| View Blog
|
|
|
|
In the past several weeks, I and many, many other people have had their property trespassed upon and damaged by people who have stolen our political signs from our lawns. (Ours appears to have been burned.) Strangely enough . . . all the stolen signs support John McCain.
We live in Jacksonville, Florida. I thought this was still in the good ole US of A where we all had the right of freedom of expression.
I was wrong, obviously!
The fact that our signs are stolen from our own front lawns clearly shows that those with different opinions will not allow others the freedom of expression they always demand.
Freedom is not a one-way street! Those who support Senator McCain have as much right to express that preference as do those who support Mr. Obama.
It appears the only ones who do not seem to understand this are those who support Mr. Obama.
Is this indicative of the type of leader to be elected? I think not!
|
|
Posted by MCzwz on 2008-10-12 14:52:17 | Rating: | Views: 131
|
|
| |
|
|
| Blog Comments
|
|
|
|
|
The Republican party destroyed the Constitution, so you are accurate in your assessment. There is no Constitution and organized crime now runs this country. I told you that you are out of your league, so stop trying to make sense of it and adapt. This will be a Constitutional monarchy when you earn it back, until then it is jungle rules living. If you cannot deal with it, leave my colonies.
|
|
Posted by joseph33
on 2008-10-12 15:19:40
|
|
|
|
|
You are free to agree with me in regard to every pressing issue. Freedom was a gift to the peasants and I am taking it back.
|
|
Posted by joseph33
on 2008-10-12 15:21:26
|
|
|
|
|
I hate freedom. Your bloody freedom has destroyed my environment, made your daughters whores and your sons cannon fodder. This is a splendid ideal. Go bake some cookies and shut your damn mouth.
|
|
Posted by joseph33
on 2008-10-12 15:26:08
|
|
|
|
Well, historically, the Republican Party has always supported the Constitution, and recently, "Republicanism" has lost most of its conservative values.
However, the liberal platform (supported by the democrats) is infamous for denying the people their American rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The right to life is infringed when abortion is repeatedly practiced, and openly endorsed, despite the growing numbers of humans who are slaughtered every year by selfish Americans. This is a key issue in every democrat's agenda, and rises from the liberal view on the sanctity of life: since we evolved from nothing, we (humans) have the right to do whatever we want to our "weaker" brothers and sisters. This evolutionary view led to the philosophies of Nietzsche, Hitler, and Marx: The strong will survive, and the weak will die for the betterment of the human race, and society at large. Need we discuss the atrocities of communism/socialism, Nazism, Fascism, Leftism, or Liberalism?
Take the birth of Liberalism; the French Revolution. Hundreds of associates of the king were brutally beheaded in the name of anarchy (and other liberal values). In the wake of this destruction, France suffered even more under Anarchy and murder for a time, until a totalitarian leader seized control: Napoleon.
The effects of liberalism should be clear, but let’s talk more about their denial of the right to liberty. Liberty, as defined by dictionary.com is freedom from arbitrary or despotic government or control. It is ironic that the word "liberalism" has its roots in the connotation of liberty, while the liberal's agenda of legislation is always more and more control. From taxation, to education, to religion, to gun control, even to the information you hear from the media. Does this sound like liberty to you? What about B. Hussein Obama's desire to nationalize health care?
How about the Fairness Doctrine; an attempt to force unbiased media time for opposing viewpoints but has since been re-birthed in the 60's to restrict talk radio: famous for supporting conservative speakers and values? What about freedom of speech? Maybe the liberal news networks should apply the same doctrine to their broadcasting? Ted Turner screams "NO!" Is this liberty?!
And finally, what about the pursuit of happiness?
(Now before this point is discussed, I must give the libs a few points for their “noble” idea to stop poverty and the corruption of money.) Many Liberals view their cause as the right thing to do because other Americans need some help with their finances so tax benefits for some and increases for others is an essential role of taxation. And they seem to think that the government needs to provide oversight and guidance and even funding for economic packages.
In light of the current mortgage crisis, many companies gave out mortgages to individuals, whose income could not support the payments, resulting in widespread bankruptcy and inflation. This (among others) is the primary reason for our economic situation: corruption in business. Democrats think that in order to prevent this from happening again, strict funding, oversight, and control are needed. But this will not stop the problem. The problem is integrity. This is why our founding fathers created the American form of government based on Christian ideals and principles found in the Bible. Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely, and the love of money is the root of all evil. Now, I do not have near the amount of time needed to discuss our heritage, but the point is, that the government should not be needed in economic situations, EXCEPT in order to break up monopolies of oppressive companies and mergers; NOT control. The best way of looking at this, is putting socialism on the far left of an economic spectrum, and capitalism on the far right. Absolute capitalism would be reckless, corrupt, and chaotic. While absolute socialism would be oppressive, inefficient, and foolish. One must find the happy medium, and in my opinion (and Ronald Reagan’s) the farther to the left you swing, the less effective you become.
The bigger government grows, the more inefficient it becomes. This has been made evident through the histories of the failed systems of socialism, nationalism, and communism. And the rare instances in which they succeeded, the civil rights and liberties of the people were severely handicapped.
Also, the government is the one body known to man that takes money, and does not reproduce its consumption in PURCHASABLE goods or services. In other words, we don't get too much out of what we put into the government. The best economic philosophy is one that allows the freedom of the company and people, but has SOME oversight, in order to maintain justice and order. NOT absolute control.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-12 17:03:26
|
|
|
|
In terms of poverty, the government should have no say, unless once again, some company is being blatantly oppressive. But the redistribution of wealth is a practice endorsed by communists. The church (funded by our gifts and tithes) should be the driving force of financial relief. Once again, there are circumstances in which people need compensation, but many individuals take advantage of these programs at the cost of responsible people. Subsidizing then, is stealing; whether one takes the government, or the people who accept the funds. Help can be provided, but not as radical as the democrats would have it.
So, when your signs are stolen, MCzwz, it does not surprise me, in light of the liberal's political philosophy. Yet when one considers the ideas and associations of Barrack Hussein Obama, the problem is magnified.
Thus the question arises: is America ready for the most liberal congressman? Can we afford (financially and in terms of ideals) this kind of a man? Please understand, I am not blaming Obama for the loss of your signs. But his character and background need to be considered.
And what country are you from Joseph33? Do you care about America?
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-12 17:13:44
|
|
|
|
I am no blaming Mr. Obama himself, of course, for the loss of my yard sigs. I am, however, blaming his and his supporters' ideology which leads them to feel they have a "right" of some sort to restrict or even prevent my own rights.
The ideology presented by Mr. Obama is what all Americans should be concerned about.
|
|
Posted by MCzwz
on 2008-10-17 21:45:58
|
|
|
|
Well yeah, I knew what you meant, and I didn't mean to be blaming him either. Obviously. That would just be ridicules. But the point is, is that the worldview of Liberalism/Secular Humanism does lead to their supporters adhering to a "radical" lifestyle, if you will; where decorum, respect, integrity, principle, virtue, charity, and selflessness are usually absent. That is why “ideas have consequences,” and “all that it takes for evil to prevail is for good men to stand by and do nothing.”
Make a difference. Voice the Truth of Jesus Christ in every discipline of every aspect of society.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-18 01:31:48
|
|
|
|
Yes, we all need to try to make a difference, this year especially. For some reason I can't quite fathom, the radical left sees that it has received a particularly special dispensation from "The One" to go as far as they wish in trying to muzzle, frighten, and intimidate opposing points of view.
That mentality, above everything else, is what must be stopped this year by making sure "The One" is not, NOT elected.
If we wanted a socialistic society, we would all move to Cuba, right?
|
|
Posted by MCzwz
on 2008-10-18 15:35:43
|
|
|
|
Yeah, or Russia, or China. Seriously. We need some Reagan politics.
But I think that America will continue to slide down in the list of world powers for several years until finally we are worthless. Then, out of the newly revised Roman Empire, (Europe) a leader will come, establish world peace, a world currency, and a lot of promises that will get him amazing support. Then, after a time of severe tribulation, the Lord Jesus Christ will return, and deliver us, and the Millennial Reign will begin.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-18 22:51:05
|
|
|
|
Quote: "Freedom is not a one-way street! Those who support Senator
McCain have as much right to express that preference as do those who
support Mr. Obama."
I completely agree with you!
Quote: "It appears the only ones who do not seem to understand this
are those who support Mr. Obama. Is this indicative of the type of
leader to be elected? I think not!"
I take offense to your comment. I support Senator Obama and I think the burning of signs on anyone's lawn is indicative of stupid idotic people. This is happening on both sides. Call it what it is, vandalism.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJQQaWReMYc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-hlJ8LcPpk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6VHmD93Reg
|
|
Posted by afbrat1965
on 2008-10-20 20:23:52
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, did you read the other comments? I agree with you. We agree with you. Read the other comments.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-25 10:25:54
|
|
|
|
Yes rb28horne08 I read the other comments. So when you say that you agree with me and that MCzwz agrees with me, you are lying.
MCzwz stated "It appears the only ones who do not seem to understand this are those who support Mr. Obama." That's a lie. Again. This is happening on both sides.
You posted "So, when your signs are stolen, MCzwz, it does not surprise me, in light of the liberal's political philosophy. Yet when one considers the ideas and associations of Barrack Hussein Obama, the problem is magnified." How on earth does this answer have anything to do with the vandalism of yard signs?
You also posted "Please understand, I am not blaming Obama for the loss of your signs. But his character and background need to be considered." Again, what does his character and background have to do with the vandalism of yard signs?
MCzwz posted "I am not blaming Mr. Obama himself, of course, for the loss of my yard signs. I am, however, blaming his and his supporters' ideology which leads them to feel they have a "right" of some sort to restrict or even prevent my own rights."
Forgive me rb28horne08, but nothing in what you just said agrees with my post.
|
|
Posted by afbrat1965
on 2008-10-25 13:24:40
|
|
|
|
Ok, I agree with your statement that vandalism is vandalism, AND I know it can happen on either side. Corruption knows no boundaries. That is not the point. So please don't say that I am lying.
The point I was making, (and I believe MCczwz was making) is that USUALLY liberals are radical, negative, misinformed, and quite often produce ad-hominem arguments. Like calling me a liar. So in light of these tendencies, it doesn't take much to come to a conclusion like that. However, once again, I was not meaning to blame the left wing for all crimes.
And, I was directing those comments to joseph33. All I was pointing out was the Democratic party (supporting liberalism) restricts Americans' rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Historically, liberals have proven to promote ideas that are against our constitution(restricting our first and second amendments), anti-American(most democrats' stance on immigration and socialism), and anti-Christian(the agenda to make a "secular" society, pervert the faith of our founding fathers, and removing all kinds of Christian faith from the public spectrum).
And once again, for the sake of discussion, a debate or an argument does not have to involve anger, so let’s try to respect each other. I don't want this to get out of hand. Let's state what we believe without letting passion get the best of us.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-26 13:46:39
|
|
|
|
|
Also, I am sorry if I offended you; I did not mean to.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-26 13:49:17
|
|
|
|
Just a reminder, RB28Horne08 . . . most liberals tend to take personal offense -- or look for reasons to take personal offense -- at most anything and anyone who does not fully, unhesitatingly, and fully accept their point of view.
You merely expressed your POV, clearly, succinctly and logically. You "offended" no one . . . . except those who are always so quick to take offense that we have come to this "politically correct" state that in and of itself is a type of censorship.
BTW, RB, I agree with your interpretation of what I was saying in my response above. It was pretty clear, I would say . . .
|
|
Posted by MCzwz
on 2008-10-26 19:29:33
|
|
|
|
"Most liberals tend to take personal offense????? I guess you haven't read your own posts. You really should read what you post, not just copy and paste from Fox news, Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh. Every criticsm that you have leveled has not been supported by facts of any kind. I think this will probably be my last post as you folks only want to read and hear what you want to hear.
I'll close with a shor clip from William Buckley's son so that you will know what happens to you folks when you don't tow the extreme right's party line:
BUCKLEY LEAVING
NATIONAL REVIEW
Author and son of late conservative icon William F. Buckley last week surprised
readers of the magazine his father founded, the National Review: "Sorry,
Dad, I'm voting for Obama" was the headline on The Daily Beast blog.
In a phone interview with the American-Statesman on Tuesday,Christopher Buckley revealed another surprise:After National Review readers raised holy heck over his perceived betrayal of the right, Christopher he offered to resign his Buckley
column; it was accepted. "It upset a great number of people - a huge number of canceled subscriptions, apostasy, the whol thing," he said from Washington. "I was
sort of hoping for, 'Well, let's think about it.' But to paraphrase Ronald Reagan, 'I didn't leave the Republican Party, the Republican Party left me.'"
Buckley, the author of numerous humorous political novels, most recently
"Supreme Courtship," is booked to appear at the Texas Book Festival in Austin
on Nov. I.
- Patrick Beach
|
|
Posted by Cassandra40
on 2008-10-26 20:18:37
|
|
|
|
That's right. And a note about the politically correct junk, I heard this quote from the daughter of an Islamic jihadist, who killed himself to kill Americans,
"America is strangling themselves with their political correctness."
These Secular Humanists (liberals) preach "separation of church and state," but after they perverted our history (a faith-based constitutional republic) and our constitution, they expelled academic freedom and religion (religion-the "Christian religion" in the words of our founding fathers) from the public spectrum they implanted their lies into the society. I agree.
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-27 00:00:31
|
|
|
|
|
(That last note I left was meant to agree with MCzwz...)
|
|
Posted by rb28horne08
on 2008-10-27 00:04:43
|
|
|
|
|
|
Email This to a Friend 
