Bio not provided
@Bob_In_Boston @StephenSmith1 @mogul264 I hope you take a closer look and do more research Bob because with a stroke of a pen and the President can enact an executive order that would wipe all of our rights away. You need to take a closer look throughout history. The majority of the population was not for slavery; however, they chose to remain silent and not do anything till it split the country. We have seen throughout the last 100 plus years the silence of the majority and look where that has lead. A country that is divided in more ways than one. A people that is further apart then just before the Civil War. However, till the American people can unify and remember the spirit of America; then this country will be overrun. It is to our state governments that we must look at for protection.
1 year, 3 months ago on Nullification Victories!
@MJRaichyk @DorotheaTeasley @KansasBright @KrisJackson It is not our Constitution or Pledge of Allegiance that defines us as a free people. The colonist were seen by many though under the allegiance of Britain to be a free people. The merchants, farms, slaves, lawyers, sailors, Indians; they saw a free people; it was the reason they choose to fight. Unfortunately, some had to fight and wait longer and some were pushed to patches of land. At the time, there was no Constitution, Declaration of Independence or Pledge of Allegiance. The Constitution is in place to ensure that the government does not overstep and take that freedom away. However, our society is more selfish and does not understand the responsibility that comes with freedom as they did back then. Those documents you mentioned came later to ensure that later generations can feel the patriotism and the goodness of being able to start a business, be a farmer, solider, sailor, etc. If you believe that freedom is wrapped up around a piece of paper and a pledge; then it is no wonder that Obama got re-elected and the federal government is taking our freedoms left and right. The Declaration of Independence is as true today as it was back then. It is a feeling. A knowing. I can burn a sheet of paper, but it does not take my freedom away. Yes, anyone that tells me that our Constitution and Pledge defines us is incorrect. It has always been the overwhelming mindset to chose for oneself and self-improvement within was the backbone of strong religious morals and values that statistically kept crime down. It game them decades of choosing (through neglect of England) how to live, grow, earn a living, learn, govern and belief. They printed what they wanted; however, due to their values they understood the responsibility that they are not alone and have to be conscious of their neighbor. If they were offended; then they handled it in many ways. Our Constitution is being violated and as a result our freedoms are being taken away. You ask a foreigner why did they want to come here. You will not our Constitution or our pledge but a list of other adjectives. Our pledge sums up those adjectives. The Constitution is in place to ensure that those adjectives from days of old and new which are not that far off remain to enjoy by her people and by those that choose to come here by legal means and proper way and make America their new home. So, I say again. It is not the documents that define us as a free people, because there is coming a time when those documents will be tossed out and pushed aside; however, does that change the type of people we are. NO! I AM FREE! YOU ARE FREE! We do have to responsibilities to protect ourselves and our neighbor that is what the Constitution and the laws are supposed to do. Do I believe every person born is free? Yes. Freedom is a mindset. We are all bonded (enslaved) whether it is of our choice or forced is another issue. However, freedom is a state of being, a knowing. We have defined freedom is such physical form; however, it goes beyond that. If you go through and read personal papers and journals of people that lived back then and through the ages; freedom is not so general but broad. For every action there is a reaction. So, every time a person moves, speaks, writes, etc that person makes a choice. They can ignore, complain, sing, be happy; however, it will cause a reaction. The next person make complain, take notice, become pleasanter, etc. A tiny flame can move mountains. Everyone should have the right to chose their own religion; however, when in the name of your religion you go take a person's life for no other reason than an opposing religion a consequence must be paid. Now that is what defines us as a free people, because that is what we fight for and believe. It is not our documents. You hold tight that the Constitution is where your freedom is based and when that Constitution gets thrown out; what are you going to base your freedom on then? Every human was born with certain inalienable rights. (Plain and simple) You either believe it whole heartedly, or everything is just physical and wrapped around a sheet of paper. It is not just the liberal minds that need to be educated but the conservatives need to feel it and know. The Constitution, itself is just a piece of paper; however, the mindset, values and ideals that went far deep into the creation of the document is what we out to be fighting for.
@KansasBright@KrisJackson I never gave much thought to what Calvin Coolidge had to say, because I disagree with his ideas and way of thinking. Our public education has been dumbing down generation after generation. It all started with Politcal Correctness.
"Political Correctness started in a think tank (called The Frankfurt School) in Germany in 1923. The purpose was to find a solution to the biggest problem facing the implementers of communism in Russia. Why wasn't the wonderful idea of communism spreading?
The Frankfurt school recommended (amongst other things):
the creation of racism offencescontinual change to create confusionthe teaching of sex and homosexuality to childrenthe undermining of schools and teachers' authorityhuge immigration to destroy national identitythe promotion of excessive drinkingemptying the churchesan unreliable legal system with bias against the victim of crimedependency on the state or state benefitscontrol and dumbing down of mediaencouraging the breakdown of the family" http://sd2cx1.webring.org/l/rd?ring=realpoliticallyi;id=9;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Epoliticallyincorrect%2Eme%2Euk%2F
"Of course the answer is an emphatic yes, if only because some other name wouldn’t carry the stigma that Marxism has amongst conservatives.
Fatefully for America, when Hitler came to power in Germany in 1933, the Frankfurt School fled – - and reestablished itself in New York City. There, it shifted its focus from destroying traditional Western culture in Germany to destroying it in the United States.
Most importantly, the Frankfurt School crossed Marx with Freud, taking from psychology the technique of psychological conditioning. Today, when the cultural Marxists want to do something like “normalize” homosexuality, they do not argue the point philosophically. They just beam television show after television show into every American home where the only normal-seeming white male is a homosexual (the Frankfurt School’s key people spent the war years in Hollywood).
The next conservatism should unmask multiculturalism and Political Correctness and tell the American people what they really are: cultural Marxism. Its goal remains what Lukacs and Gramsci set in 1919: destroying Western culture and the Christian religion. It has already made vast strides toward that goal. But if the average American found out that Political Correctness is a form of Marxism, different from the Marxism of the Soviet Union but Marxism nonetheless, it would be in trouble. The next conservatism needs to reveal the man behind the curtain – - old Karl Marx himself.
"Gramsci, a young communist who died in one of Mussolini's prisons in 1937 at the age of 46, conjured up the notion of a 'quiet' revolution that could be diffused throughout a culture -- over a period of time -- to destroy it from within. He was the first to suggest that the application of psychology to break the traditions, beliefs, morals, and will of a people could be accomplished quietly and without the possibility of resistance. He deduced that "The civilized world had been thoroughly saturated with Christianity for 2,000 years..." and a culture based on this religion could only be captured from within. Gramsci insisted that alliances with non-Communist leftist groups would be essential to Communist victory. In our time, these would include radical feminist groups, extremist environmental organizations, so-called civil rights movements, anti-police associations, internationalist-minded groups, liberal church denominations, and others. Working together, these groups could create a united front working for the destructive transformation of the old Judeo-Christian culture of the West. By winning 'cultural hegemony,' Gramsci pointed out that they could control the deepest wellsprings of human thought -- through the medium of mass psychology. Indeed, men could be made to 'love their servitude.' In terms of the gospel of the Frankfurt School, resistance to 'cultural Marxism' could be completely negated by placing the resister in a psychic 'iron cage.' The tools of mass psychology could be applied to produce this result. The essential nature of Antonio Gramsci's revolutionary strategy is reflected in a 1990s book  by the American Boomer author, Charles A. Reich, 'The Greening of America.' "There is a revolution coming. It will not be like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual and the culture, and it will change the political structure as its final act. It will not require violence to succeed, and it cannot be successfully resisted by violence. This is the revolution of the New Generation." Of course this New Generation would be Reich's elite Boomer generation. And the mantra for these New Age 'foot soldiers' of the Frankfurt School prophets, would be 'have the courage to change .'
Thus the dumbing down of our people is complete through a cultural revolution that needed to take place but went about it the wrong way. They wanted hyphenated Americans whereas Langston Hughes, Fredrick Douglas only wanted RECOGNITION AS BEING AMERICAN and in my book that is a big difference. It is the reason why there is still a huge racial and ethnic divide in our country. We are not unified. We are not seeing each other as being equal. America has ancestry from all over they world, we can celebrate it. However, we do not need hyphenated names. It is a part of us but not the whole of us. I say nullify. First, we need to re-claim our education system and nullify they federal government and union from that first and foremost. Political Correctness needs to go. Our WHOLE history needs to be taught. OUR CONSTITUTION needs to be taught line by line including all the papers that were written arguing for and against the Constitution.
1 year, 4 months ago on Nullification Victories!