing concerns about the thousands of dead voters potentially on the rolls as living voters head to the polls in the high-stakes special election for U.S. Senate.

    Though one study reportedly found as many as 116,000 dead voters on the rolls in the state, William Galvin, who oversees elections, said the dead voters are removed from the voter lists.
    “These are conservative groups who don’t know anything about this state,” he said, according to The Boston Herald.

    But Americans for Limited Government President Bill Wilson said Galvin should take the issue much more seriously considering the weight of Tuesday’s special election.

    “Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin has chosen to ridicule those concerned” about the dead voters on the rolls, he said in a written statement. “With so much at stake in his state and throughout the nation in today’s election, one would expect him to be more serious and less cynical. After all, it’s his job.”

    Americans for Limited Government was referring to a study conducted in October by data firm Aristotle International Inc. that found more than 16 million registered voters had either died or moved. Massachusetts had a particularly high number.

    CNSNews.com reported that the Bay State had 116,483 dead registered voters, and 538,567 registered voters who had moved away from their listed addresses. The data apparently did not reflect end-of-year purges that states sometimes do to get rid of the excess names.

    But the Herald reported that one conservative group was stirring concern by suggesting Coakley supporters and liberal groups like ACORN could pose as dead people to vote for the Democratic candidate.

    “We guard the rights of voters here,” Galvin said.

  45. I’m scripting a movie – don’t know what’s it about yet though 🙂 🙂
    Here’s a sub-scene:

    “Who is he”

    “You Es Whep”

    “What kinda f**k’n name is that??”

    “Well, if you’re his friend, it means he’ll die for ya.
    “If you’re his enemy, … you’ll never know it.
    You’ll be f**k’n dead and buried before you think abou’ it”
    …..
    “So, you don’t have to worry – one way or another,
    it just doesn’t matter, does it? …

    • You just wrote the reason why free men could survive together, a respective environment is reason to live, then men would not need to be vicious, just freindly. You could continue with:

      That there is Bama, he makes the best whiskey around, but if he don’t like ya, he won’t sell it to ya.

      Wouldn’t society work great with that kind of mindset, everybody is nice to each other, or they are forced to do without. Keep writing the movie, sounds like it’s gonna be a good one! 🙂

      G!

  46. Could this be a problem?

    Miami — More than 100 Haitians crammed inside a Catholic church Tuesday to ask questions about a federal government designation that will allow possibly hundreds of thousands of illegal Haitian immigrants to work in the U.S. and send money home during the next 18 months.

    http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,583408,00.html

    I have many concerns about this.

    G!

    • Judy Sabatini says:

      I’m sorry and I don’t mean to sound mean about this, but you know what’s going to happen don’t you? They will get the jobs, they will get the money, they will get the financial aid for college, they will get free medical services, they will get most likely free housing as well.

      While we’re getting this health care crap shoved down our throats, some looking for work, some struggling to make ends meet, some struggling to get money for tuition, some trying to get a doctors appointments, and some just making sure they can keep their heads above water, these people will get it for free.

      And just where is all that money going to coming from I ask. Oh wait, let me guess, they’re going to raise taxes on everything that they can think of, right. I mean, I’m for helping those who need it, but when does all the free crap stop for all these people, and it doesn’t matter where they come from either.

      Seems to me, that this government can screw us up one end and down the other, but when ever something happens to any country, why are we the first country to being in 100’s of 1000’s here to this one? Is any other place like France or Venezuela, or China, or any of those countries willing to take some of the refugees, and give them some help as well?

      Sorry, didn’t mean to sound crass or that I don’t care, I do, I really do, and I feel bad for these people, but it’s not just up to the U.S. to step in and help these people, is it? Don’t we have enough problems with what’s going on here now, and the where this country is headed?

      That’s just my opinion anyway. I will now go duck behind my desk and wait for the incoming I’m sure I’m going to get.

      • No ducking needed! Remember, “why let a crisis go to waste”. I have a theory about this as well, and will present it later this week 🙂

        G!

  47. http://freedomfliesblackflag.wordpress.com/2010/01/18/sufa-flag/#comment-86

    Yes, my friend.

    You Captain a different ship.

    But we share the same wind.

  48. A Puritan Descendant says:

    Thinking out loud here as I am having a hard time articulating a simple thought without offending anyone >

    If one does not see/feel excess government regulation then maybe they don’t live beyond a simple life of servitude to begin with.

    I make this statement based on the idea that excess government regulation is difficult to avoid by an industrious person, compared to a simple city person with a 9 to 5 job.

    This may help explain the differences in perceptions towards regulations.

    Gotta run and watch the Massachusetts returns roll in, Later all.

    • Buck the Wala says:

      Sorry if I’m misreading what you wrote, but seems to me that’s pretty condescending (to use Mathius’ word from earlier) — if one does not see/feel what you see/feel then the only explanation is that that person can only be content living a life of servitude?

      • Buck

        You and Matt can both do better. Is this your new CARD in the deck?

        It is NOT condascending and you know it. But then you are free to take that way if you choose.

        More accurately it is JUDGMENTAL.

        Are we not to judge based on our knowledge of reality and the circumstances presented before us. You guys have judged on many occassions. It is not a crime and it certainly is not condascending.

        The only question is whether the judgment is accurate, or truthful. If it is not then present your argument. Not some hollow accusation designed to stop the judge from stating his/her opinion.

        I for one agree partly with the assumption. I believe that those raised in large metropolitan areas are prone to accept the myth of big govt. That is because they are more dependent on modern govt for their daily survival. What they don’t realize is they don’t have to. But no matter. They are and they know it.

        What you don’t recognize is that for those of us who do not live in your concrete jungle and depend on your high flying financial industry don’t need your govt to provide for us. We do just fine with little to no govt. When we do use it, it is usually in the form of small town or county forms.

        Besides, how can it be condescending when up above you have admitted to being willing to trade some of your freedom for what you view as Gov’t’s benefits? That simply is illogical.

      • A Puritan Descendant says:

        GM Buck,
        I was right, that was hard to articulate. And your response confuses me a bit but then again I am not yet fully awake.

        I am trying to say, if one lives a simple life then maybe they are not exposed to regulation as much as a person who is trying to for example install a farm pond in an area containing an endangered species. I hope that clarifies my point. Or maybe it confuses it further.

        I could have said something like this > People who choose to live in an apartment or house on a tiny piece of land must be simpletons because they don’t choose to live the correct way like myself. But I did not say that as that would be very JUDGMENTAL.

        Later LOL

  49. Watching Teddy’s seat……..

    • WOOT WOOOT! Coakley has conceded! Unbelievable. This is a true sign of HOPE!!!

      Way to go Massachusetts!

      • This only means one of two things. I delays the desruction, or it speeds it up. I only hope that BF is right and we have till 2012.

        On a brighter note, the people have laid a major pile of poop on Obama’s ideals, good for them! What will they do next to shove Obamacare down everyones throats. If this isn’t a clear message, I don’t know what else other than a bullit can convince them.

        Peace Kathy! Live Free my friend 🙂

        G!

      • Kathy,

        Just curious. Since the beginning of January I have heard these two things come from your mouth: WOO PIG Sooey(sp?), and WOOT WOOT! Everything Ok your way? Please, do tell.

        • Woo Pig Sooey is for LOI and his fellow Arkansa-ians. That is their “cheer”, like…..GO SPARTY! or whatever you MSUians yell.

          Woot, is just like YEAH or Wahoo. Picture arm in air cheering.

          All is good with your neighbor to the west, and thanks for asking.

  50. In his own words!

    Subject: This is your PRESIDENT

    From Dreams of My Father: ‘I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites.’

    From Dreams of My Father : ‘I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.’

    From Dreams of My Father: ‘There was something about her that made me wary, a little too sure of herself, maybe and white..

    From Dreams of My Father: ‘It remained necessary to prove which side you were on, to show your loyalty to the black masses, to strike out and name names.’

    From Dreams of My Father: ‘I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn’t speak to my own. It was into my father’s image, the black man, son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself: the attributes of Martin and Malcolm, DuBois and Mandela.’

    And FINALLY, and most scary!

    From Audacity of Hope: ‘I will stand with the Muslims should the political winds shift in an ugly direction.’

  51. SK Trynosky Sr says:

    The question has been raised, How does the government take away my liberties? This is initially an easy question but it devolves to: they take too much of my money and make me get a building permit.

    I’ve spent the day thinking about it, here goes:

    1. My # 2 son, back from six years in the USAF decided to be a NY fireman. He took the test, placed well but was caught up in the financial squeeze and the appointment went on hold. In the interim, a group of Black firefighters did as they always do, challenged the test as being racist. As of last week, they succeeded in finding a judge to agree. The February class will not happen. I defy you to find anything in the test racist. Most questions are common sense.

    2. Same thing happened to my brother in law twenty five years ago with the police list. Took him almost 4 years to be appointed.

    3. Same thing happened to a friend in 1973 also with the FDNY.

    4. Same thing happened to me, no promotion test for almost seven years.

    5. In 1968, a very good friend purchased a M-1 National Match Garand rifle which he competed with. He lived in NY City. Ten years ago in the furor/witch hunt over the word semi-automatic, they were banned as a class of firearms by the NY City council. Note, this was despite the fact that all these rifles had been, as per the 1965 statute, legally registered. The police came to my friends home, because thanks to registration, they knew he had it, and advised him he had 30 days to turn in the rifle or get it out of the City. Fortunately he had a cousin living upstate.

    6. When I moved to NJ in 1977, I brought with me a Colt-Ar-15 and an M-1 carbine purchased in 1970 when I got out of the service. I dutifully secured a NJ Firearms owner permit. About ten years ago, when NJ went through the same witch hunt over “assault weapons” both of mine were banned. I too was advised to surrender them, register them or get them out of the state. Because the government has absolutely no clue of what it is doing, I can legally purchase an M-4 or Ar-180B in the state but my carbine and AR-15 are a no go.

    7. Ever been stopped by a cop when you did nothing wrong. If so, did he ever make you feel that you were an escapee from Stalag Luft III trying to make your way through 1944 Germany?

    8. Of course I pay too much in taxes, especially local property. Over $ 10,000 here in NJ for a fairly modest Bergen County home yet I had to fight the local school authorities tooth and nail for travel (not tuition) re-imbursement for my kids who went to Catholic schools that I paid for. God forbid if the issue of vouchers ever came up. I had the privilege of paying for everybody else’s kids education while being slapped in the face.

    9. Ever try to get your local government to do anything? You know, like plow the streets properly in the winter, enforce the property maintenance code on your neighbor when it’s mid August and the swarms of mosquito’s start rising from that thing in his yard he calls a swimming pool.

    So, I actually do believe that the government in its infinite wisdom has stuck its nose in places it does not belong. I’m sure most of us could add to this list and go beyond high taxes and building permits.

  52. Judy Sabatini says:

    You need to watch this video, it’s heartwarming.

    http://media.causes.com/611645?p_id=28931771

  53. Judy Sabatini says:

    I just heard that Coakley conceded.

  54. Talking about freedom reminded me of this article. The Hadze are one of the last nomadic hunter/gather tribes of Africa. Talk about having absolute freedom – only possessions you can carry with you, nothing to do except go hunting or gather food when you’re hungry. Sleep where ever you are, build very simple huts for the rainy season, come and go as you please, leave one tribe join another or wander on your own. No marriage, some couples switch ever few years. Kids raised by the tribe. Share the kills and the gathered food (but its kind of a free for all!!).

    http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2009/12/hadza/finkel-text

    This sounds interesting and might be “fun” for a few weeks, but it sounds like a pretty hard life. At the opposite end of the spectrum when compared to life in the US.

    But I’ll bet G-Man would enjoy this – and thrive!!

    • Todd,

      I won’t lie to you.

      Freedom is really tough.

      You see, being a slave is a gamble.

      On one side, there are “these” slaves that get the bloody crap reamed out of them – its so brutal its inhuman.

      But on the other side are “those” slaves” that get a life of ‘not too bad’. They get this life because the balance is lifted by “these” slaves over there.

      “Those” slaves don’t notice the pain and suffering “these” slaves have – its unseen. So “those” slaves think its just a dandy life.

      But the Universe seems even – a group suffering for the benefit of another.

      Now, a freeman sees this too – and he is just not interested in the game.

      He will take his own suffering and not place it on anyone else – but likewise, he’ll refuse the suffering of others that try to misplace theirs.

      So, from the point of view of “these” slaves – his life is pretty hard.

      But from the point of view of “those” slaves – his life is pretty good.

      BUT from his point of view, – and that is the most important –

      It is Simply His Life

    • Todd, you are a wise man!

      You said: This sounds interesting and might be “fun” for a few weeks, but it sounds like a pretty hard life. At the opposite end of the spectrum when compared to life in the US.

      But I’ll bet G-Man would enjoy this – and thrive!!

      I’ve spent most of my life, that I can remember, becoming one with nature. I’ve been priveledged to enjoy the great outdoors in many countries, from the Middle East to Central and South America. I schedule my vacations for this very purpose. There is nothing more wonderful than being one with nature.

      Peace! Thanks for making me smile tonight 🙂

      G!

  55. Judy Sabatini says:

    And they said Brown couldn’t win, well, they were wrong, weren’t they.

    Good night friends, see ya tomorrow.

    Have a great night.

    Judy

  56. What slimeballs is CNN ! Stopped broadcasting Browns acceptance speech – so America cant see what a charming guy he is. If Coakley won – don’t you bet they would have broadcast the whole thing !

    I get the slimeball emails from the DNC / Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and have been extremely P$ssed that not only do guys like James Carville say things like: Tea bag wing nuts, delusional birthers and all sorts of right-wingers are frothing at the mouth.. .. ..
    BUT Then Kerry – a possible president says things like: We also see how revved up the tea baggers are .. .. .. The far right wing – the out-of-state tea bagger crowd – has invaded Massachusetts.

    They have constantly used this lewd slam against solid American citizens. Can you imagine what would happen to McCain (a presidental loser like Kerry) if he used any derogatory term about liberals!

    Now, I attended a Tea Party organization meeting just about a year ago – didnt agree with all the different ideas discussed, but they sure dont deserve the nastiness that the dems (and the media) have constantly spouted !

    • Amen Frank. I discussed this the other night. I have about had it with the “teabagger” thing being deemed acceptable by the liberal crowd. They wouldn’t like a bit the things I would call them but then again I have the respect to treat people better than the progressive “leadership”.

      Your outrage is warranted and noted.

      USW

    • Hi Frank,

      I feel the same as you, but I don’t let it get to me. What else can we expect from a bunch of intellectual children? These fools never progressed beyond the 8th grade.

      🙂

  57. Bonnie Carniello says:

    Life of Illusion
    Can anyone say “Freedom of Religion”- who wants to spend money to remove “In God We Trust” from all of the National buildings-start with DC. Somebody give me a Jesus rifle and I know how to use it and so does my daughter whose running for office! Many people forget that this country was founded by a “Christian” community of people. If you can’t embrace it, turn away! I don’t mind when other religions tout their things. Could we just respect other religions period?

    You can sell your General Electric stock to make a statement. That will send a message.

    I’m so tired of apologizing to all of the people who want to stay politically correct in every direction and all of you yelling racist-get over it, a black President was elected!

    D13-Actually having to wear a seatbelt saved my life after a really bad accident. I was hit in my door as a truck ran a red light. I would have gone through the windshield if not for the seatbelt. I didn’t grow up wearing one either, but I do think they help, not hurt.

    Mathius-roadside litter is usually done by people in local jails. It beats sitting in cells 24-7 using toilet paper and saves the state hiring people to do it, they are paying the people in jail anyway.

    Someone mentioned people liking the “Little House on the Prarie” days. I come from that in my family, a small town near Appomatox, Virginia called Saxe. My great-great grandfather started a tobacco farm on 132 acres and oh by the way my Great Aunt born in 1899 lived to 92. They grew their own vegetables and cured their own meats. What a concept! And the ground was peppered with chemicals that are outlawed today. And my Great Aunt had two sons in the Air Force who died in WWII and they adopted two boys and raised and educated them.

    All of you who are concerned about the chemicals in the food could grow your own even if you don’t own land. Plants will actually grow in pots! I stopped eating beef for the most part when the mad cow thing happened. I only buy buffalo. It is leaner and healthier anyway. You have to stand responsible for what you eat and what’s in it.

    Someone once told me if you’re in a line of cows and they’re not coming back, get out of the line! I think America sent that message tonight by voting in Scott Brown and his truck with 200,001 miles on it! One if my land, two if by sea! If its to be, its up to me!

%d bloggers like this: