One objective of this blog is to encourage productive discussion and debate within the "comments" forum. Leaving comments has been made easier. No registration is required. Comments can be left anonymously. A Hassle free and easy forum to leave a comment. However, any inappropriate comments will be deleted by blog administrators. Thank you for commenting so your voice can be heard.

Monday, January 23, 2012

Hell Freezes Over - I Actually Agree With Ann Coulter

Conservative pundit Ann Coulter laid into GOP candidate Newt Gingrich and those in South Carolina who voted for him in the state's primary on Saturday.

Coulter appeared on Fox News' weekend edition of "Fox and Friends" on Sunday. Coulter, who staunchly supports GOP candidate Mitt Romney, criticized South Carolinians for choosing "the emotional satisfaction of a snotty remark toward the president than to beat Obama in the fall." She criticized Gingrich for his debate performances, and said that he "would say things that didn't really make sense. It's what you usually associate with Democrats."

Coulter also defended CNN's John King for asking Gingrich about the recent allegations made by his ex-wife. Coulter said, "John King is a completely fair reporter, an honorable reporter...and Newt Gingrich goes back to the well to attacking the media, and I resent that..."

John King had every right to ask that question and should have asked that question. Gingrich constantly espouses "morality" and "family values;" yet, he doesn't seem to live by his own standards. Further, ABC responded and said Newt out and out lied about ABC not following up. And the "two" witnesses to which Newt referred were his two children from his first marriage (how would they know anyway?).

If the she-devil can call Gingrich the anti-christ, we should all listen!

Maybe there is hope for people on the right and left to get along. I usually send her hate mail.

Sunday, January 1, 2012


A day has come which I never expected.  The United States has become a police state. 

The political press has been abuzz with over the much anticipated signing of the NDAA by Barack Obama on Saturday: this move was not surprising because Obama had already made it clear he would go ahead and enact the law, even though he added some 'stern' language that is supposed to legitimize what some say is a precursor to the establishment of martial law in the US. To wit: "The fact that I support this bill as a whole does not mean I agree with everything in it. In particular, I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists." And yet he signed it (full text of Obama's statement on the NDAA, sent while on vacation in Hawaii, can be found here).


Where is the Tea Party (those Constitutional proponents) on this issue?  What about Libertarians (Ron/Rand Paul)?

The individual rights and freedoms of the People of the US are founded in principles dating back centuries.  The presumption of innocence, the right to trial by your peers, the writ of mandamus, etc. 

All gone.

We are a nation at war with ourselves based upon the boogyman of terrorism.  Do you feel saver now?

Jefferson sums it up best:
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it. - Thomas Jefferson to Archibald Stuart, 1791.