-
The Seventeen Year Itch
May 15, 2013 | 6 comments
-
Questions
May 1, 2013 | 50 comments
-
Stifling Our Children
April 15, 2013 | 39 comments
-
Thoughts on Gay Marriage
March 27, 2013 | 96 comments
-
Baseball Saints and Sinners
March 13, 2013 | 13 comments
The Nation's Pulse
Reagan Days
Too much water has flowed under the proverbial bridge.
When I wrote last week that I was encouraged by recent events in the Northeast — particularly the potential purpling of some of the truest, bluest states — some readers accused me of promoting gradualism, in that I opined that RINOs are an infinitely better governing alternative than leftist liberals. They inferred that I believe that straight conservatism is not sellable in the New York/New England region; often citing the fact that Ronald Reagan won all of these states in 1984.
While all of this is true, might I suggest that quite a lot of water has flowed under the proverbial bridge since the Gipper graced the White House. In some ways, the political climate seems to approximate that which ushered in the days of Reagan; high unemployment, financial uncertainty, unease in the area of foreign policy and particularly a loss of pride in the American Way, due to poor leadership in Washington. But there is a dramatic difference.
I don’t know about the rest of the country, but things sure have changed here in the Northeast since the 1980s. For one thing, in those days, the brainwashing of American schoolchildren was scarcely underway, only a few decades old. Today, it is not only the kids, but the parents as well that are the products of liberal indoctrination. Hence, issues that should be, at best, open to intelligent discussion, are treated as done deals; like the absolute acceptance of “a wall between church and state” and the “settled science” of anthropogenic global warming. Indeed, the idea that man himself is but a necessary nuisance on the planet seems to be gaining in popularity. Even in some religious circles, you can’t shake the notion that love for the Earth and its four-legged creatures seems to outpace that for the Creator and those made in his image.
Political correctness, once the butt of comedians’ jokes, now rules the day in nearly all aspects of life. Its effect on education is only part of the damage. So permeated is our culture with an emphasis on feelings rather than fact, that now we even have laws safeguarding the tender sensibilities of self-identified victim groups. In the years since Reagan left us, incompetence in the workplace is protected by claims of gender, race and age discrimination, while single parenthood and homosexuality have gone from moral maladies to federally funded and legally protected lifestyles to be taught to our children as worthy of imitation.
Yes, the nation surely has changed, and not for the better. In 1985, many young people still understood the everyday heroism that was the American citizen/soldier, given their proximity to those of the Greatest Generation. Today, too many barely understand the dynamics of World War II and worse, think that our use of the atomic bomb on Japan was an act of cruel racism. Do most modern Americans understand what motivated our founding fathers? Have they any notion of what is meant by objective truth? The Natural Law? The depredation inflicted on our national psyche by leftists has been devastating as well as wholly effective toward their ends.
The point is, not only have these things been done, they have been done rather easily. Modern American culture grows every day more and more devoid of the knowledge and practice of virtue. The predictions of our founding fathers like James Madison have nearly come to fruition: “Is there no virtue among us? If there be not, we are in a wretched situation. No theoretical checks — no form of government can render us secure. To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”
Yet thankfully, in much of the country, there still remains the longing for these things and a real desire to reclaim our former way of life, and I pray that November will go a long way toward that lofty goal. But those who think it can happen overnight in every part of the nation are overreaching. Reagan himself wrote this on compromise in his autobiography, “If you got seventy-five or eighty percent of what you were asking for, I say, you take it and fight for the rest later, and that’s what I told these radical conservatives who never got used to it.”
Will the day of the Dutchman ever return to our country? Let’s hope that Reagan’s words to surviving D-Day veterans at Point du Hoc on Normandy Beach on June 6, 1984, will once again inspire the citizens of America:
You all knew that some things are worth dying for. One’s country is worth dying for, and democracy is worth dying for, because it’s the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man. All of you loved liberty. All of you were willing to fight tyranny, and you knew the people of your countries were behind you.
JimP| 6.3.10 @ 7:29AM
Wow! The Northeast really is FUBAR. Time to secede people. Let's declare independence from this God forsaken area. They will be happier and so will we.
Purpleguy| 6.3.10 @ 6:54PM
You don't seriously believe all this crap she wrote, do you? Progressives and liberals love the Founders and this country as much as you do, in fact they love the people more than you do.
"In the years since Reagan left us, incompetence in the workplace is protected by claims of gender, race and age discrimination.... " - Good Grief, replace gender, race, age with Big Business, Corporate Personhood and Corporate welfare. Would you rather be good to the Multi-National Corporation like B.P., instead of your own people? Really?
Nick| 6.3.10 @ 7:26PM
You're a liberal, PurpleJackass.
You hate God. And you hate America.
Hoffmann| 6.3.10 @ 9:24PM
Purpleguy- Speaks the truth!
Occam's Tool| 6.3.10 @ 10:42PM
Purpleguy, you are a bit of a moron, aren't you? I have worked for State and National governments in multiple capacities, and it has made me a die-hard Conservative.
Unlike me, I doubt you devote your entire life to the medical treatment of Native Americans. Most Liberals like you wouldn't know what a poor person looks like.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:12AM
Name-calling again? Weak minds turn to that every time.... If you are so much like the poor, why do you care if the rich pay more taxes to get us out of the mess we're in?
Don't you realize that the poor get hit the hardest in bad economic times, while the rich could give up a little comfort, like oh, maybe John "Grandpa" McCain might just be able to get by with 5 houses, instead of 11, dontcha think? Or Mitt "I didn't do healtcare" Romney might be able to get by with a few less expensive suits ...
For the record, I doubt you devote your life to anything or anyone but you...
Nick| 6.4.10 @ 3:40PM
Envious much, PurpleJackass?
JimP| 6.3.10 @ 11:14PM
Purpleguy: Progressives and Liberal love the Founders? Then why do they try to undermine everything the Founders established? That's a rhetorical question. I know you don't have an answer that makes any sense. So to paraphrase your comment: "In order to save America, you must destroy it". Is that the idea?
And what's with all the Stalinist agit-prop about not loving 'the people' and being good to BP blah, blah. LOL You don't really think anyone here believes your crap do you?
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:17AM
So, tell me, how do conservatives love the Founders? How do you display your love for the Founders? The Constitution? America? How?
The Founders were men of science and enlightened thought, men raised during the Enlightenment and Progressive/Liberal ideas - something sorely lacking in the conservative ranting ... they were afraid of a King, but not a government - y'all mix that up so often.
JimP| 6.4.10 @ 5:54AM
We love them by working to maintain what they gave us. They were not "progressives". This is dillusion on your part. You are wrong. They were too "afraid" of government. So the set up a Consititution that limits government. Read James Madison's Federalist papers. Also, read George Will's column today. He sums up the differences between "progressives" and the Founders nicely.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:01PM
Yes, I read Will's column and his reliance on William Voegeli's "Never Enough" and excerpts from that tome... Trouble is, he cherry picks what he wants to make his point... in typical Fixed News fashion... and conservative misdirection.
William Voegeli points out that "the welfare state is good and necessary. The taxes is requires are not fun to pay, but they fund programs that improves the quality of life for everyone by strengthening and uniting our nation. We should accept and even embrace those taxes as a fair price we pay for the essential benefits they buy."
It's an interesting book, but does not in any means denigrate the progressive movement anymore than it does the conservative movement. Neither set of ideas are inherently bad, they are just different - ergo the divisions.
maverick muse| 6.5.10 @ 6:55AM
"The taxes [the welfare state] requires are not fun to pay, but they fund programs that improves the quality of life for everyone by strengthening and uniting our nation."
Saying something does not make it so. Obama's father wrote that 100% taxation would improve the quality of life for everyone. Him saying it doesn't make it so, either. The authoritarian programs of Stalin and Mao hardly improved the quality of life of all those they murdered and work camped to death.
Osamas Pajamas| 6.3.10 @ 11:18PM
What this country needs is a truly LIBERAL president and congress! And I forgive the reader for suspecting that this must be some kind of bad joke!
But the Democrats believe in "statism" --- not "liberalism."
They benefit from the imprecise American political terminology ---- we say "the government" here in the USA ---- rather than "the state." And that's a dangerous problem. Famous brands of statism in recent centuries have been Nazism, socialism, fascism, communism, and welfare statism ---- this last is sort of a mix of fascism and socialism.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a political philosophy of small, cheap government ---- it is a constabulary ---- and the job of a liberal government is to enforce human rights within its own jurisdiction. I speak of the inalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ----The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words. The words "liberal" and "liberalism" were hijacked by the Democrats and socialists and fascists long ago ---- and it was the mistake of conservatives and libertarians to let them get away with it.
It is long past time that liberalism be reclaimed, defined, and explained by its rightful owners ---- by the champions of freedom, i.e.: not by Democrats.
Well, how about "progressivism?" Whuzzat?! “Cancer” is “progressive,” too. Isn't “progressivism” just another statist cancer? It chews you up, piece by piece, in the name of Da Peepul? Eat Da Rich? Moral cannibalism, anyone?
Friends of freedom! Friends of peace-through-strength! And friends of prosperity! Declare yourselves to be "liberals," then ---- and kick over the bloody coffee tables --- and overthrow and trounce the Democrats in 2010 and 2012!
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:20AM
Anyone who pays attention to any thought of freedom from a writer with Osama in his name needs to have his head examined.
For the record, I have never equated Democrat with Progressive or Liberal... why do you?
Sam Vaughn| 6.4.10 @ 9:48AM
Just an observation. Most liberals and progressives believe the founders were a bunch of rich middle-age slave owning white guys who were just trying to avoid paying taxes.
JF| 6.5.10 @ 2:15PM
Hey Purpleguy - does it occur to you that the corporations you despise are comprised of people - all of whom draw salaries for doing work that other people known as customers want to buy? So libs and "progressives" love people so much that they admire a president who "has his boot on the neck" of BP, who has given us 16 to 20% unemployment and who thinks progress forcing people into a health care plan that guarantees mediocre care, limited access and no accountability for government sanctioned medical malpractice? The only people libs love are those who are too stupid to think for themselves or too compliant to complain about being turned into a slave.
nova9047| 6.5.10 @ 2:57AM
The Northeast's honeymoon with socialism began with FDR. Reagan '84 was a hiccup. Tom Kean, a RINO by standards of today, was the Northeast's beau ideal of a Republican. Guess what? Kean beat Florio in 1981 by 1,800 votes. Republicans have migrated away from confiscatory welfare state taxation since 1989. You would hardly expect what's left behind to be conservatives when they are the recipients of welfare state largesse.
Brian Mc| 6.3.10 @ 7:29AM
Lisa,
Your article rather gives me a feeling of trepidation rather than hope. The indoctrination is working, hence, an uphill battle of gargantuan proportions. Can there be a turning of the tide?
I pray God will continue to bless America
Joe C| 6.3.10 @ 2:46PM
Indeed. Before I go to sleep every night, I say a prayer for Ronnie, and a prayer for our great nation - that Ronald Reagan's spirit may once again be made incarnate on this Earth, to show us the way of the good.
Purpleguy| 6.3.10 @ 6:57PM
This country has always moved forward, not backward, despite some conservative's efforts to retard, delay, or reverse technological advance, advancement of human rights, expansion of the middle class, and spreading of freedom around the world. Get on the train or get out of the way ...
Osamas Pajamas| 6.3.10 @ 11:19PM
What this country needs is a truly LIBERAL president and congress! And I forgive the reader for suspecting that this must be some kind of bad joke!
But the Democrats believe in "statism" --- not "liberalism."
They benefit from the imprecise American political terminology ---- we say "the government" here in the USA ---- rather than "the state." And that's a dangerous problem. Famous brands of statism in recent centuries have been Nazism, socialism, fascism, communism, and welfare statism ---- this last is sort of a mix of fascism and socialism.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a political philosophy of small, cheap government ---- it is a constabulary ---- and the job of a liberal government is to enforce human rights within its own jurisdiction. I speak of the inalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ----The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words. The words "liberal" and "liberalism" were hijacked by the Democrats and socialists and fascists long ago ---- and it was the mistake of conservatives and libertarians to let them get away with it.
It is long past time that liberalism be reclaimed, defined, and explained by its rightful owners ---- by the champions of freedom, i.e.: not by Democrats.
Well, how about "progressivism?" Whuzzat?! “Cancer” is “progressive,” too. Isn't “progressivism” just another statist cancer? It chews you up, piece by piece, in the name of Da Peepul? Eat Da Rich? Moral cannibalism, anyone?
Friends of freedom! Friends of peace-through-strength! And friends of prosperity! Declare yourselves to be "liberals," then ---- and kick over the bloody coffee tables --- and overthrow and trounce the Democrats in 2010 and 2012!
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:22AM
Copy/Paste the lazy man's way to make a point .. how passionate of you. I can do it too ... wow, isn't that AMAZING?
Anyone who pays attention to any thought of freedom from a writer with Osama in his name needs to have his head examined.
For the record, I have never equated Democrat with Progressive or Liberal... why do you?
NHConservative| 6.3.10 @ 7:48AM
Unfortunately, Lisa UNDERSTATES the problem - currently a hot topic in Amherst, NH is why two Souheghn High School students who participated in the brutal torture and murder of a local woman and attempted murder of her young daughter with knives and machetes shouldn't have their pictures in the High School yearbook. Neither the school's Principal nor Superintendent wanted to address whether murder violated the school's six 'Pillars of Behavior' and justified expulsion nor did they ever raise the issue of expelling the students. They remain on the school rolls and are receiving school 'services' while in jail for the murder and attempted murder. Conservative NH indeed. The attitude of the school attendees and managers is disgraceful!
Purpleguy| 6.3.10 @ 6:59PM
Yep, let's not educate them, let's give 'em the death penalty. That's so much better for our society.
Nick| 6.3.10 @ 7:28PM
Now, you're starting to learn, PurpleJackass.
Mike| 6.11.10 @ 7:51AM
Nick, Purple is liberal. It seems much higher minded and compassionate to libs to “educate” the criminal who committed the crime. Compassion for the innocent victim or the future consequences of all this rehabilitating/educating they recommend isn’t a concern. Fast swift punishment like that dispensed in Singapore may in fact cut way down on the violence and crime thereby making things safer for good people but seems cruel to their eyes. Libs simply do not understand human behavior. To them, it’s always the intention that counts-results be damned. Take it from a guy who lives in Liberal HQ USA; we practice more liberalism than anywhere else and have more woes than NY City. All said though… “***Jackass” isn’t necessary.
Occam's Tool| 6.3.10 @ 10:44PM
And why should two CONFIRMED murderers not have the death penalty? My only concern about the death penalty is that lawyers and judges are morons. Kind of like you, Purpleguy.
JimP| 6.3.10 @ 11:16PM
Yeah. I double what Nick said.
John Locke| 6.3.10 @ 11:39PM
TAX HATER SAMUEL ADAMS, ON A ROLL AND ARMED TO THE TEETH, AUGUST, 1776……
"You darkeners of counsel, who would make the property, lives and religion of millions depend on the evasive interpretations of musty parchments; who would send us to antiquated charters of uncertain and contradictory meaning, to prove that the present generation are not bound to be victims to cruel and unforgiving despotism, tell us whether our pious and generous ancestors bequeathed to us the miserable privilege of having the rewards of our honesty, industry, the fruits of those fields which they purchased and bled for, wrested from us at the will of men over whom we have no check.
"Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say, What should be the reward of such sacrifices? Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, and supplicate the friendship, and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If you love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom – go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or your arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.
“Courage, then, my countrymen, our contest is not only whether we ourselves shall be free, but whether there shall be left to mankind an asylum on earth for civil and religious liberty. Dismissing, therefore, the justice of our cause, as incontestable, the only question is, What is best for us to pursue in our present circumstances?”
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:23AM
Blah, blah, woofie...
pa conservationist| 6.5.10 @ 10:30AM
Yep,fry them! Before they commited these crimes they had the same oppurtunity as the rest of us to get educated or to educate themselves.Why did'nt they ? why would you think I should be happy to give them my hard earned money ?
Melvin| 6.3.10 @ 8:10AM
Ya know people the South used to be the bastion of Conservatism. To a certain degree it still is. But we have one migrating problem, and that is Yankees moving down to the South to escape high taxes and intrusive and domineering government.
Yankees are allot like illegal aliens, they move to the South which is by and large Conservative. And the first thing they are doing is not adapting to Southern ways and traditions, but immediately start complaining how backward the South still is and start legislating to recreate new Southern versions of New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Ohio, and Pennsylvania to name a few.
These Yankees are also aggressive in their nature. They refuse to accept and adapt to Conservatism and demand that Southern Conservatives adapt Liberalism.
The Snow Birds who used to go back North in the Spring but now decided to live in the South are famous for this.
There was one woman I talked to from New York City, very pleasant woman, who spoke about how bad everything was in New York City and how that she and her family moved down here to North Carolina for the slower paced lifestyle, the rural atmosphere, warmer climate. But almost in the same breath she extolled that there was absolutely nothing to do down here, and then without skipping a beat started bragging about the virtues of New York City in how everything was close and always something to do.
You know what I wanted to tell her, but being polite, I told her what made the South so charming would eventually grow on her. She was probably thinking about the same thing about me from the Yankee point of view.
Maxwell| 6.3.10 @ 9:51AM
Well Melvin, I guess you would not welcome me to your state. However I will be moving South after I retire. I'm bringing my books, guns (life member of the NRA), family pictures and my Harley and Ducati motorcycles. Anything else I can buy locally.
I have posted much the same to many of the gun boards. On AR15.Com and GlockTalk.Com some members have said let us know when you move in, we all can go shooting. One such person is known as OldPainless. He is in Texas and said he will leave the light on for me.
All I want is places to ride, good food, to find a couple three friends that share my views. I hope that is not to much to ask.
Melvin| 6.3.10 @ 11:51AM
Now Max, by your description, you appear to be of Conservative mind, and just want to be left alone with like thinkers.
But, I would make sure bet that you would have to admit there are those in Northern States that just can't sit still and leave a person to his or her devices, they always got to get into your business.
This is more or less what I was alluding to. Some come down South to improve their lives not recreate the very reason that they want to leave.
Come on down and sit a spell on the front porch and drink ice tea and think to yourself, "Damn, I should have moved down here sooner."
Maxwell| 6.3.10 @ 5:34PM
Melvin, yes, I am of that mind as were my parents and you are very correct that most people from New Jersey and New York are left wing loonies. Also, as I have read on many of my gun boards people from the NE when they move South will many times say, 'well, when I was in New York we did it this way, you are doing it wrong!'.
Thank you for the invite. I'd be both happy and honored to set a spell.
Margie| 6.3.10 @ 8:52PM
Hmm. We just elected Chris Christie here in NJ. If most of us were Left wing loonies how could that have happened? I think the answer lies in this: that it is the politicians who are Lefty loonies. And they get elected because not enough conservatives get out and vote for the "R". They sadly sit moaning and complaining that the R just isn't conservative enough.. and they don't bother voting. They help in effect, to hand over the elections to the Left.
Well, it took several years of being so sick and tired of the policies of the Democrats that finally they (conservatives) said, "I will now go out and vote for the "R"! Well thank you very much. Let us keep that up for the upcoming November elections, folks!
They cried with loud wails and lamenting that Chris Christie wasn't a conservative either. When will we grow up and learn that no single human being is ever going to match up perfectly with our own values? If we really want true conservatives getting elected, then we have to back them EARLY on in the nominating process. PLEASE! Vote!
Our nation is at stake. I'll say it again~ ANY "R" is better than any "D". And as Rush said~ Are there any communists in the Republican party? Any Socialists? Any Marxists?
And he also said we need to hound the Democrats out of office by voting Republican! If we do like we did in NJ, and all conservatives vote Republican, we can do this. Talk about purging? How about we purge the White House of Democrats?
Onward!
nova9047| 6.5.10 @ 3:07AM
Margie- the sad truth is that a succession of well meaning but clue deprived R governors aided and abetted their D counterparts in creating the debt problem which Christie is trying to repair.
Margie| 6.5.10 @ 11:13AM
The sad truth is that if you want to create a third party the election will go to the Democrats. I just don''t know how else to state it. I'm a realist. If we work early on to back conservatives to be nominated then we can get somewhere. But it is counter productive to constantly complain about how the Repubs are evil RINOS. Either work at restoring the party or consider yourself on the losing, part of the problem side.
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it!
DonDuke | 6.3.10 @ 2:25PM
I don't know Melvin. On one hand you say "Yankees moving down to the South to escape high taxes and intrusive and domineering government." Then you go on to say that these very same people "...refuse to accept and adapt to Conservatism and demand that Southern Conservatives adapt Liberalism." You really can't have it both ways. If they are fleeing from "domineering government" they are surely not liberals . The examples you use seem to be east coast libs. But don't paint all those that move to your lovely state with such a broad brush. Lets see...... hmmmmm.... would we call this "effete profiling"? ;-)
Melvin| 6.3.10 @ 2:56PM
Hmmm Yankees, profiling, I wonder if I could get TSA to cooperate?
As I have said before, this pleasant woman from New York City loved that she and her family moved down here, but then complained that there was nothing to do and nothing was close.
I had forgotten this other term that I have heard more than once, "We did it this-a-way in New York, New Jersey."
Shoot, the company that I work for the entire front office is from New Jersey.
I guess it is easy to want to try to recreate where a person spent so much of their lives, and most of the Yankees that do come South and decide to live here, but on the flip side of the coin these Americans also let their former states go to hell in a hand-basket, and if the South isn't careful that could also very well happen here to. Because we all have to be vigilante because we don't have any other place to migrate to from the Liberal cancer.
Purpleguy| 6.3.10 @ 7:03PM
Wow ... Is someone still fighting the Civil War? Hmmmm.... ?
Osamas Pajamas| 6.3.10 @ 11:20PM
What this country needs is a truly LIBERAL president and congress! And I forgive the reader for suspecting that this must be some kind of bad joke!
But the Democrats believe in "statism" --- not "liberalism."
They benefit from the imprecise American political terminology ---- we say "the government" here in the USA ---- rather than "the state." And that's a dangerous problem. Famous brands of statism in recent centuries have been Nazism, socialism, fascism, communism, and welfare statism ---- this last is sort of a mix of fascism and socialism.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a political philosophy of small, cheap government ---- it is a constabulary ---- and the job of a liberal government is to enforce human rights within its own jurisdiction. I speak of the inalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ----The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words. The words "liberal" and "liberalism" were hijacked by the Democrats and socialists and fascists long ago ---- and it was the mistake of conservatives and libertarians to let them get away with it.
It is long past time that liberalism be reclaimed, defined, and explained by its rightful owners ---- by the champions of freedom, i.e.: not by Democrats.
Well, how about "progressivism?" Whuzzat?! “Cancer” is “progressive,” too. Isn't “progressivism” just another statist cancer? It chews you up, piece by piece, in the name of Da Peepul? Eat Da Rich? Moral cannibalism, anyone?
Friends of freedom! Friends of peace-through-strength! And friends of prosperity! Declare yourselves to be "liberals," then ---- and kick over the bloody coffee tables --- and overthrow and trounce the Democrats in 2010 and 2012!
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:24AM
There you go again ... being all lazy and shit...
John667| 6.8.10 @ 2:30PM
"being all lazy and shit" sounds like something a weak mind would say...
Occam's Tool| 6.3.10 @ 10:48PM
Actually, DonDuke, they ARE Liberals---they don't associate the rotten outcome with their rotten ideology. As a Conservative Jew who lived in the South for 20 years until I couldn't stand the summer heat anymore (high blood pressure), I understand Melvin entirely.
nova9047| 6.5.10 @ 3:15AM
Just got back from visiting my USAF son stationed in SC. What a s*it hole. As the cashier at Piggly Wiggly greeted us, "Welcome to nowhere." I honestly couldn't believe a Tobacco Road could still exist on teh east coast in the 21st Century until I saw it with my own eyes. "Take route 678 around Sumter." Why, when route 123 goes straight thru? Oh, I see- the shacks, the barefoot natives, separate but equal town. You can take your genteel south and shove it. No wonder your Gov. spends his free time driving along the Buenos Aires coastline.
Cutch| 6.3.10 @ 2:55PM
Amen brother Melvin. I would respectfully submit that it's about a world view (conservatism), from within the goodness that is part and parcel of the culture of the South. Those of like mind are more than welcome, we are taught to have good manners and hospitably welcome them, but the ones who will be a plus are those who seek to understand WHY we (and our children!) still "say grace, and we say ma'am", and then join with us. Raise your children right and they will BE right and DO right! I am proud to be an American, but what makes up the South is what makes us. That's why a boy from south Alabama with roots going back almost 200 years is of one mind and heart with another from the Carolinas. Our common heritage and culture. I would not secede from those northern states. The mind-set and world view discussed above leads to results that are unsustainable. Let us remain constant in the face of adversity and they will one day see what they do will not work. I also pray for our nation, not so much that God will bless us but that we will bless Him. We are told that He will then return to blessing.
Purpleguy| 6.3.10 @ 7:05PM
You can't secede, period, end of story... It's not a state's decision. Change is tough, but just as you expect immigrants to adapt to a new country, you should too, as your neighborhood, city, state changes over time.
Osamas Pajamas| 6.3.10 @ 11:30PM
Hey, PurpleGuy. The colonies formed a confederation [the "Union"] with the explicit provision that they could secede --- that they could "leave" it. But that's actually less relevant than the fact that we have the same right of revolution that the Founders had --- and inasmuch as the First American Revolution was ILLEGAL and brought forth upon this earth a new nation, conceived in liberty, we can and should repair the damage done by the collectivists and statists who hide behind the labels "Democrat" and "Progressive." The Second American Revolution obviously will be ILLEGAL, as well, PurpleGuy, and I can only hope that the rest of our lads 'n' lasses can shoot better than my favorite Vice President --- Dick Cheney. We were out hunting some years ago when suddenly I espied an entirely plausible target, and I shouted, "Mr Vice President! Look, it's a Democrat!" Cheney swung and fired, and although his heart was in the right place, he missed the legitimate target and popped his old buddy, instead. Sigh.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:43AM
Nope ... since the States were British colonies until they became Independent States of the United States, they were not sovereign, and did not have the right to secede. "The immediate predecessor to the Constitution, the Articles of Confederation, purported to establish a "perpetual Union." By seeking to create what the Preamble calls "a more perfect Union"--in an echo of the Articles' language"
Moreover, "it is significant that Article VII sets out the provision for original ratification, and that Article IV empowers Congress to admit new States, but that no provision of the Constitution authorizes a state to leave the Union. The juxtaposition of what the Constitution says about states entering the Union and what it does not say about them leaving, indicates that the door to the Union swings in but not out."
"That uncertainty was put to rest not by the superior strength of the anti-secessionist argument, but by Lee's surrender to Grant at Appomattox.
The military resolution of the secession question was then given legal force by the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1868 case of Texas v. White. The Court ruled there that even Texas--an independent republic before it joined the Union in 1845--had no right to secede. "The Constitution," the Court said, "in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States."
So you see, we are in a perpetual union, as the Founders created, sealed in blood spilled in the Civil War, and consecrated by the Supreme Court. Period, end of story. Those pesky facts just won't get out of your conservative way, will they?
Nick| 6.4.10 @ 3:32PM
I see you have been reading my post for a while, PurpleJackass. I made the "perputual union" argument here, long ago.
Everyone here at TAS are not on the same page when it comes to secession.
JimP| 6.3.10 @ 11:34PM
Melvin is speaking the truth. Not all Yanks moving down South are like the woman Melvin described, but the majority are. And they do immediately begin voting for stuff that raises taxes which is why they left the North. Yanks who want warm weather and lots of fun stuff to do and government services at a temporarily lower cost should move to Las Vegas . They have it ALL. Plus there are probably some "WISEGUYS" still hanging around too, just to add that extra homey touch for y'all. Go West Yanks, go West. Las Vegas is the place you ought to be.
WarHawk| 6.3.10 @ 8:12AM
We can't secede! We tried in 1814 and had to sneak out of Hartford.
Blackknights 1802| 6.3.10 @ 8:36AM
This is all the result of the “Woodstock” generation.
breffnian| 6.3.10 @ 11:43AM
I agree. The coming generations will be more conservative as they witness the mistakes their parents made. For example, abortion is falling in popularity and liberal feminism is increasingly rejected by women. Don't lose hope.
Curly Smith| 6.3.10 @ 8:36AM
RINOs are a better governing alternative than leftist liberals if you want long-lasting and deeply entrenched liberalism... like what we see in the NE. It's the old frog in the cookpot story. The RINOs gradually move you toward leftist policy goals and you suddenly wakeup one day and find yourself enslaved to the state. The leftist liberals insist that their goals be accomplished overnight and shock the populace with the impending slavery.
It doesn't take any courage to be a RINO, you just pick the easiest, most non-confrontational way out. You make deals, you split the baby, you're a peacemaker. If the leftists want all of the people enslaved and the conservatives demand that nobody be enslaved then you push for enslaving half of the people. If the Muslims demand that all Jews be marched into the sea and the Jews refuse then you march half of the Jews into the sea. You're the noble peacemaker.
RINOs can get you into leftist bondage but they can't get you out. They'll always take the easy way out and by taking 1 step forward and 19 steps backward you'll just get more deeply mired in the liberal bog. If the NE is to be more than a gulag then it will be Chris Christie rather than Scott Brown who'll lead the way. One is a leader, the other is a freedom-sapping liberty-destroying RINO.
Margie| 6.3.10 @ 11:39AM
But have you forgotten that Christie was called a RINO by most of the RINO haters here?
All of this RINO talk is getting old.
Chris Christie isn't a perfect conservative to some. Even I didn't like how he spoke out against Steve Lonagan's flat tax idea!
I think that Christie's election is a good example of how voting for an "R" is always voting for a "D". ANY Republican is better than the alternative Democrat. But NO one individual is going to ever be the "perfect" conservative, though that is what we all wish for!
Christie/Palin 2012 anyone?
Margie| 6.3.10 @ 11:41AM
Drat! Should read: Voting for an "R" is always BETTER THAN voting for a "D".
Curly Smith| 6.3.10 @ 12:22PM
Two things...
First, the axiom that voting "R" is always better than voting "D" simply isn't true. If you always vote "D" then, by and large, you know what you're getting. If you simply pull the "R" lever then you may get a Republican, you may get a DemoLite, you may get a Democrat. By just looking for the "R" label then you never force the GOP to actually run/support Conservatives. You're telling the GOP that your vote is a lock and that your opinion is unimportant. And, you get us to where we are today. I know this to be true as I've followed the axiom for decades.
Second, the flat tax is a bad idea. The problem is spending, it's not the lack of efficient or equitable taxation. We should never make it easy for the taxers to tax us. The flat tax makes it easy to increase the tax rate because it's then like your property taxes... a 0.2% increase only costs you $50 per year... who could complain? But that increase is spread over millions of people and results in a significant tax increase. The best solution is to repeal withholding and move "Tax Day" from April 15th to October 15th and have the taxpayer send a check to the Treasury 2 weeks before they vote.
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.3.10 @ 12:44PM
Curly,
Your logic is ass-backwards. Question: are you involved with your local/State Republican party?
Have you put yourself in a position to help nominate solid conservatives therein?
OK,
Let me give you an alternative to sitting/bitching.
Sign up and raise hell for conservatives locally, vote the R straight ticket............. then donate cash to solid conservatives in other districts if your district's Rs are not the best.
Duh, is that too complicated?
Curly Smith| 6.3.10 @ 3:51PM
Ken,
Let's try a little thought experiment.
You're running the GOP.
You've got the Conservative vote locked up.
You need a candidate...
Who will you run?
A solid, rock-ribbed Conservative to capture the voting bloc that you already own?
Or, a "liberal" Republican to go after the part of the electorate that routinely votes for the Democrat?
Now think hard... you want to win the election... to do that you need the most votes... what do you do?
OK, I'll save your brain cells. If you're in charge of the GOP then you run the RINO. You find an "electable Republican". By saying "Vote the Straight "R" Ticket" you render your Conservative views meaningless. You're admitting that all you care about is the "R" after the name. You saying that the GOP owns your vote irrespective of the candidate. You're saying "NO!" to accountability. And, quite frankly, you're saying "YES!!" to the last 15 years of Republican mismanagement.
So, to answer your question... no it's not complicated at all.
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.3.10 @ 5:28PM
Curly,
Until you answer my first question, you are not worth conversing with. Until you answer it you are just another "belly-acher" worthless sack of crap.
What have you done to restore our republic except bitch?
spoonman| 6.3.10 @ 7:04PM
Ken, I like your style. I suspect Curly never lifted a fineger to help a conservative candidate nor ever donated a dime to their campaign(s). Life is full of bitchers and very few doers. Curly seems like the former.
Curly Smith| 6.3.10 @ 7:25PM
Ken,
There's nothing quite as pathetic as a bully behind a keyboard. Well, unless it's the bully's wingman, right spoonman? Why is it that everybody who disagrees with you is just a whiner and moaner? And, it's not just me, it's a rather common theme on this site. Ideas that differ from yours simply aren't worth consideration, are they?
Two words Ken, old buddy, old pal, if you want to win converts to your cause.... Honey, Vinegar
Margie| 6.3.10 @ 9:25PM
Why couldn't you answer his question?
Curly Smith| 6.3.10 @ 10:30PM
If you can't independently verify the answer then the answer is meaningless. If the answer is meaningless then the question is pointless - except to change the subject.
I only want one thing from Ken... I want him, and you, to think. Recorded history did not start when the exalted one was inaugurated. The GOP majority has a record. What are you, and Ken, doing that will materially change the leadership of the GOP? You want to elect a few Conservatives; great, I'm all for that but unless you change the culture of the GOP then it's a futile exercise. If you merely vote the "lesser of two evils" then you'll never get a good result.
And, consider, what happens if you do as Ken suggests "vote the R straight ticket............. then donate cash to solid conservatives in other districts if your district's Rs are not the best." You'll keep electing the same "R's that aren't the best".
That's a great plan if your goal is to elect Republicans. It's a dreadful plan if your goal is to make the GOP a truly Conservative Party. It's much easier to excite the base to remove a Democrat than it is to remove a squishy Republican because you have to overcome your original axiom "R is always better than D". If you want the political leaders to reflect the true conservative nature of the country then you must hold them accountable. I'm sorry but following your axiom only gets us to where we are -- and where we are isn't a place that I'd wish on anyone.
Occam's Tool| 6.3.10 @ 10:50PM
Old Texican: I donate to the Republican National Commitee, AIPAC, ZOA, and the Heritage foundation. I vote straight-line Republican.
Now can I get an autographed copy of your book for my son?
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.4.10 @ 2:39PM
Hey Tool,
You bet your hiney. Which book? the baseball teaching book?
Done!
email me your snail mail address at
kbjudgeroybean06@gmail.com
Jeff R| 6.3.10 @ 8:54AM
To the extent that the northeast, portions of the midwest and the west coast continue to buy into the goverance, ethics and virtues of the left is the extent to which those regions or areas within regions will decline.
Much of the rest of America hasn't slid so deeply into the left's muck. For those of us in conservative or less liberal areas, we hold out great hope for reclaiming a fuller measure of American greatness.
Petronius| 6.3.10 @ 10:47AM
Some more salt in our wounds please. It is all too true that the paleocons of Reagan's day stayed home home and sat on their hands rather than go to the polls and vote for a Republican who was out of sync with them on just 1 issue. Herewith the results of such stubborn habits: the fallout from the infantile crap most people believe, primarily that government is a substitute for mommy. And they are infecting the entire country after ruining the states and cities they came from. The only places impervious to them are where they won't go. And I'm keeping that list to myself so I can get away from them. Liberalism is the gangrene of our body politic, of which, not all can be saved.
Sic biscutis dissintegra.
Purpleguy| 6.3.10 @ 7:14PM
Luckily for this country, the Reagan Revolution died with him. He set this country on a path of destruction promoted by both Bushes and we're living with the aftermath - No regulations or poor regulation have resulted in the worst financial and economic collapse since the Depression, Deep Water Oil Drilling with no hopes of stopping a leak in the Gulf of Mexico, and mine disaster after mine disaster killing dozens because the almighty dollar is king over people's lives. He set this country on the "borrow and spend" path and we're on a the path of bankruptcy due to Reagan's policies.
The Founder's of the Country knew the Constitution of their time would not suffice for the future and fully expected change. From the steam engine to the railroad to the automobile to the computer, this country has moved inexorably toward the more progressive and liberal innovative attitudes, for that is human nature. And, it will not be denied. Try to enjoy the ride, don't fight it....
Nick| 6.3.10 @ 7:23PM
You don't even know who the Founders were, PurpleJackass.
You think that John Marshall was the first chief justice of the Supreme Court, moron!
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.4.10 @ 2:47PM
Nick,
Purpleguy truly is ignorant and illiterate isn't he?
Folks,
I introduce RONALD REAGAN...THE MAN WHO WON THE WAR.....against the most terrible regime in the history of the earth...with nukes.
How many here would be literally dead...without Ronald Reagan? 100 million Americans?
Purpleguy would have been licking the Soviet genitals however....if he had survived the nukes.
God bless the illiterate cowards.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 6:48PM
What you mean is he, like the 7 US Presidents before him, continued the Cold War policies of Harry Truman, truly one of the greats.
Reagan on the other hand did bankrupt the Soviet Union, while at the same time putting us on the borrow and spend path to bankruptcy. And, the Bushes continued his borrow and spend policies... "Deficits don't matter" was his mantra ... If you love Reagan so much, why do you care what the deficit is - only Democrats care about it... Conservatives have always seen increasing the deficit as the way to "Kill the Beast" by starving the Government of money. Eventually, the country will go broke, and all Entitlements will end. That is the conservative plan - trouble is, it takes us all down with the government. It's so stupid, but keep pushing, keep pushing... you may get your way.
You can point to him as the start of the end of this country's prosperity. Y'all won't believe it, but it is true. While promoting free enterprise and economic growth, he presided over the worst Recession since the Great Depression - until now. His policies raised taxes 6 times on Americans during his presidency, got 230 Marines killed in Beirut, allowed AIDS to spread unchecked to become a pandemic, and started all this deregulation crap. The deregulation debacle that ended up creating the financial meltdown, an SEC and MMS watching porn, instead of overseeing the oil and financial industry, and now the largest oil spill in history with no end in sight.
But he made you feel good, didn't he? While he destroyed the American Middle Class way of life - it just took 30 years to kill it. Yep, that's the Gipper for ya... you can have him. Glad he's gone.
Nick| 6.4.10 @ 7:48PM
Ken,
Yes, all Useful Idiots think it will be different for them.
I call President Reagan the greatest president of the 20th century. President Coolidge was the second greatest.
Most of the rest should've been impeached, removed, and put in jail.
Truman let the FDR's Soviet spies stay in the State Department. There was a good reason Truman's polls were at 21% when he left office.
Osamas Pajamas| 6.3.10 @ 11:17PM
What this country needs is a truly LIBERAL president and congress! And I forgive the reader for suspecting that this must be some kind of bad joke!
But the Democrats believe in "statism" --- not "liberalism."
They benefit from the imprecise American political terminology ---- we say "the government" here in the USA ---- rather than "the state." And that's a dangerous problem. Famous brands of statism in recent centuries have been Nazism, socialism, fascism, communism, and welfare statism ---- this last is sort of a mix of fascism and socialism.
Liberalism, on the other hand, is a political philosophy of small, cheap government ---- it is a constabulary ---- and the job of a liberal government is to enforce human rights within its own jurisdiction. I speak of the inalienable and perfectly-natural and universally-valid human rights of life, liberty, private property, and the pursuit of personal happiness.
The first article of private property is "the self" and all other rights are derivatives of and flow from these cardinal rights. These rights ----The Rights of Man ---- are the gift of nature or of nature's god ---- and they belong to all human beings, everywhere.
Show me a Democrat who subscribes to all of the above, without qualifications or weasel words. The words "liberal" and "liberalism" were hijacked by the Democrats and socialists and fascists long ago ---- and it was the mistake of conservatives and libertarians to let them get away with it.
It is long past time that liberalism be reclaimed, defined, and explained by its rightful owners ---- by the champions of freedom, i.e.: not by Democrats.
Well, how about "progressivism?" Whuzzat?! “Cancer” is “progressive,” too. Isn't “progressivism” just another statist cancer? It chews you up, piece by piece, in the name of Da Peepul? Eat Da Rich? Moral cannibalism, anyone?
Friends of freedom! Friends of peace-through-strength! And friends of prosperity! Declare yourselves to be "liberals," then ---- and kick over the bloody coffee tables --- and overthrow and trounce the Democrats in 2010 and 2012!
JmsA| 6.6.10 @ 11:32AM
Purpleturd,
"The Founder's of the Country knew the Constitution of their time would not suffice for the future and fully expected change." And you were there as they said unto you they wished what they formulated and created be conflated with the increasingly tyrannical socialist nonsense of today, right?
"From the steam engine to the railroad to the automobile to the computer, this country has moved inexorably toward the more progressive and liberal innovative attitudes, for that is human nature." Oh, yeah! All the inventions came about from a centralized, over-regulating government, none from the free-minded entrepreneurs in a free enterprise system? How many inventions, just from the top of your head, other than what they stole from the west, the communist Soviets come up with, genius? 11/02/2010 By the way, has the One, your idol, plugged the damn leak yet?
Purpleguy| 6.7.10 @ 11:24AM
There you go again ... I said nothing about Socialism, nor that the Government created the innovation and inventions. And, who gives a shit what the Soviets did or did not do? You people are obsessed with them ... you do know they are in the dust bin of history, dontcha?
But it is true that the Government made Westward expansion possible by giving away Federal land in the West for those who could claim it and work it - and with that followed the Transcontinental Railroad. It's also true that Computers were developed from the work that was done for the Military - See "Alan Turing", if you don't believe me. And, can't you point to dozens of common items that originated from the Government sponsored NASA Space Program? How about the start of the Internet, which came from Arpanet, a DARPA entity - you know what DARPA is, right?
The best of this country comes from the partnership between Business and Government. Americans already are conditioned with the Entrepreneurial spirit and when Business and Government cooperate there is no limit what can be done. Government by itself cannot do everything, and business by itself cannot either... but together they can do miracles. If you really cared about this country, you'd understand that.
Oh, and, yes, the Founders did expect change in the Constitution over time to fit the changes in our society over time - that is why they gave us the Amendment process built into the Constitution. Didn't you know that? And you call yourself American?
Nick| 6.7.10 @ 11:36PM
Yes, the Soviet Union is in the dust bin of history, all thanks to President Reagan, Prime Minister Thatcher, and mostly Pope John Paul the Great.
But, their Useful Idiots, like you PurpleJackass, are still around and have to be dealt with.
PolishKnight| 6.3.10 @ 11:23AM
Lisa didn't mention one of the biggest PC/leftist gifts to modern society that not only the rust belt has swallowed whole, but even most conservatives as well.
"Radical" feminism.
Well, not radical by the modern era's standards: Women going to expensive universities and then waiting until their late 20's or even early 30's to think about starting a family.
That's radical folks.
Back during the Reagan era, there were still a significant number of women who married when they were young and put their families ahead of their careers and this included a support for "family values."
But even during the Reagan era, and even the Gipper himself, endorsed a kind of super-chivalry where it was considered monstrous to say that women should have to limit their opportunities or accept greater responsibility. Reagan attacked welfare motherhood but the fact is he helped create them when he was governor by kicking men out of the home and creating a maternal welfare state.
As women put off family and put a priority on their careers, this makes them more dependent upon the left for preferential workplace treatment in addition to programs targeted towards unwed mothers who are unable to land traditional men. These are the most loyal of the Democratic constituency, for now. At least until foreigners become the next, big, leftist votes to buy and they dump these women like they dumped working class men.
Look at how China treats women, for example.
Even now, in the states, I often hear self-labeled conservative women griping how there aren't any more "real" men. Well, most of them aren't really conservative women either!
James S.| 6.3.10 @ 2:19PM
My wife is a doctor, and we waited until our 30s to have kids. She's a great mother, hard worker, super smart and the best friend I could ever ask for. We live in a fairly affluent neighborhood with quite a few women who don't work married to professional men--I assume that's the "conservative" ideal you're talking about. But I'd take my wife over any of the depressed stay-at-homes I see any day.
PolishKnight| 6.4.10 @ 1:53PM
JamesS, your response illustrates my point exactly. Just like with a limosine liberal, you live in an "affluent" suburb so apparently all is well. Hey, we don't need to drill for oil! I get mine from the service station so it "magically" will get there!
Go to a non-fairly affluent neighborhood and unwed and single mothers abound. Even in fairly affluent neighborhoods, statistically, there are plenty of miserable career women unable to find traditional breadwinning men.
Yes, in theory, women's equality is great if you only look at the success stories and compare it to the worst of traditionalism. But the same can be said of capitalism: If you ignore the death camps of socialism and only look at the failures of capitalism, socialism wins.
Enjoy Wysteria Lane.
Petronius| 6.3.10 @ 6:07PM
Sir PK
The basis of domestic relationships was undermined and diluted long before me and thee stepped into the arena. Of those who choose to marry today there are two camps, those who operate on expectation with little or no consideration for what kind of spouses or parents they will become, and the cold blooded tacticians who select a mate for what they can make of him or get out of him. The feminista shark is a subtype of the latter, and marries a male based on his IQ and desire to have 1 or 2 legitimate daughters to inherit her estate (and his) after she reams him in divorce court.
As to Reagan getting the rap for wrecking families, the social engineers defeated him on that one too. Men ceased to be masters of their households long before Father Knows Best went off the air. Nancy and Phyllis were a sideshow on his watch. The start can be placed at the feet of Woodrow Wilson, and John Dewey. The end was THE PILL! So as many as will can all play in the mud without consequence. Conservative or liberal do not apply. Try rutting animal.
PolishKnight| 6.4.10 @ 2:05PM
Where to start? Let's go in order:
It's not just the feminista shark that seeks to exploit men and toss them away, but rather in lesser degrees supposedly "conservative" women who appear to be decent and may never get divorced, but they are no less cold blooded at demanding that men continue to earn at least as much as they do and get paid as much as they can in the workplace. When they can accomplish the "double dip" and earn as much as a man but still marry up, all is well.
By the same token, sharks are the sweetest things when they are well fed at the Mall of America aquarium. You can scuba dive with them.
Reagan still deserves criticism for buying into basic feminism and nominating O'Conner, further feminizing the welfare system, and doing little against affirmative action. He engaged in some rhetoric on the issue, but a liberal president would have done far more as an executive to advance their agenda. Obama's looking the other way at illegal immigration. Why couldn't RR refuse to enforce AA?
About The Pill, it really isn't all that effective. Women either get pregnant due to mistakes in taking it or hormonal inbalances. It's like driving drunk at 100mph because you have an air bag in your car.
In the modern era, women are having children out of wedlock not due to accidents from the pill so much as because that's the best they can do in a post feminist era. Marriage for men today is a raw deal so children are used to make men pay a form of backdoor alimony. Children are now chattel. Before conservatives endorse this as a form of "social responsibility", consider that this paradigm only works if the men are stupid enough to let a woman get pregnant out of wedlock but smart enough to pay their CS on time. Just as the divorce laws drove responsible men out of marriage, it also is driving responsible men out of dating such women.
Petronius| 6.4.10 @ 3:41PM
In very truth, the social policies of the federal government get the nod from blue blood Republicans because it abets their snobbery. Sad to say most old school Rinos do not get themselves elected to Congress to govern, but to make it socially in that town which is controlled by our enemies. When Reagan nominated Justice Bork to SCOTUS, he got flattened by the beltway establishment which is the REAL government .
And any attempt to get rid of Affirmative Discrimination would have brought as much grief to Reagan from his own friends as the liberal press can dish out. The last thing they want to see is a common tradesman earning enough money to apply for memberships in their country clubs. The approval Reagan gave to self made men was passive and back handed. Those among us who did make it on their own terms without eating anybody's excrement came by it the hard way and he related directly to them on that level because he'd been there; done that. Dumping on raw achievement in his eyes was right out. But we shouldn't expect to be invited to tee it up with him and his friends. This brings us back to the distaff side of the equation. Back in the 70's I subscribed to Smithsonian. They published a cover story on the Supreme Court Justices. There were many letters printed in the following issue, one with a photocut per the request, "Let's see the REAL Court of last resort; the Justices Wives."
2 words: first begins with P. The other is "whipped".
For those with short memories and or a lack of historic perspective I raise this question.
What was the first major legislation passed by Congress when women got the vote? Prohibition.
I rest my case.
PolishKnight| 6.4.10 @ 8:10PM
Souter certainly wasn't P-whipped.
I find it strange to imagine that the RINO beltway would not want self-made working class white males but would rather welcome minorities. I know someone who married into a blue blood family and it appears that the toleration for racism and sexism against working class white males seems to have come from well-educated, upper and upper middle-class white women who either voted RINO or Democrat (and married conservatives who were too chivalrous and "gentlemanly" to stand up to their wives.
I have to take my hat off to the leftists in that they at least know where their bread is buttered. They don't think twice about protecting their special interest groups that they are buying votes from (or is that from whom they buy votes?) On the other hand, Republicans treat their working and middle class white males for granted while Sarah Palin goes around bragging about what a feminist she is. Most working men and fathers I know either left the presidential ballot blank last time or voted none of the above (one voted for his son in leau of a candidate he could stand.)
But don't worry, there are plenty of women doctors to treat us after MS-13 does a drive-by.
Don| 6.3.10 @ 1:17PM
I am from NJ and I intend to stay and fight with the BIG MAN, Gov Christie..
We will prevail.
Spoonman| 6.3.10 @ 7:05PM
Stick with Christie - he's got "Balls"
Andy_Krow| 6.3.10 @ 3:33PM
Hey NHConservative!
Troubling times in our town of Amherst, wot?
Soughegan High's principle should be fired!
NHConservative| 6.3.10 @ 3:54PM
Andy_Krow: I agree with you that is a minimum punishment. One thing - my post is ambiguous - the pictures of these murdering thugs actually are included in the yearbook. The question is how this happened - it appears they couldn't bring themselves to NOT include the pictures and didn't want to start a controversy by discussing the issue. The fact is that there are solid grounds i.e. their admission of involvement and facilitation of the mother's torture/murder and disfigurement and attempted murder of the daughter (who was in the 6th grade.) This is a disgrace to the town and the high school.
Dave Trapped in NYC| 6.3.10 @ 9:50PM
Take it from me, it is way worse than Lisa says here in NYC.
I had to laugh, there was an article in the NY Post that NY Jews are abandoning Obama in droves-what a laugh,no they are not- NY Jews are liberals first, second and third. They could care less and never will care for Israel.
Plus, the city does not function anymore and when the unions start to riot this place will make the 70's look like paradise.
WRJonas | 6.3.10 @ 10:20PM
Lisa's got a good argument. The problem with adopting the principle of gradualism though is separating the philosophy from the legislator AFTER the election. It takes about 2 weeks before our fearless congressman/senator realizes he was elected by a mixture of compromising voters( not just harsh conservatives), so a gradual move to the left becomes the newly adopted position.
Its a dance step that is apparently permanent and irreversible
Osamas Pajamas| 6.3.10 @ 11:14PM
I recall being questioned rather intensely by a couple of Secret Service agents back during the Clinton regime, and they were trying to divine my political orientation in order to characterize me in their report. "Remember when America had a REAL President?" I asked. "Ronald Wilson Reagan!" I clarified. These guys appeared flummoxed. I wasn't a commie or a fascisti --- I was just a guy engaged in publicly comparing Sick Willie Clinton and my alltime favorite President --- Ronnie RayGun --- and Clinton always came up short by any comparison worth making --- a fact which I exploited with vicious merriment. I think that the collectivists and statists have thoroughly polluted the American public dialog, and they must be met not only with closely reasoned criticism --- but also with ridicule and contempt. Be glad warriors, ye conservatives and libertarians --- and destroy those who would do us ill.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:46AM
Luckily for this country, the Reagan Revolution died with him. He set this country on a path of destruction promoted by both Bushes and we're living with the aftermath - No regulations or poor regulation have resulted in the worst financial and economic collapse since the Depression, Deep Water Oil Drilling with no hopes of stopping a leak in the Gulf of Mexico, and mine disaster after mine disaster killing dozens because the almighty dollar is king over people's lives. He set this country on the "borrow and spend" path and we're on a the path of bankruptcy due to Reagan's policies.
The Founder's of the Country knew the Constitution of their time would not suffice for the future and fully expected change. From the steam engine to the railroad to the automobile to the computer, this country has moved inexorably toward the more progressive and liberal innovative attitudes, for that is human nature. And, it will not be denied. Try to enjoy the ride, don't fight it....
WhatAboutBob| 6.4.10 @ 12:27PM
Copy/Paste the lazy man's way to make a point ..
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 6:02PM
Exactly my point ... glad you noticed and thank you for making my point for me - again ...
Scaramouche| 6.3.10 @ 11:41PM
The Democrats have this "enemies list" --- denominated in epithets aimed at the people whose wallets they wish to hijack and take up residence inside. You can be a ‘Racist!’ and you can be a ‘Homophobe!’ and you can be a ‘Teabagger!’ --- a homosexual man taking his partner's testicles into his mouth. You can be ‘Selfish!’ and you can be a ‘Hick!’ and you can be a ‘Rube!’ You can be a ‘Right-wing-nut!’ and you can be "Unenlightened!" and you can be a ‘Fascist!’ --- although no one more closely approaches the precise description of ‘Fascist!’ than the usual Demo propagandist --- either official, or self-appointed.
So all you have to do to occupy multiple epithets on the Demos' enemies list is to insist that they take their hands off yourself, off your wallet, off your property, off your kids, off your diet, off your healthcare, off your household appliances, off your car, off your weapons of self-defense, off your liberty, and off your freedom of speech. Insist on all these good things - and that qualifies you to be spat upon by nasty, mean-spirited scum --- by The Friends of All Mankind --- by a gang of lying, thieving, sticky-fingered, bloodsxcking, predatory humanitarian thugs --- by the Democrat party, in other words. No political party in the history of America more profoundly deserves absolute and outright destruction.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:52AM
Do you even know what country you live in? Do you think this is Somalia? There maybe you could have no government touch anything of yours - but you better be able to fend for yourself, 'cause it ain't the government you nee d to fear.
Anyone can make a list of the things you like and don't like and ascribe the things you don't like to "THEM"... so what? You think you are in the unique position of believing you are right and everyone else is wrong? THAT's what's wrong with the country - we're all wrong to some extent and we're all right to some extent .. but name-calling, while enjoyable, is lazy, stupid and solves no problem whatsoever. You could replace Democrat with Republican or Conservative above and so what?
The Scarlet Pimpernel| 6.3.10 @ 11:42PM
OhBummer is a boob and a fool for attacking the American Tea Partiers. He is annoyed that they’re not grateful to him for hijacking the American healthcare system --- the greatest act of vandalism perpetrated upon the American people since a gang of jihadi frootloops and loonytoons hijacked some planes and crashed them into the World Trade Center towers.
And --- now widely seen for what he is --- the president presents a problem for the Democrat-captured media. They pump out his propaganda for him --- and, like the opinion monitors in Ayn Rand’s novel, “Atlas Shrugged” --- they are dodging brickbats and rotten vegetables.
He’s pompous, pampered, and pretentious --- a pseudo-intellectual fop. He’s a glorified, smooth-lyin’ dandy, and slicker than Sick Willie Clinton. He’s a dictator-on-the-make, a bloodsxcking, predatory humanitarian thug, and a low-down skunk.
He’s a fraud and a swindler. He lies when he inhales and he lies when he exhales; his oxygen is the falsification of reality. He lies, placidly and laconically, as if deception were a soporific drug.
He’s a friend of the poor and the downtrodden --- indeed, you can hear the milk of human kindness sloshing around inside of him when he walks.
He declares himself the post-racial leader --- “Let me be clear!” he intones --- and he hides behind his race, daring his critics to put their reputation for fairness at risk.
He pauses to ponder the portent of his propaganda --- and it is fakery; he smiles and his mendacity comes shining through. Shake hands with Barak Hushpuppy OhBummer --- “The Mistake of ‘08” --- the illegal alien squatter in the White House --- and America’s first and last Arab president. Now count your fingers.
Purpleguy| 6.4.10 @ 1:52AM
Luckily for this country, the Reagan Revolution died with him. He set this country on a path of destruction promoted by both Bushes and we're living with the aftermath - No regulations or poor regulation have resulted in the worst financial and economic collapse since the Depression, Deep Water Oil Drilling with no hopes of stopping a leak in the Gulf of Mexico, and mine disaster after mine disaster killing dozens because the almighty dollar is king over people's lives. He set this country on the "borrow and spend" path and we're on a the path of bankruptcy due to Reagan's policies.
The Founder's of the Country knew the Constitution of their time would not suffice for the future and fully expected change. From the steam engine to the railroad to the automobile to the computer, this country has moved inexorably toward the more progressive and liberal innovative attitudes, for that is human nature. And, it will not be denied. Try to enjoy the ride, don't fight it....
Ken (Old Texican)| 6.4.10 @ 2:57PM
Purpleguy,
You poor schmuck!
These bastards will END you "useful idiots" first.
...They always have...and they always will. Read some history, dumbbunny.
Good luck, and pray that we Americans win.
Purpleguy needs a life| 6.4.10 @ 3:10PM
Obviously you drew the short straw at the SEIU meeting to troll here.
Kind of goes hand in hand having to ride the short bus all your life.
What a lonely, pathetic existence. [Try] to have a good weekend.
W. Barton| 6.4.10 @ 6:55PM
How long has that scumbag Bedtime for bonzo guy been in hell now?
Guess he found out the chasm between he and Lazarus is too wide to reach that cool water, to quench his thirsty tonque.
But like the Good Book says, the rich have had their reward, and when the rich man arrogantly passed by the poor beggar at his door, the rich man ignored him, then whined for water when he saw the poor man in Abrahams bosom, while he was tormented on the other side after their deaths.
For you ignorant idiots here, this is not the Lazarus Jesus raised from the dead, but the one who ask for alms outside the rich man's door, only to be shooed away. You have to realize the ignorance of truth in here, they only prostitute Jesus for cheap political gain, and most importantly, MAMMON.
Nick| 6.4.10 @ 7:16PM
You must be referring to the Polio Prince, FDR, huh?
Go away anti-Semitic pig!
maverick muse| 6.5.10 @ 7:01AM
Water flowed.
Water has flown.
Reagan had Americana positive attitude charm. His love for America and his rejection of Soviet Communism were absolutely clear.
But Reagan's lousy leftist SCOTUS appointment and his permissive endorsement for gun control legislation are part of this "Reagan Conservative" legacy that Sean Hannity preaches.