Do you REALLY love America? This is the TEST: A Tale of Two Countries ~ Video by JJ McNown on Fortis Media

From JJ's description of this video:

You’ll often hear it said that both Conservatives and Leftists love America, but they have different ideas of what direction we are to go.

This is not true.

Conservatives and Leftists DO love America, but they love two very DIFFERENT America’s.

Each party is seeking to pull the country in directions that are diametrically opposite from each other.

Which one is Right?

JJ

While this video was uploaded to youtube last November (2019), it is so relevant to what has been going on in this country, even now, post-impeachment. This is an important one to watch. JJ McNown explains the differences between liberty and freedom. I pray that many people will see this video, and understand the importance of the election in November of 2020! We must limit the number of Demonicrats (my justified word for "Democrats") who are elected to go to Washington, or run your state.

We saw what happened in 2018 when voter apathy among the Conservative voters, who failed to see the harm in not voting, or what the Left would do to the President, specifically, when they took back the U. S. House of Representatives. The Progressives must be voted out of office this year, even if it is a primary that takes out the incumbent and replaced by a LESS Progressive Demonicrat.

So, do your part, now, by watching the entire video, and make sure you get this Fortis Media video shared as often as possible.

Do you REALLY love America? This is the TEST: A Tale of Two Countries

VIDEO: The push-back against the panties-in-a-wad people

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

VIDEO: I do not like this Uncle Sam, I do not like his healthcare scam

Please note:  To see the following video, you must be logged into Facebook.

Post by Johnny2k's America.

*    *    *    *

As an additional feature here on Blogging In Our Time 2 Escape, this blog will be including videos that have been posted on the johnny2k's America Facebook page! Videos can sometimes say more than what can be expressed in text.  Be sure to visit the archive with hundreds of videos to peruse!

*     *     *     *

Don't be afraid!

WE the PEOPLE

are the MOB
ONE NATION UNDER GOD

YOU ARE NOT ALONE!
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear

*     *     *     *

The Donald: Doing the job the media won't do ~ By Larry Elder

No, the real story about Trump isn't Trump.

It's the pass given Obama by the media. Whether it's regarding Obama's birthplace, whether Obama personally heard Wright's racist and anti-Semitic sermons, or whether unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers wrote Obama's first book, Obama manages to avoid careful examination from the adoring media.

Trump would not be relevant – if the media had been.

What Larry Elder says about The Donald (Donald Trump) is important for Republicans to know about. Larry does not think that The Donald will try to run for President. There are just too many things that The Donald has in his past for him to even think about it. And as Rush Limbaugh said, Trump needs to be schooled on Conservatism. 

The good news regarding the ongoing Donald Trump saga is that he has shown that the American people have had a desire to know more about Obama, about his missing birth certificate, and more, and the media completely looked the other way when it came to digging in to Obama's past. And now, Americans are becoming aware of what the media never bothered to mention.

*  *  *

The Donald: Doing the job the media won't do

LARRY ELDER

By Larry Elder

April 21, 2011 ~ 01:00 am Eastern

© 2011

Donald Trump isn't going to run for president.

He is rich, enjoys himself, says bold and often stupid things, trades his wife in for a younger model every few years and calls Rosie O'Donnell a "big fat pig." What's not to like?

But President The Donald Trump? Really?!

He couldn't take the scrutiny. Given his swashbuckling life and the media's heightened scrutiny of things Republican, Trump would spend his entire campaign putting out fires. Whether it be shady-side-of-the-line business deals, "bimbo eruptions," tax shenanigans, enemies looking to get even, or Lord knows what else, he'd barely have time to round up enough B-listers to keep "Celebrity Apprentice" afloat.

Then there is the matter of his ideology – as in, what exactly is it? Trump has alternately called Jimmy Carter the worst president ever, then George W. Bush the worst president ever, and now Barack Obama the worst president ever. This nouveau "conservative Republican" supported "universal health care"; advocated a tax on the rich; stood pro-choice on abortion; supported Democrats like Hillary Clinton and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; called George W. Bush "evil"; proposed a 25 percent tariff on Chinese imports; and has contributed more money to Democrats than to Republicans. Whew!

Like Ross Perot – an earlier rich, thin-skinned businessman-turned-presidential-aspirant – Trump barks out orders, says jump and expects people to do so. Doesn't work that way in politics. Try jabbing an index finger at an obnoxious New York Times reporter or a pesky rival Republican and saying, "You're fired!"

Nor will he run as an independent – as he once threatened and then un-threatened to do. An indie candidacy would siphon votes away from the Republican candidate, requiring Trump to spend the rest of his life deflecting the blame for Obama's re-election. No fun being the next Ralph Nader, who, after costing Al Gore Florida and the presidency in '00, can't get a table at Chuck E. Cheese's.

This brings us to the only reason to pay attention to The Donald. He's turning over rocks the media can't even locate with a guide dog and a treasure map.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Talk radio gave conservatism wings ~ By Barry Farber

If you who oppose this thesis can swallow this one pill, you may qualify for eventual recovery. Rush Limbaugh's genius is not the reason for his success. His conservatism is. If an equally gifted liberal were to come on the air, he would fail. Limbaugh's genius is a reinforcer, an expander and an enhancer; not a cause. And "ditto" the fate of a "Hannity" as handy with the language on the left as Sean is on the right.

You liberals decrying the success of conservative talk radio and trying feverishly to emulate it deserve one feeble compliment. You do remind me of all those untiring agenda-crats who, by consent, ignored a perfect fit and kept trying tirelessly to mash the glass slipper onto Cinderella's sister's foot.

Barry Farber discusses how talk radio allowed the American people to finally get an opportunity to offer their feedback to the source of information. And when this finally happened, the feedback was Conservative. Barry offers the suggestion that as brilliant as talk hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity are, they would not have been successful had their message been liberal. This might explain why Liberals hate the Conservative talk radio shows. It hurt Progressivism when Americans with Conservative values found out that they weren't alone!

Talk radio gave conservatism wings

BARRY FARBER

By Barry Farber

January 19, 2011 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2011

In medieval Europe, people thought trees gave birth to birds. There's a medieval notion in modern America that talk radio is the former choir boy who dropped out, took up alcohol and drugs, went mad, tortured turtles and plotted more and wilder ways to defame and destroy our beautiful America.

Newspapers shook their heads sadly at the trajectory of their fallen siblings in talk radio and remained "normal," meaning liberal. So did almost all magazines, books, movies, plays and television; except, of course, those awful shows that tried to mimic talk radio. Is there possibly another explanation why talk radio looms as the Peck's Bad Boy of American media while virtually all other media remain "OK," again, meaning liberal? I suggest there is, and I further suggest the left will continue to peck at it even though its truth is impeccable.

Newspapers are written by a staff hired by the owners. The editorial policy is set by those who inhabit what we used to call the "Bubble Room." Sure, there are letters to the editor, half-a-dozen a day or more; all selected and edited by the editors. Magazines are similar. As more and more conservative books succeed, the ramparts are eroding; but if you wish to see President Obama limited to a single term, don't propose that voting next time be limited to those who work for major American publishing houses. The message of a book is unchallenged within its covers. After the author concludes, there's no chapter consisting of "Letters to the author" disputing his views.

It's a technical insult to you readers to spend more than one word extending this reasoning to movies. The word "Hollywood" is sufficient, and there are no additional scenes tacked on to the end of the film presenting "Letters to the director" with alternate points of view. After a play, on opening night only, you may hear the cry "Author!" ring out, but that's an appeal for applause, not a cross-examination of the playwright's politics.

TV dramas, game shows, reality shows, comedy shows and network news don't give us a chance to criticize their facts, attitude or ideology. The rare exception when a plain-old-viewer's contrary opinion is offered, it's done with a flourish appropriate to the Bastille being stormed and democracy restored to the nation.

The only medium that lets the general public into the act – like Andrew Jackson let the riff-raff into the White House – is talk radio. And the rest is simple. Editors, producers, directors, authors, playwrights and media-owners are often talented and praiseworthy people. But move them off-stage, please, for this one snapshot. WHEN THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE ADMITTED TO TAKE PART, THE RESULT WILL BE CONSERVATIVE!

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Following Superwoman's lead ~ By Robert Ringer

For me, the one thing that Robert wrote that really stood out, practically jumped off the page, is, "Compassion is a good thing, but it's not a collective experience. It's a very personal issue." Those words are the purest embodiment of the true differences in the ideals of progressivism and conservatism. The founding fathers who wrote the Constitution of the United States knew this. They were profoundly aware that once a government took over the job of "compassion" that it would eventually lead to tyranny. And of course, they were right, and we're already seeing the actual results of collective compassion.

And this is why the progressives have made it so difficult for Republicans to have the courage to stick to the Constitution, as Robert explains in this column. The progressives know that they can make their opponents, the conservatives, look like the bad guys in this political climate. They have the liberal press on their side, and believe me, they make use of that asset. The progressives also know that the more people that they have receiving some type of entitlement, the harder it will be for the true conservative constitutionalists to reverse the "progress" made over the last century. We will only find out if that is even still possible if enough truly courageous men and women get elected this year. Just sayin'...

So, the big question remains: If we actually have elections in November, and if Republicans can overcome Democratic fraud and voter intimidation and win both the House and Senate, will enough of them have the courage to stand up and talk tea-party language?

If they are fearful, all they need to do is follow closely behind Superwoman (a.k.a. Michele Bachmann), Jim DeMint, Ron Paul and a host of other tea-party House and Senate members. Bachmann is a woman who never ceases to amaze me with her ability and courage to zero in on the real issues. She doesn't buy into false-premise debates, which drives the far Left crazy. In a recent interview, she said:

"I think that all we should do is issue subpoenas and have one hearing after another, and expose all the nonsense that has gone on." The only word I would take issue with is "nonsense." I would be inclined to call it blatant criminal activity. But I agree with her that a tidal wave of subpoenas should be issued.

Along with a growing group of her colleagues, Bachmann not only understands what a majority of people in this country are upset about, she actually believes in the same things they do. But it would all be for naught if she didn't also possess the courage to say what she believes.

By Robert Ringer

Posted: August 06, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

A long-time friend of mine, who retired some years ago after serving as a Republican congressman for 18 years, called me last week. He said he was concerned about protecting his assets in the event the current soft dictatorship in Washington evolves into an out-and-out police state.

During our discussion, I asked him, if the Republicans win control of both houses of Congress, did he believe they would have the courage to seriously start cutting back on entitlements and trying to repeal every unconstitutional bill the Obamaviks have passed? To which my cynical friend responded, "If the Republicans take over the House and Senate, it's not going to make a tinker's dam bit of difference."

He went on to say that one of the hardest realities he had to come to grips with during his tenure as a congressman was that most Republicans lack courage. He said they live in fear of being accused of being calloused, cruel, uncompassionate or – worst of all – racist. When he was a congressman, he was notorious for stubbornly sticking to the Constitution when it came to voting on legislation – which, of course, resulted in his being labeled an extremist.

The recent Senate debate over yet another extension of unemployment benefits was a perfect example of the RINO problem. Most Republicans were careful to say they supported the extension of jobless pay, but argued that the costs should be "paid for" rather than added to the federal deficit.

Attention Republican senators: There is no provision in the Constitution for the government to provide unemployment benefits – period! Yet, this obvious fact was never part of the debate. And so it is with virtually every congressional debate. Such time-wasting debates are almost always based on a false premise – usually that the government has a right to engage in activities that are not spelled out in the Constitution.

In the case of unemployment benefits, the false premise is that Congress has a right to give money to people who are unemployed. The debate then centers around whether the money should be borrowed or printed or come directly from taxpayers in the form of higher taxes, or by cutting an equal amount from some other transfer-of-wealth program. What many Republicans still do not understand is that a majority of Americans (meaning tea-party people) want politicians to abide by the Constitution.

Compassion is a good thing, but it's not a collective experience. It's a very personal issue. To be sure, a majority of Americans are compassionate, but they do not want the government to force them to pay for what politicians think they should be compassionate about.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

The burned hand teaches best ~ By Patrice Lewis

I am so very sorry, Patrice, and I sincerely apologize for taking so long to publish this post here, but once again, the eloquence of your column threw me for a loop. It seems that I once again had a difficult time trying to opine on this brilliant column. I had a real case of brain lock and writer's block...

I spent the whole day trying to figure out what I would say, or looking for a video that could illustrate the point of this column. But alas, I think I finally found what I was looking for. This video will be in two parts, please watch both of them. It will be very much worth your time.

Ronald Reagan 2012 Address To America: Part 1/2



Ronald Reagan 2012 Address To America: Part 2/2

Both videos provided by PaulWilliamsWorld (Excellent work, Paul!)

It was after a few moments of silent prayer did the Lord give me the mercy to find the above two videos. What an absolutely great way to bring Patrice's column to the world. First of all, it has to be a little ironic that I had thought of including something about Ronald Reagan, being that when Patrice discussed her liberal days in college, and said this: "This was during the days of Reagan (for whom I felt the obligatory liberal hatred) – I wondered why people hadn't been clear-headed enough to elect a solidly progressive president." I was so thrilled to find these videos right in my own youtube playlist, literally right under my nose! (That's almost always how God works, ya know?)

The other reason why these videos fit so perfectly with this column is even better. It perfectly displays the fact that the burned hand may NOT have taught us best. Why, shoot, Reagan came along, and most of the speech in the video was during the 1980 campaign, and you would have thought that Jimmy Carter had given us the burned hand that we should have learned from. However, it seems that those days somehow went down the memory hole. And the scary thing is knowing the painful truth that the progressives control the schools, the mainstream news media, and Hollywood, and combined, they used indoctrination along with distracting our attention away from what Ronald Reagan had told us 30 years ago.

I'm really hoping that it is not too late to learn from the burned hand, because now, the government does everything in their power to take care of us from cradle to grave, and we may not be allowed to feel the pain of the burned hand until it goes up in smoke... and then it's too late! Ponder on that for a moment! Just sayin'...

So, wearily, conservatives must continue to fight the evil we see, which is the ballooning size and power of an increasingly despotic government. To add insult to injury, conservatives must also continue to fight the tools of that government – the mainstream media, the useful idiots (progressives) who applaud that government, and the megalithic industries (financial institutions and multinational corporations) that can only maintain their monopolies by partnering with those who have guns and the willingness to use them (the government).

Conservatives cannot deny the existence of this evil. Therefore we cannot deny the need to fight it. Fighting is hard work, and I work hard enough as it is – but it's better than standing dumbly to one side and allowing history to repeat itself because I was too apathetic to fight evil when I saw it.

By Patrice Lewis

Posted: July 31, 2010 ~ 1:00 am Eastern

© 2010

Ever wonder why conservatives and progressives can't seem to get along? I think I have a clue. We see evil in different things.

When I was in college, I was a good little liberal. I marched in feminist rallies, I signed petitions, I feared nuclear warfare. I was all for world peace and universal harmony and couldn't understand why everyone else didn't yearn for the same. And I felt disdain for the close-mindedness of those poor ignorant conservative sods who Just Didn't Get It.

I was a pacifist and felt sincere bewilderment at the emphasis on America's military strength. This was during the days of Reagan (for whom I felt the obligatory liberal hatred) – I wondered why people hadn't been clear-headed enough to elect a solidly progressive president.

Ah, to be so young and ignorant …

Age and life experience has a funny way of changing one's perspective. So does parenthood and the responsibilities of training up one's children to be decent people and contributing members of society. All this combined to gradually change my perspective from raging liberal to thoughtful conservative. Now I wonder how the progressives can be so close-minded that they Just Don't Get It.

Recently, I came across a quote that was so powerful it stopped me dead in my tracks:

"It is tempting to deny the existence of evil since denying it removes the need to fight it" (Alexis Carrel).

Aha. Perhaps this helps explain the widening chasm between the perspective of the conservatives and the progressives. No, I'm not saying progressives deny the existence of evil. As I see it, progressives identify the wrong things as evil, then proceed to fight those things tooth and nail.

I'll take this moment to point out that this dichotomy between progressives and conservatives transcends the miniscule differences between Democrats and Republicans. While in theory Republican politicians are (cough) conservative, all too often they're just a slower version of the more blatant liberal progressives.

Progressives apparently do not believe our founding documents have relevance in our modern society. In fact, it seems progressives believe those documents are evil – otherwise, why would they fight like mad to change or (worse) ignore them? Why else would they seize the opportunity to translate their particular beliefs into federal law explicitly against constitutional restraints? Why else do they seem to rejoice in the massive and intrusive expansion of government rather than the small and streamlined government put in place by the Founding Fathers?

When you get such things as a ban on incandescent light bulbs, forced socialized medicine, cap-and-trade and even such absurdities as federal regulations about what schools can serve in their cafeterias … well, I'm sorry, but it's clear progressives have no faith in peoples' ability to govern themselves. We are all little children and must be told what to do.

Given the nature of the quote ("It is tempting to deny the existence of evil since denying it removes the need to fight it"), it seems progressives see individual freedom and liberty as evil (or at least misguided). Otherwise, why would they work to deny personal liberties and implement the power of collectivism and the State, as with Obamacare? Otherwise, why would they applaud the redistribution of our wealth through the largest tax hike in the history of this nation?

Conservatives see this constant encroachment of federal micromanagement as evil and contrary to the economic health of this country. That's why we fight it.

But progressives embrace it. They prefer to fight us, for fighting it. See how it works?

We think we're right and they're wrong. They think they're right and we're wrong. And never the twain shall meet.

But like all differences of opinion, there is a simple and time-tested method of determining in a debate which side is more correct. You know this method. Your children know it. It is so simple that every creature on God's green earth knows it.

The simplest method of determining who's right and who's wrong is called "risk-reward," or, as we were all taught as children, "the burned hand teaches best."

At NO point in human history has growth in the power of government over the governed ever resulted in freedoms and liberty. Never. It always results in tyranny and oppression.

Our founders knew this. Their hands had been burned by a massive and intrusive government, and it taught them well. That's why they built a system of severe restraint and limited power. Unrestrained government can and always does become the "fearful master" of which Washington spoke, when it expands to replace the rights of man with the "privileges" of government.

READ FULL STORY at WorldNetDaily.com

Be sure to check out
johnny2k's Tea Party Gear!

Glenn Beck speaks at CPAC

By John Kubicek

I knew that Glenn would be awesome. On his radio show Friday, he was telling Stu and Pat how he kept changing what he was going to talk about at CPAC. Don't worry, he came up with the perfect speech, as you will see below. Glenn comes on at about 5:20 on the video. The entire length of the speech is roughly 55 minutes, and this will be an hour you'll love as you watch and listen to this brilliant man. Enjoy!

Giving credit where credit is due

I want to thank SarahStormRpt at twitter for leading me to this great video, and though I probably would have eventually found it anyway, I'm pretty sure it saved me a lot of time. Oh, FYI, I also should tell you that this video can also be seen at Caffeinated Thoughts, which is how I found the video over at USTREAM.TV so I could get the embedding code (I hope it works!).

And, last but not least, Sarah Palin approves of this video!

Sarah..Sensational!

From Con-Men4Palin (Conservative Men Who Support Sarah Palin and her Conservative Views)

Sunday, February 7, 2010

Sarah Palin"s keynote speech at the first annual Tea party convention in Nashville Saturday night was a home run with two outs, and a tie game in the bottom of the ninth. She was absolutely right on with her criticism of the Obama administration, as well as her enunciation of what the Tea party and the common sense conservatism movement is all about. Her best line of the night was when talking about national defense she said,"We need a commander in chief, not a professor of law standing at a lectern." Another great line was, "foreign policy can't be managed through the power of personality." A slap at Obama who has put forth the idea that because he is who he is, our enemies would be more receptive to America, and less antagonistic.

She was Reaganesque in her enunciation of the conservative principles of free market capitalism, and small government, with reduced taxes, and less regulation. Watching the liberal spin after the speech, the left wing media seemed to criticize her for not being specific, and speaking in generalities. But, that was exactly how Ronald Reagan galvanized the country and won two landslide victories in the eighties. She was interrupted multiple times by an energized audience that at one point during the question and answer session began chanting, "run Sarah run."

READ FULL STORY >

Eureka, I Am a Conservative! ~ By Harold Witkov

From American Thinker

By Harold Witkov January 15, 2010 For the longest time, average Americans were in a political stupor. But not anymore. In the past year, across this great nation of ours, an awakening has started. Individual Americans, by the droves, are experiencing their own political eureka moments and transforming into conservatives. The famous Greek mathematician of antiquity Archimedes was once requested to determine if a solid gold wreath was indeed solid gold. According to legend, Archimedes, knowing he was not permitted to damage the wreath in any way, was at a loss. However, upon entering a bathtub and noting that the water level rose in accordance to his body mass, Archimedes deduced that he could perform a similar experiment comparing water level variations between the wreath in question and any solid gold material of the same weight. Upon realizing he had found the solution he was so desperately seeking, in what is often referred to as Archimedes' eureka moment of discovery, Archimedes forgot himself and ran home naked through the streets, bellowing, "Eureka! Eureka!" (I've found it! I've found it!) In certain Eastern religious circles, it is believed that sometimes one must discover who he is by first discovering who he is not. I have no idea if there is anything to this school of thought, but when it comes to the world of politics, I do believe there are times when one must discover where he stands politically by first recognizing what he stands against. Now that Barack Obama and the Democrats have taken over the presidency and both Houses, more and more Americans are starting to gag from the stench of unfettered liberalism. Horrified by out-of-control spending, a socialist agenda, and weak foreign policy, a growing number of outraged Americans have been doing some major political soul-searching. Intuitively, they sense America has dangerously changed course, and a growing sea of citizens are now on the same page and thinking the same thoughts:

I am against the federal redistribution of wealth. I am against entitlement politics. I am against American czars. I am against apology tours that denigrate the greatness of our country. I am against tax-and-spend politics. I am against government takeovers. I am against amnesty citizenship for those who have entered our country illegally. ...

There is much, much more to this commentary! READ FULL STORY >

From Alinsky Defeater's Blog: The Original #OCRA Document

From one of my all-time favorite blogs, Alinsky Defeater's Blog I can not tell you how happy I was to get the link to this page again, because I had lost track of it. Now that I will have it blogged here, I'll always be able to find it now when needed. And I hope this to be a memorable page for you, too. Keep this handy, and be sure to click on the READ FULL STORY link at the bottom. What I'll include on this post will be just enough to perk up your interest. My deepest appreciation to AlinskyDefeater on Twitter!

Organized Conservative Resistance Alliance A Statement of Principles, Goals, and Methodology To the Left: Before I begin, it is an unfortunate fact of political life in the United States today that you must immediately express in no uncertain terms that you are not an “extremist” if you use the word Conservative. So, let me assure you of a few things:

1. We do not advocate violence and we soundly renounce and repudiate any who do. 2. We are not racists. This is the first thing that those on the Left of the political scale always throw at Conservative groups, and especially now that we have our first African-American President. We, like so many Americans, celebrate the fact that America has moved so far from the horrible days of slavery that we can have an African-American President. Disagreeing with his policies is not tantamount to racism. We will not even address this spurious charge from here on unless someone who uses our name behaves in a racist manner, in which case we will denounce such words and/or actions. 3. We do not want the President to fail. We do, however want his present policies to fail because we believe they are bad for America. 4. We are not aligned with any political party and we have no sponsors of any kind. We do not explicitly support or endorse any business or corporation. Obviously, we will not deny that the principles of Conservatism have traditionally been the paradigm of the Republican Party, and that most will probably lean towards Republicans over Democrats, but it is the ideas that matter, not the names. 5. We are not advocating anything illegal, immoral, or even disrespectful towards policy makers. It is possible that Alinsky methods could be used against those that use them against us, but we would prefer not to. 6. We are not conspiracy theorists, although we do not try to limit the free exchange of ideas of any kind. 7. We are willing to engage you on policy, but trolls will be blocked, mocked, and/or ridiculed into submission. In our experience, the Left rarely wishes to engage on actual policy and fact checking. 8. On a topical subject: we are not against people having access to healthcare nor are we just opposed to the Administration’s policies just because they are Democrats. We believe improvements can be made to the current system, but that it the limitation of the free market that is causing most of the problems.

READ FULL STORY >

What's wrong with the Constitution? ~ By Patrice Lewis

From WorldNetDaily

By Patrice Lewis Posted: November 07, 2009 ~ 1:00 am Eastern © 2009 In last week's column, I expressed my concern that our country is rapidly moving away from the governmental restraint outlined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. I invited people to briefly tell me why they thought the Constitution was flawed or unfair, or with what parts they disagree. I received so many replies that I had to pick and choose what to include. I received few e-mails from true liberals, though I received many replies from conservatives who gave me their thoughts as to how liberals interpret these documents. The replies were extremely polite, for which I thank everyone. I'm not making judgments on these answers; I'm just reporting them as a glimpse into how people interpret the Constitution. Each paragraph is input from a different reader: "The Constitution is flawed in that it does not contain a mechanism for The People to enforce it, other than the ballot box (which doesn't repeal legislation) – or revolution." "Is Social Security constitutional? How did the politicians and the Supreme Court justify this Ponzi scheme back in the 1930s?" "I don't think the liberals think or believe the Constitution is flawed. I think that they love to play with and tweak words to suit what they distortedly believe is their 'right' to have what they have not earned. They hate to see people work hard, have what they have not earned, and tear us down because they feel jealous and inferior. They feel that they are owed and want to force charity upon the working people. Granted, many of these liberals do work, but I do not think that their brainwashed minds of entitlement allow them to fathom the magnitude of these (Pelosi, Reid, Congress, Obama) decisions and the impact it will have on all of our lives. They love being lied to because it gives them a cause. ... Liberals love to have a cause, no matter how twisted and false it may be. They have not learned what is really important in life, therefore push their own selfish and destructive agendas." [CLICK HERE TO READ MORE]

Beyond conservatism – beyond Reagan - By Joseph Farah

By Joseph Farah March 14, 2009 My friend and colleague Rush Limbaugh is under siege right now from Barack Obama's minions who have placed a target on his back and declared him public enemy No. 1. I can understand why. Rush's program is, in many ways, a beacon of truth and common sense in an age of lies and disinformation. He also commands the largest audience of any dissenter from the path of socialism chosen by Obama's Democrats and cheerleaders in the Big Media. While the Obama crowd is hoping the nation and the world will put behind them Ronald Reagan conservatism, now personified by Rush, they eagerly embrace the failures of the past with a new brand of supercharged Franklin D. Roosevelt-style Big Government. But are those really the only choices facing this nation? Is the choice really between Reagan and Roosevelt? Is the choice between conservatism and liberalism? Or are there other choices we should consider? For a long time, I have tried to get my conservative friends to consider a more ambitious agenda – especially as our nation has drifted further and further from its roots in constitutionally limited government, individual liberty and personal responsibility. While I love Rush and love Reagan, I have to tell you that liberalism is not the only enemy of freedom. We're losing too much ground too fast. We need an offensive agenda to keep America free and prosperous. It's time to realize that even electing another Reagan, if one were on the scene, is not enough to reverse the destruction wrought upon this country's most cherished institutions since he left office in 1989. [Continue reading]

digg story