Straight from the Ministry of Truth

 Orwell's 1984Hateful.  That’s the manner in which the people who represent me in my own government now characterize me, merely because I have the temerity to disagree with them politically.  Of course, that’s not how they choose to see the dilemma that continues to grow in size and scope as the gales of November draw closer.

No – it’s not that I disagree with them politically – how could that be?  After all, they’re the enlightened few atop the cream of human society, and they clearly know far better than I do about such things.

No, there could not possibly be an American citizen with a modicum of common sense that could even consider standing in opposition to such glorious legislation and programs as universal health care, cap & trade, amnesty for people who have no legal right to be here, and alleged “stimulus” packages that suffocate the economy with a blanket of useless dollars.  Nope. There’s not a single person who, in his right mind, would even consider the political stop, drop, & roll, because there’s no way an educated person could view our country as being ablaze in any way, shape, or form.

No – since I must be the only person in America who disagrees with the manner in which current events are unfolding, there can only be one possible explanation: I’m hateful.  A white supremacist.  I’m racist (naturally).  Maybe even a tad stupid.

Of course, the common sense that has always been so much a part of our American character and culture, that sense that generally tells us when something just isn’t right, is steadily contributing to the vast number of people in this country who seem to be waking from their political slumber with each passing day.  Further, it is that same sense that informs us that the nonsense that relentlessly spews from the mouthpieces of the Left–the vast majority of the media in addition to many of it signature elements in the blogosphere–is, quite simply, a cacophony of sound and fury that ultimately signifies nothing.

And therein lies the rub.

I began collecting some of these thoughts last week in the days leading up to the April 15 Tea Parties.  By now it’s more than obvious that those firmly entrenched on the far left end of the political slider are becoming more and more desperate with seemingly each passing day.  If something doesn’t change the current equation for them – say amnesty, for example, which certainly puts a premium on the ‘necessity’ for national ID cards, now doesn’t it? – an electoral bloodbath awaits them in November.  Vilifying and smearing common-sense Americans is no longer enough; the people who constitute the Tea Party must be portrayed in the worst possible light, as people who live to hate others and as people who use various forms of violence as  their primary political tool of choice, people who aren’t even intelligent enough to consider open dialogue and discussion.  In a best-case scenario for the Left, these people must even be provoked into some type of physical confrontation.

Quite simply, conservatives must be seen as hateful.

The most ironic thing in all of this, of course, is that it couldn’t possibly be further from the truth.  The people of this country who, for some reason, inexplicably support the Soviet-styled policies coming out of Washington are failing in their attempts to provoke us, and it’s driving them crazy.  They continue to try new methods that will lead some of us to physically express the frustration with our irresponsible government that we feel in our hearts; I can only imagine what they might be willing to try as mid-term elections draw nearer. For right now, however, it’s not working.  We continue to have a decided advantage in the court of public opinion, simply because we will not give them what they so desperately want.  There are also fewer and fewer people around the country who are listening to the dribble that emanates from the angry, child-like minds of Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow, and Bill Maher.

Let’s take a look, however, at all of this talk of ‘hatred’, ‘violence’, and ‘anger’ that seems to have lately become so much a part of the political discourse in this land of freedom.  More specifically, who are the people who are willing to resort to violence, and, possibly more importantly, who are the people with a vested interest in stoking the flames of violence and racism?

Throughout history, the concept of ‘forcing’ one’s will on others has been almost exclusively the province of the political left.  Why do they need to ‘force’ themselves on others?  That’s easy – generally speaking, nobody wants to buy what they’re selling.  There are only two groups that truly benefit from a leftist-run government, and those are the powerful elites and the lackeys that support them in exchange for the crumbs that fall off their sumptuous tables.

Everyone else?  Who gives a damn?

Of course, the Left always tries to counter the fact that their form of governance – if accurately presented to the people – offers little of interest to people who just want to live a happy life.  In response, those with a financially and emotionally vested interest in seeing a government operated by a collection of southpaws attempt to appeal to the softest target in the minds of the people – their heartstrings.

Should any individual question the absolute purity of the goals of the Left, they are initially branded as people who are just simply not bright enough to understand.  If any degree of resistance continues, the nature of the response intensifies by degrees – the person(s) is not bright enough, then stupid, then angry/selfish, then hateful, and, of course, racist.  When all of these avenues have been exhausted and no other viable political options present themselves any longer, force is applied.

How else do you explain Andy Stern’s (the former head of SEIU) statement? – “We’ll first try to use the power of persuasion.  If that fails, we’ll use the persuasion of power.”

Much has been made during the course of the current administration of its eerie likeness in form and feature to the fictional world of George Orwell’s 1984.  Indeed, while Orwell himself admitted that he leaned more to socialist tendencies, he also understood how a government run in such a fashion could quickly move to dangerous extremes.  Since its publication in 1948, Orwell’s novel has historically been held up as a blueprint of the dangers inherent to a leftist-run government.  I mention these points because, given all of the discussion of ‘hatred’ that is being loosely and dangerously thrown around lately in the political marketplace, I often can’t help but think of the aforementioned Olbermann and Maddow with regard to a particular passage from Orwell’s book, the portion that details what Winston (the main character who had a sense that ‘something wasn’t right’ with the world) called the “Two Minutes’ Hate”.  I have a hard time not envisioning ‘Goldstein’ as a stand-in for either Glenn Beck or the collective notion of the Tea Party:

The programmes of the Two Minutes Hate varied from day to day, but there was none in which Goldstein was not the principal figure. He was the primal traitor, the earliest defiler of the Party’s purity. All subsequent crimes against the Party, all treacheries, acts of sabotage, heresies, deviations, sprang directly out of his teaching. Somewhere or other he was still alive and hatching his conspiracies: perhaps somewhere beyond the sea, under the protection of his foreign paymasters, perhaps even – so it was occasionally rumoured – in some hiding-place in Oceania itself.

Goldstein was delivering his usual venemous attack upon the doctrines of the Party - an attack so exaggerated and perverse that a child should have been able to see through it, and yet just plausible enough to fill one with an alarmed feeling that other people, less level-headed than oneself, might be taken in by it. He was abusing BIG BROTHER, he was denouncing the dictatorship of the Party, he was demanding the immediate conclusion of peace with Eurasia, he was advocating freedom of speech, freedom of the Press, freedom of assembly, freedom of thought….

….his theories were refuted, smashed, ridiculed, held up to the general gaze for the pitiful rubbish that they were – in spite of all this, his influence never seemed to grow less. Always there were fresh dupes waiting to be seduced by him. A day never passed when spies and saboteurs acting under his directions were not unmasked by the Thought Police. He was the commander of a vast shadowy army, an underground network of conspirators dedicated to the overthrow of the State….

…The horrible thing about the Two Minutes Hate was not that one was obliged to act a part, but, on the contrary, that it was impossible to avoid joining in. A hideous ecstasy of fear and vindictiveness, a desire to kill, to torture, to smash faces in with a sledge-hammer, seemed to flow through the whole group of people like an electric current, turning one even against one’s will into a grimacing, screaming lunatic…

Winston had heard the whispered story of a terrible book, a compendium of all the heresies, of which Goldstein was the author and which circulated clandestinely here and there. It was a book without title. People referred to it, if at all, simply as the book. But one knew of such things only through vague rumours. Neither the Brotherhood nor the book was a subject that any ordinary Party member would mention if there was a way of avoiding it.

Have there been any reports of violence at the Tea Parties?

In the most general sense, has Glenn Beck done anything but discuss the various ways by which the Constitution has been and continues to be violated?

To the best of my knowledge, the answer to both questions is “no”.

Yet, we now have Rachel Maddow comparing the people who constitute the Tea Party to the likes of Timothy McVeigh.  If there’s an example out there that validates such a comparison, I’d like Andrew Breibart to offer another $100,000 to root it out, because I’d be really interested in seeing it and because I don’t have that kind of reward money to offer.

Are there violent extremists on the far Right?

You bet.

Is the Tea Party the extreme Right? No way.  And the Left knows it.  And they’re scared. Why else would they pay such attention to such an allegedly ‘fringe’ movement?  If they were actually as intelligent as the manner in which they so desperately want to see themselves, they’d ignore it altogether.  They just can’t bring themselves to do that, though, because they know that the Tea Party generally represents what America was intended to be from the get-go. Now we understand that the various arms and vehicles of the political Left are even willing to go so far as to infiltrate the Tea Parties in an effort to act up and portray the protests against big government as consisting of a collection of racist, stupid, backward people.

Wait – isn’t that stereotyping or profiling?  I thought liberals were against that sort of thing?  Strange….

If the Tea Parties are, indeed, violent, racist, and stupid people, wouldn’t they do themselves in?  Wouldn’t liberals around the country be able to sit back with their smug smiles and say,“I told you so?”  Yet, the Left continues to coordinate and plan a reasonably trickly political undertaking that, we’ve even recently learned, Cass Sustein, our vaunted ‘Regulatory Czar’, even proposed a couple of years ago: infiltration of dissenting groups.

Wasn’t he appointed by President Obama?  Strange….

I think, when all of the ideas that I’ve posited here come out in the wash, what really needs to fleshed out, a point to which I earlier alluded, is who the various lackeys are around the country that have such a vested interest in supporting what could otherwise be deemed ‘dictatorial’ policies.  In short, who are the people that are willing to sell out their personal connection to their own country for the sake of their own skin?

When I was growing up here in little Rhody, there used to be a joke that went like this: “What’s orange, flat, and sleeps 8?”  The answer? A flatbed truck for the Rhode Island Department of Public Works.  While there are many, many agendas on the far, Progressive left, the one from which I simply can’t seem to extricate myself as one of the leading causes of our national dilemma is the detrimental effects of the public unions.  Further, don’t misunderstand – I’d be the absolute first person to stand up and say that in some fields, especially those in which physical danger is involved, unions are an absolute necessity; however, the concept of ‘unionized public unions’ has grown to the point that it is now out of control, is trying to bleed blood from the proverbial stone without any regard to future consequences, and, in short, is now trying to globalize itself in a desperate effort to maintain the flow of financial plasma.

My own opinion – and the very nature of an article such as this is that I’m free (at least for now) to express such an opinion – is that one of (if not the most important one) the leading groups of ‘lackeys’ that are consciously supporting policies that run counter to the very fabric of our society is the members of the public-sector unions, simply because they’re now beginning to realize that (and I realize that I’m trivializing this, but this is merely to make my general point) their cushy, no-work jobs are threatened because the country has reached the point of insolvency.

Vested interest, indeed.

I could waste time and space here discussing all of the negative characteristics of the typical union, things that most of the America’s Right readership already understands.  I think, though, that something that should be pointed out and one that will be seen as even more poignant in the context of both this article and our current national condition is this: during the 1940’s and 1950’s when America was coming out of World War II, recovering from the Depression, experiencing an industrial economic boom brought on as result of  war-time production, and was moving in a decidedly more conservative direction, the factions of the political Left that had for over a decade been entrenched in American industry and unions began to lose their footing in the political power base of America.  The Left needed to re-group, and they found a way by (amongst other things) introducing policies of ‘super-seniority’ in the workplace, policies that were meant to advance black workers over white workers without regard to qualifications.  Should anyone doubt that, feel free to look it up.

In short, it has always been a foundational principal in the leftist’s work here in America to divide us, or, to be more blunt, to divide and conquer.

Sound familiar, as it applies to the Tea Parties?

So who has a more vested interest in fomenting hatred, violence, and racism? Who is going to be more motivated to force their political agenda to come to fruition, and who is more likely to acknowledge the natural process of the voting booth to bring about real change?

Allow me to further add that I’m fully well aware that there’s more to the Progressive left than merely the impact of unions; what these other facets and groups have done, however, is nothing more than to hitch their personal wagons to the politics that run counter to the cultural establishment.  That is what this is all about.  It’s not about being pro-government; it’s about changing the culture, period.  Those on the left want to be re-affirmed, recognized, and legitimized.

If we don’t agree to it?  They’ll force us to agree to it, if necessary.

Want to call me ‘hateful’?  Have at it.  Those who know me as a person already know the truth.

Want to call me ‘racist’?  Go for it – that simply means that I’ve won the argument.

You will not provoke me.  And in November, I’m going to remember everything that’s been perpetuated upon me.



  1. Dee says:

    John Buyon, I don’t know if you have a 401K or an IRA but if you look at your statements the earnings did not start to decrease until 2006 when the Democrats took control of Congress and the Senate. The rich are the ones who create jobs and hire people. There will always be someone richer than I am and someone who is poorer. My husband and I have worked hard for what we have and I am more than willing to share it with those who are truly less fortunate, and we do through various donations, but not with those who aren’t motivated to work. I made all of my children work at McDonald’s as one of their first jobs. Many young people with no experience want to start at the top. They think that a job at McDonald’s is beneath them.
    I don’t understand how government takeovers of private industries are saving capitalism. I have cousins who worked at GM. They had 6 months, 6 months, of vacation! They made alot of money and would complain if they went on strike. They thought we should be helping them. I asked them if they would help me if my husband, an accountant, lost his job. They had no answer.
    If a company is not doing well, it will either fail or restructure. The government runs Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and the Post Office. None of these programs are doing well. As Obama has said, look at UPS and Fed-Ex. Private companies, competing for business, and doing well.
    Look at lasix surgery. When it first came out, only a few doctors were doing it and the prices were high. Now many perform the surgery and prices have lowered. The same with TV’s and computers.
    I disagree that it is right wing Americans who are to blame.
    I would be interested in how the past 8 years effected you. What happened to you during those years that has you so upset?

  2. John Buyon says:

    @ DEE
    “The rich are the ones who create jobs and hire people”
    yes true that is fine, but not when the rich get richer fast while the middle class gets poorer. the republicans cut taxes for wealthy people and the wealthy people donate billions to the republicans. Read “what’s the matter with Kansas” to understand how the Republicans have duped millions of decent hardworking Americans to vote for right-wing extremists and corporate oligarchs who don’t care about them and don’t have their interests at heart.

    “Many young people with no experience want to start at the top. They think that a job at McDonald’s is beneath them”
    yes that is true and it is sad.

    “I would be interested in how the past 8 years effected you. What happened to you during those years that has you so upset?”

    I financially benefited from the bush tax cuts, but I would gladly give the few thousand dollars back to the government if it meant universal health care, balanced budget, and a slowing down of the inequality in America.

    upset? asking me why bush’s presidency has got me upset is like asking a women why she is so mad at the rapist.

    a war of choice in Iraq that we were lied into
    huge deficits during an economic boom
    increasing economic inequality
    the rise to power of the christian fascist movement in America
    all of this I actually don’t blame Bush, he was just a stupid simple, good and naive man who was manipulated by the evil forces surrounding him
    I was actually planning on voting for him in the 2000 election before the debates.

  3. nana says:

    John Bunyon, your previous comment to Randy asserting that if he had a BRAIN, he would realize the Republicans would have sent troops to resist student protest groups etc… I mistaken or weren’t the Democrats in control during the ’60′s? If I recall correctly, George Wallace was a Democrat, there were riots at the DNC convention in Chicago. So you feel Bush was a stupid, good and naive man who was controlled by the evil forces around him…so now, do we have a highly intelligent, brilliant speaker of questionable background who is manipulated by the EVIL forces around him?…which scenario is worse, in your opinion? I am not defending Bush because he did things that I did not agree with but compared to the devastation this country is facing at the hands of this administration, there is no comparison as to who will do the most damage. As ‘stupid’ as you may think Bush was, I believe he respected and loved this country and I do not feel that Obama shares that patriotism. You seem to have a problem with Christians so I suppose I would be part of that group you feel is so dangerous. May I tell you again to ‘know your enemy and it is not the Christians”. I have a son in the Army and a nephew in Afghanistan so I am concerned about our involvement in wars but as I recall the feelings after 9/11 by most Americans that we had to go on offense if we were to prevent future attacks like those on 9/11. In retrospect, we know mistakes were made as we know they were made in previous wars…did FDR get us into WWII by being dishonest with the American people?…LBJ allowed us to stay in Viet Nam without adequate support to win the war. Why NOT look at what OBAMA does and says without pointing back to Bush every time as an attempt to justify what this administration is doing? Look at the declared socialists in Congress (DSA) and notice what party they belong to…maybe you should worry more about these socialists than the Christian ‘fascists’.

  4. Dee says:

    John Buyon, You state that you would give back the money you earned if it would slow down the inequality in America. You are free to do so. I have not seen one politician give up his home to someone less fortunate or give away alot of his money. What about Obama’s riches?
    If you listened to the so called “bipartisan” healthcare debate, you would have heard Senator Paul Ryan present a very intelligent plan that would actually lower costs. But because he is a Republican, he was scoffed at and his suggestions were ignored. The Republicans were told to go home and consider the Democrat plan. There was no bipartisanship on the part of the administration. At the end, one got the feeling that it was Obama’s way or the highway.
    How have the “Christian facists” influenced the government?
    I have to disagree that Bush was “stupid”. He may not have the ability to read so eloquently from a teleprompter, but he had more business experience, more government experience, and much more love for the country than Obama does.
    This dialogue with you has been interesting and I appreciate your willingness to share your views.

  5. John Buyon says:

    @ Nana

    OMG do I need to explain the switcheroo in American politics one more time ?
    do right wingers understand anything?
    the republican party was founded on the progressive and liberal ideas of abolishing slavery and industrialization while democrats were the party of states rights, plantations and racism. FDR’S new deal coalition made alliances that were unbreakable for 20 years allowing the democrats to have congress and presidency for a half century. By the time of Kennedy however the democrats became the liberal, progressives because they helped enfranchise the blacks thus losing them the “Solid South” forever, the south went awal for an election or two (Wallace)until Nixon’s Southern strategy made the republicans the elitist, racist, states rights party. Thus the republicans went from Northern Good Liberals to Bad southern reactionaries
    while the democrats went from Bad southern conservatives to Good Northern Progressives.

    For the last time socialists are not some sort of devils who run around causing mischief.
    before the socialist movement workers were oppressed, women were below men, the ruling classes used racism and nationalism to divide and conquer the world

    @ Dee
    I do give to charity, but charity is not going to be enough
    that is why I am amazed at how right wingers say government should get out of business so that we can be more productive but in the same breath say that greed is good therefore justifying not being charitable.

    Republicans said they will hand Obama his “Waterloo” (Demint) if they don’t cooperate on health care and that was clearly their strategy.
    could you post a link to the republican health care solution
    its so fking frustration seeing the republicans have Congress for 20 years doing nothing but spend on useless wars and tax cuts for the rich and when its democrats turn they wine and bitch and moan on how socialism ( as if it means some sort of heresy) is coming and how they would solve health care better.
    ” How have the “Christian fascists” influenced the government?”
    OMG look at Bush’s power base we got wealthy corporate interests funding him, BUT $$$ is not enough to win elections in america so they need some troops on the ground. Who are these groups? they are reactionary middle class and lower class evangelicals who consciously vote against their own interests because of a 30 year conservative brainwashing.
    read or look up “whats the matter with Kansas”

  6. Jeff Schreiber says:


    I’m really getting tired of hearing that the GOP presented no alternative ideas. You’re a smart guy, but you REALLY need to stop talking for a moment and start listening. All throughout 2009, Republicans proposed bill after bill and amendment after amendment, and each was shut down by the Democrats, who wanted either single-payer or a pathway to single-payer.

    Back in November, House Republicans released their own plan for health care reform, and the draft bill they put together came in at roughly 230 pages instead of Pelosi’s 1,990, and at a ten-year cost of only $61 billion to the Democrats’ almost $2 trillion. Want a link? Here:

    Other alternatives introduced and shot down by the Democrats:

    Small Business Health Fairness Act of 2009.

    Medical Rights & Reform Act.

    Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act.

    Empowering Patients First Act.

    Improving Health Care for All Americans Act.

    Promoting Health and Preventing Chronic Disease through Prevention and Wellness Programs for Employees, Communities, and Individuals Act of 2009.

    Improved Employee Access to Health Insurance Act of 2009.

    Health Insurance Access for Young Workers and College Students Act of 2009.

    Stop with the “party of no” nonsense. Stop yapping and start listening. If you want to look for the “party of no,” look at the Democrats. They’re the ones who shot down every common sense amendment to this terrible bill, including amendments which would have guaranteed that the bill was paid for, and amendments which would have ensured that registered sex offenders cannot be provided with ED drugs at taxpayer costs. They’re the ones who have said “no” to transparency. They’re the ones who have said “no” to including Republicans in key negotiations. They’re the ones who continue to say “no” to prosperity, growth, freedom and the very idea of American exceptionalism.

    You want to know what is “so fucking frustrating,” John? It’s people who are so caught up in ideology, whether on the right or on the left or somewhere in between, that the cannot open their minds enough to actually look at the answers presented to them. To borrow your language for a moment, I for one am fucking tired of it.

    You want to talk about spending? According to the Congressional Budget Office (, during the dozen years in which the House of Representatives was under Republican Party control, the average budget deficit was roughly $104 billion. Since the Democrats assumed control following the mid-term elections in 2006, however, that average has skyrocketed to approximately $1.1 trillion. Now, you might not have been taking civics classes up there in the frozen north, but spending begins with Congress. Furthermore, those useless tax cuts for the rich gave the United States the strongest economy it had in its existence, until the Democrats’ failure to understand the adverse consequences of the Community Reinvestment Act and their own spendthrift ways in 2006 and on destroyed it.

    If there is brainwashing anywhere, it’s on the left. I’ve never met people so divorced from reality and so averse to facts and common sense.

  7. Dee says:

    John Buyon, Go to and download a copy of their plan.

  8. Surgically precise rebuttal says:

    Somebody just castrated the Canadian @2:05.

  9. John Buyon says:


    from what I can see from your links repubs got some ideas that are sensible and reform oriented and mainly free market based solutions which is good since the free market is non coercive and non authoritarian like a government. most of their ideas were incorporated into the democrats bill tho.
    this plan that was passed more than a month ago is a duplicate of Romney Massachusetts plan!!!
    their [republican] plan doesn’t go far enough it gives American people and small businesses $1 while giving big pharma and insurance companies $10
    “doesn’t block insurers from denying coverage to people with pre-existing health conditions, as Democrats would do ”
    according to your own source :

    the very fact that republicans are making an effort to show a facade of working for the people on health care is a direct reaction to the democrats taking the initiative. If left to the republicans alone they would cut taxes on rich folk while spending trillions on wars scoffing at the idea that middle class ppl would deserve health care.

    the republicans “put together came in at roughly 230 pages instead of Pelosi’s 1,990″
    this whole business about how long a bill is absurd, its the job of lawmakers to get comprehensive health care solutions done, that’s why democrats were elected in 2008. Its Congressman’s job to read and write and understand law and bills not the job of the public at large to understand what a law is.
    It’s the peoples job to evaluate what they get and make a decision to elect representatives on their behalf if you had taken civics you would know that.

    you say:
    “during the dozen years in which the House of Representatives was under Republican Party control, the average budget deficit was roughly $104 billion”

    while you also say:
    “Furthermore, those useless tax cuts for the rich gave the United States the strongest economy it had in its existence”

    Jeff I know you are studying law but you surely know that famous economics equation

    C+I+G+X-M= GDP

    at a time of economic boom government needs to cut spending so that inflationary pressure will not be built up.
    why did the republicans have a deficit in this period of boom?
    because they are extremely incompetent I say

    Democrats have the right and the obligation to spend lots by the stimulus act, even if it causes a deficit. once again
    C+I+G+X-M= GDP
    recession means consumers spend less and business invests less, less exports so who can plug the dam and kick start the economy again? only spender in the economy left is government so it should spend lots during a recession.
    Thats economics 101 brother

  10. Shadow jobs says:

    Does spending stimulus on Democratic elections help?

  11. Bro! says:

    “Thats economics 101 brother”

    Jeff, you didn’t tell us you had a Canadian brother.

  12. Jeff Schreiber says:


    Maybe that’s why I like Canadian beer as much as I do. Not to mention hockey. Maybe I do have a Canadian brother, eh?

    Maybe you’re right, you hoser.


  13. The math path says:


    Paraphrase, let the grandkids pay for this mess

    How about B = I
    budget what you have coming in

  14. Ugly is as ugly does says:

    “OMG look at Bush’s power base we got wealthy corporate interests funding him,”

    We could only wish to have George Soros (once again, an unattractive one) funding us.

    Hey Buyon, why don’t you ‘moveon’?

  15. John Buyon says:

    @ Jeff do you understand why I’m frustrated with this site
    there are like 4 people with a brain who comment
    you, randy, dee, blackie
    everyone else is just a joker who wants to get in some stupid one liner.

    ” our kids are paying for our debts”
    this is misguided and a feel good notion
    whenever the government borrows money it isn’t the children who is the people who lend money presently who have to forgo current consumption for future savings.
    our kids are most likely going to be receiving the principal and the interest of the treasury bills, paid by the government.

    Budget = Income
    I didn’t see any tea partiers protesting bush deficits at a time when we were in an economic boom and deficits and large government spending were unjustified. But as soon as a democrat comes in to spend lots when an economy is failing as is common economic knowledge, and is completely justified,
    all these hillbillies want to throw a revolution.

    @ Ugly is as ugly does says:
    are you actually retarded, you think rich people like the democrats?
    do you want to know who supports Bush 2000 campaign?

    Bank of America $8.3m
    AT&T $8m
    Verizon $5.5m
    United Parcel Services $4.7m
    Altria $4.6
    Microsoft $4.2m
    Citigroup $3.7m
    FedEx Corp. $3.6m
    General Electric $3m
    Anheuser Busch $3m GlaxoSmithKline $2.8
    Exxon Mobil $2.8m
    Chevron Corp $2.6m
    BMS $1.8m
    Time Warner $1.8m
    General Motors $1.6m
    American Airlines $1.4m
    Disney $1.2m
    Alticor (Amway) $0.7m
    BP $0.7m


    ERNST & YOUNG ($130,625)
    CITIGROUP ($99,500)
    VIACOM ($94,675)
    GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO. ($86,750)
    TIME/WARNER ($73,525)
    BELLSOUTH ($71,750)
    PATTON BOGGS ($40,750)
    ANHEUSER-BUSCH ($37,000)

    Soros is a great man who is virtuous enough to give money against his own interests because he knows life is more than just profits for the rich and high stock prices.

  16. Oh Canhedump says:

    “it is the people who lend money presently who have to forgo current consumption for future savings.”

    You’re a real to brain to yank the Chinese’ chain.
    …..hey, that rhymes….

  17. Oh Canhedump says:

    People appreciate my one liners, to your 700 liners.
    I was a programmer for 32 years, learned to do more with fewer lines.
    We don’t really need to expound on the contributing editors, and I know, like you should know, you ain’t gonna change any minds.
    I can express my anger, and or agreement, with a slight bit of sarcasm in just one frickin line, hoser.

  18. Long John says:

    Someone has a Soros crush. Obama is gonna be jealous. You two timer.

  19. Here kitty kitty says:

    People are free to give money to whom will be BEST for our country (2000).
    Picture in your mind a weak-willed response on 9/11 by Al Gore.

  20. CG DDG Ticonderoga Arleigh Burke says:

    Last time I checked, when I was writing fire control software for AEGIS, I wasn’t retarded. I will go get rechecked for the Canadian.

  21. John Feeny says:

    You know what people…..all John is doing is trying to incite so that the radical progressives can point fingers, which is precisely what they’re best at and all that they have, really, in the end. John is just an angry guy who never got his way with certain people in his life and is now seeking some form of abstract retribution. When all is said and done, it’s actually kind of sad.

    John, if you’d like to try to paint me as “angry”, have at it. My dinner will still taste the same tonight. I will never block your comments, but you will certainly not hear from me again.

  22. Dee says:

    John Buyon, thank you for saying that I have a brain. I’m glad that all my years of schooling and all that I have read and learned have not gone to waste.

  23. Randy Wills says:

    Although John Buyon has called me a few bad names, the worst being “a Christian fascist”, I actually care about what he says. If we don’t try our best to understand the issues from the perspective of both the left and the right, and treat each other with respect rather than vitriol, we’ll never bring this country together again. That may not make much difference in my lifetime – the shadows are very long – but it’s vitally important for the sake of my progeny.

    Stop and ask yourself “What is the logical conclusion of the path we’re on?” Philosophically, we have lost all touch with each other and no longer have any point of convergence where we can agree and start to rebuild a cohesive society. First, separation, then demonstrations, then riots, then physical encounters, then civil war. Mind how you feel about those with whom you disagree.

    The term “Battleground States” won’t be an election term any more, but something much more violent.


  24. Anonymous says:


  25. Anonymous says:

    How does one ‘converge’ with socialism, anti-capitalism, and downright marxism…. not to mention the hideousness of abortion, partial birth abortion and ideologies of even aborting years into a life. The internet a public utility?, come on. CO2 a pollutant? come on. Bailouts? come on. Windmills? come on. We’re becoming like Mr Buyon’s favorite country of citizenship, Canada.

    The pain of a reboot often feels real good shortly after completing it. If only America had been a Mac instead of a PC.

  26. Randy Wills says:

    “Anonymous @4:04 PM”

    So, I guess what you are saying is that there is no hope for anything more than a 49.9%/50.1% split in American politics and the constant verbal and political warfare between the left and the right, or are you saying “let’s just get it on and have a real war?”.

    I don’t buy it, although if there are enough persons with an attitude like yours, it may happen that way.

    I prefer to believe that if we can agree to search for the point at which we can “converge” on fundamental beliefs, we can then move the issues forward, one at a time. Maybe the desire and integrity required to do this no longer exists, but if we don’t, we will “Balkanize” America to the detriment of everyone.

    And BTW, not all, or perhaps even many, liberals are “Communists, Marxist, and Socialists”. Painting with a broad brush is a bad idea, unless all that you want is bloody conflict.


  27. Anonymous says:

    Just saying, how do you converge away freedom, morality and common sense?

  28. Randy Wills says:

    “Anonymous @ 9:29 PM”:

    I think that I’m not saying what I mean to say, which starts with the question “Is there a point (or a document such as the Constitution and/or the Scriptures) at which we can agree as the starting point of a discussion of where we’ve gone wrong in this country. My fear is that there is no point of convergence of moral values or political philosophy, but that question must be addressed before we decide what our strategy should be to “restore” America rather than “fundamentally transforming” it.

    I am by no means advocating compromising the freedoms or morality represented by those documents, so, if we can’t agree at that level, then, obviously, there is no hope of changing the diverging paths of the “right” and the “left”, but at least I would like to get that question answered before we become a totally fractured society.

    This is important because the issue facing us is whether or not we remain a country based on those documents or do we, by majority vote, become something else, that “something else” being the very thing that countless thousands of men and women have giving their lives to keep this nation from becoming. If that does happen by a majority vote of the population, it will be the equivalent of having lost WWII and the Cold War with the Soviet Union, in terms of the traditional concept of what it means to be an American.


  29. John Parker, Capt says:

    “Stand your ground. Don’t fire unless fired upon, but if they mean to have a war, let it begin here.”

  30. Rev Wright says:

    They don’t care for either The Constitution, nor The Scriptures.
    Where does THAT leave you/us, Randy?

    Hell Obama said he can’t even figure out iPods, iPads, Xboxes and Playstations. How is he going to grasp and appreciate those two great documents?

  31. Anonymous says:

    “And BTW, not all, or perhaps even many, liberals are “Communists, Marxist, and Socialists”.

    just the ones in power.

  32. John Feeny says:

    Parker -
    I love that rock. I’m gonna need a cigarette if you keep throwing out stuff like that.

    and I’ve never smoked.

  33. Randy Wills says:

    “RevWright” @ 10:02 AM:

    “Where does that leave you/us, Randy?”

    With no good choices, I’m afraid. If that is true for the majority of the population, then there are only two; surrender or fight, neither of which will leave the country, as we have known it in the past, standing.

    “Anonymous” @ 10:23 AM:

    That would appear to be the case. I suspect that we are at the culmination of a plan laid long ago, starting with the take-over of the education system, first at the universities where “diversity” and “freedom of speech” are the operative terms, and then the public school system, K-12.

    I just want people to know what the reality of our situation is, and it’s not for the faint-hearted because, if we can’t find a point at which we can engage in a productive dialog, it means either capitulation or confrontation. That’s why I continue to try to establish a dialog with those who oppose my views (Constitutional law and Judeo/Christian values) before either of the above coices becomes “cast in concrete”.


  34. Capt Parker says:

    Welcome to my platoon.

  35. Anonymous says:

    “That’s why I continue to try to establish a dialog with those who oppose my views.”

    The Germans wanted to ‘dialog’ at Bastogne. You know our reply. Four letters.

  36. Randy Wills says:

    To “Anonymous” @ 7:36 PM:

    No, the Germans did not want to “dialog” at the Bastogne. They wanted the U.S. troops to surrender, unconditionally, and threatened to annihilate them if they refused. It was in response to this “offer” that General McAullife, commander of the 101st replied; “To the German Commander, “Nuts”. Big difference.

    Another small detail that you might want to consider is that 19,000 U.S. men and five times that number of German troops died in the Battle of the Bulge, just doing what their country asked them to do – on both sides of the line.

    So, knock off the schoolyard bravado until you’ve puked your guts out over the dead and mangled bodies of your fellow human beings.


  37. Anonymous says:

    I’m ready.

  38. Anonymous says:

    Only one thing worse. Puking your guts out over a country lost.

  39. Anonymous says:

    And I really don’t need a Google lecture on the Bulge. My dad who I am caring for was there as a 1st Lt. We have talked endlessly about it and I pass a Silver Star, Bronze Star and Purple Heart each time I walk down the hallway here. THAT is why I am angry. What we have is being wasted and pissed away. I am well aware of the sacrifices. You yourself in posts above realize we’re at an impasse, so lighten up. My choice is what it is. And I haven’t seen a ‘schoolyard’ in 40 years. Maybe that’s why I still love the ‘real’ America.

  40. Randy Wills says:

    Anonymous @ 7:47 am:

    Sorry (about the “Google lecture”, which actually wasn’t from Google, but I suppose you could find the same information from any number of sources. And I meant no disrespect, but I just assumed from your comment that you might not be aware of what actually transpired at Bastogne. I had two close family members there in the 101st and my hat goes off to your father. He, like all of the others who were there – the survivors and the casualties alike – are true heros, men among men, and deserve our highest esteem.

    My point is that a better analogy to the present conditions in the U.S. would be the days leading up to the Civil War, and I just don’t want to be provoked into tragic conflict without first using all of the persuasive power we can muster to change the direction of our country. It is not the politicians or the current administration that I am concerned about (or whom I think would be open to “dialog”); it is my neighbors, and yes, some of my friends, who see our situation differently than we do, that I am concerned about. It is these folks who I refer to when I say “dialog”. These people are NOT my enemies, but they helped to elect those who are, and therefore, if won over by reason and fact, they may help us regain our nation without further animosity and disruption. If we are not able to do this, the price will be incalculable.

    Respectfully, Randy

Speak Your Mind