published Saturday, August 28th, 2010

The Lincoln Memorial

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

166
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
Tax_Payer said...

I don't waste my time listening to heathens like Glenn Beck; apparently, there are many people that do!

August 28, 2010 at 12:35 a.m.
frettfull said...

Another good 'un by CB.

August 28, 2010 at 1:06 a.m.
acerigger said...

Hilarious!! Thanx Clay,hope this one goes viral.

August 28, 2010 at 3:52 a.m.
matrixbandit said...

Given the title, I was just expecting Abe doing a classic facepalm.. this was much better!

August 28, 2010 at 7:50 a.m.
rolando said...

Seeing as how "Honest Abe" completely subjugated and destroyed another nation by violent civil war and DIRECTLY caused the death of more Americans than in all its other wars from the Revolution to Vietnam, he should have been cowering (in shame) from the beginning. [At least 618,000 Americans died in the Civil War; some experts say the toll reached 700,000.]

Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin plan nothing of the sort -- quite the opposite, actually. The rally is billed as "a celebration of the military, patriotism and American heritage."

What really hits Clay and others here right in the gonads are the six most hated, frightening words to any Progressive -- "Glenn Beck", "Sarah Palin", and "TEA Party".

August 28, 2010 at 8:12 a.m.
hambone said...

"celebration of the military, patriotizm and American heritage"

More like a celebration of Glenn Beck's and Sarah Palin's egos. It appears that Glenn Beck is on the verge of becoming a televangilist. Just another false profit. (key word profit)

August 28, 2010 at 8:26 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

I am hoping for a Palin/Bachmann ticket in 2012 with Beck as campaign manager. That would be the pinnacle of our nation's growing insanity, and a sight to behold.

August 28, 2010 at 8:28 a.m.
woody said...

Rolando, since Abe Lincoln was the last person to represent the Republican Party with honesty and common sense, it's not hard to understand how some of today's ilk could berate him for what they don't have and never will.

Remember.."...either learn from history or be prepared to repeat it...."

Oh, and by the way, your 'Tea Party' has little if anything in common with "The Tea Party."

It's Saturday, let's have some fun, Woody

August 28, 2010 at 8:44 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Thanks, rolando, for the revisionist history that Lincoln was solely responsible for the Civil War. The Confederate states were the VICTIMS.

As for the toon, I think Clay nailed it. Beck and the rest of the howling hounds only celebrate one thing: Fear.

August 28, 2010 at 8:45 a.m.
OllieH said...

Terrific cartoon, Clay! I can't wait to watch the circus in another thirty minutes.

I would debate rolando on the merits of our 16th president, but seeing that he followed his denunciation of Lincoln with praise for the likes of Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin, he's probably done more to discredit his views than I ever could.

August 28, 2010 at 9:23 a.m.
woody said...

Hey! Rolando! I forgot something (not really, but I thought I'd get a second poke in before I left for the day).

For your edification, Abe's not huddled up cringing, he pulled his legs up because he knew 'it' was going to get deep before the day was over.

Lol, as some say, Woody

August 28, 2010 at 9:24 a.m.
toonfan said...

Nice, Clay!

August 28, 2010 at 9:27 a.m.
bret said...

I have a dream ..... that I stab Glenn Beck in the eye.

August 28, 2010 at 9:28 a.m.
EaTn said...

President Lincoln is probably dazed with amazement on how, after a hundred fifty years, the same prejudices that he and many died to change in this country are still as prevalent as ever.

August 28, 2010 at 9:35 a.m.
rolando said...

And those are, EaTn?

Please don't cite racism -- our White House is loaded with it.

State's Rights? Essentially non-existent today -- Lincoln and the "common welfare" and "commerce" clauses have done away with those.

Slavery? Now THERE is one still in full effect -- just a bit different then it was in Abe's time. It now includes all tax-payers and their children...illegal aliens excluded since they take more than they pay.

August 28, 2010 at 10:02 a.m.
rolando said...

"What really hits Clay and others here right in the gonads are the six most hated, frightening words to any Progressive -- "Glenn Beck", "Sarah Palin", and "TEA Party"."

The above entries -- with a couple exceptions -- gives solid credence to my statement...


Incidentally, the TEA Party has little to do with the Boston Tea Party, as detractors well know -- it is symbolic in name, referring to the people's objections to autocratic, arrogant, and aloof disregard for their welfare in favor of the elite...and the action taken to show that displeasure.

We ARE still well-armed out here and charged with the duty to throw off the bonds that tie us to despotic rule...

August 28, 2010 at 10:10 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

"Slavery? Now THERE is one still in full effect -- just a bit different then it was in Abe's time. It now includes all tax-payers and their children...illegal aliens excluded since they take more than they pay."

rolando, equating the brutal, demeaning, murderous institution of slavery with paying taxes (at the low US rates compared to other developed countries) shows just how far you have fallen into the abyss.

August 28, 2010 at 10:13 a.m.
ITguy said...

The sad truth is the millions of people watch Glenn Beck and believe his every word. Glenn is an opportunistic entertainer. He is not a journalist. Like Rush Lamebaugh, he spreads misinformation and lies. Check out this link:

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/25/building-a-nation-of-know-nothings/

August 28, 2010 at 10:16 a.m.
rolando said...

Nowhere in my post does it say anything about Lincoln being "SOLELY" to blame for the civil war dead. I said he was DIRECTLY responsible -- and he was.

He was not the almighty hero the winners have painted him to be...he was simply a man trying his best to hold the country together, right or wrong.

"A generation which ignores history has no past and no future." --The Notebook of Lazarus Long.

According to history and the interpretation of what "war criminal" means, today as well as in the mid-1800s, Lincoln, Sherman, and Grant were definitely war criminals -- they indiscriminately and specifically targeted civilians, their property, their homes, their cities, and their lands for total destruction regardless of whether any military members or battlefield works existed. They seized lands over which they had no legal right and gave it to their favorites, etc ad infinitum.

With the government's current policy of seizing private property under eminent domain and then giving it to others [the elite], it is still continuing today.

August 28, 2010 at 10:26 a.m.
rolando said...

Oh yeah, blackie, I never said the CSA were victims either...although the residents certainly weren't helped recover by a vindictive North after the dust settled... Even the freed slaves were mistreated by the North -- a North that wanted nothing whatsoever to do with those they derogatorily referred to as "darkies"...they simply left them alone to adapt or die. They were definitely "victims" of the North.

August 28, 2010 at 10:35 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Northerners don't think about the Civil War very much. Schools that still teach history might spend an afternoon covering the salient dates and events.

In the South, however, the Confederacy is a birthright.

I had a lot of southern employees who could recite chapter and verse specific battles, strategies, and victorious scenarios.

No comment. I just find the social impact of losing a war both amusing and fascinating.

August 28, 2010 at 10:41 a.m.
blackwater48 said...

Maybe Lincon's plan at reconstruction was disrupted when Booth killed him.

August 28, 2010 at 10:43 a.m.
rolando said...

"Opportunistic Entertainer", huh? Yeah, right. We even have one heading up the WH.


Working 5 1/2 months of the year just to pay those fed and state income taxes is hardly a "low rate", lkeith. Yes, that is working for nothing through mid-May...year in, year out. Or are you one of the favored elite who pay little to no taxes?

And who cares what other oppressed peoples pay? That's why they all want to move here.

August 28, 2010 at 10:44 a.m.
rolando said...

By the way, lkeith, slaves represented a heavy investment. Only a fool would beat a horse or mule [for instance not comparison] to death or otherwise seriously mistreat them.

Nor would they mutilate a woman or stone her to death

August 28, 2010 at 10:49 a.m.
hambone said...

One good thing about Rolando's posts, at least they are not as long as the Big Yellow Bird's.

August 28, 2010 at 10:50 a.m.
hambone said...

But just as boring!!

August 28, 2010 at 10:52 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

First, I don't see many people from Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, UK, Germany desperate to move here, and they pay some of the highest taxes in the world.

Second, I am in one of the highest tax brackets, and I don't get taxed at 50%. Not even close. Where do you get such garbage? And no, I don't hide my income in offshore bank accounts.

Of course, don't let facts get in the way of your opinion, rolando.

August 28, 2010 at 10:53 a.m.
xsiveporsche said...

Why don't all of you play nice. That is what makes this country so great is that we can agee to disagree and we can speak about it too. Everyone is right and everyone one is wrong, it just depends on who's eye you are looking through.

August 28, 2010 at 10:56 a.m.
Hoppergrasser said...

"I don't waste my time listening to heathens like Glenn Beck; apparently, there are many people that do."!

Right-On ! ¡ !

August 28, 2010 at 11:01 a.m.
miraweb said...

Funny how the Tea Partiers are always looking for their fellow citizens to be "afraid" of them.

I can be afraid of terrorist attacks, worldwide recessions, and hurricanes, though I think as a country we are usually at our best, not our worst, when things are really tough.

Afraid of Sarah the Quitter and Blackboard Boy?

No, not really.

August 28, 2010 at 11:21 a.m.
Duford said...

Despite what you learned in high school, Lincoln was a tyrant of magnanimous proportions.

He jailed Northern objectors against the war, he denied habeas corpus, and, preferred that blacks be sent back to Africa.

Moreover, he drove the final stake into the hearts of the Founders' vision of decentralization. And for it, we bare a tyrannical Federal government that has removed much of its checks and balances the States provided.

If you are a Tea Partier, conservative, or independent, and decry the Federal Government's shoring up of power, then stand against Lincoln. I suggest reading "The Real Lincoln" by Thomas DiLorenzo.

August 28, 2010 at 11:49 a.m.
EaTn said...

One great granddad spent two years starving in a Yankee prison and another spent a year starving in the Confederate prison at Andersonville. After the war some of their kids married into opposite sides so I assume there was some "forgive and forget". Over a century later maybe we should too.

August 28, 2010 at 12:25 p.m.
FM_33 said...

I don't waste my time listening to heathens like Glenn Beck; apparently, there are many people that do! Username: Tax_Payer | On: August 28, 2010 at 12:35 a.m.


I bet you wish you was making the money that Glen Beck is making now.

August 28, 2010 at 12:47 p.m.
FM_33 said...

What really hits Clay and others here right in the gonads are the six most hated, frightening words to any Progressive -- "Glenn Beck", "Sarah Palin", and "TEA Party". Username: rolando | On: August 28, 2010 at 8:12 a.m.


Rolando you hit the nail on the head but you forgot two other people that the progressive fear.

Almighty God & His son the Lord Jesus Christ

August 28, 2010 at 12:50 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

"With the government's current policy of seizing private property under eminent domain and then giving it to others [the elite], it is still continuing today".

Username: rolando | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:26 a.m

I assume you are aware of the Fifth Amendment?

What "current policy" of the governments" are you referring to?

I assume you know each individual state rules on eminent domain disputes with the guidance of the Fifth Amendment which requires just compensation.

There is nothing "current" about eminent domain and your lame attempt to attach it this administration shows your ignorance of the issue.

August 28, 2010 at 12:52 p.m.
FM_33 said...

"celebration of the military, patriotizm and American heritage"

More like a celebration of Glenn Beck's and Sarah Palin's egos. It appears that Glenn Beck is on the verge of becoming a televangilist. Just another false profit. (key word profit) Username: hambone | On: August 28, 2010 at 8:26 a.m.


Thank God you don't run National Security because if you did we would alll be dead right now because of you lack of insight about Homeland Security.

August 28, 2010 at 12:54 p.m.
FM_33 said...

First, I don't see many people from Sweden, Norway, Finland, Denmark, UK, Germany desperate to move here, and they pay some of the highest taxes in the world. Username: lkeithlu | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:53 a.m.


This comment makes me more then ever wont to leave the US for good.

Plus the women are better looking over there anyway.

August 28, 2010 at 12:58 p.m.
FM_33 said...

I am hoping for a Palin/Bachmann ticket in 2012 with Beck as campaign manager. That would be the pinnacle of our nation's growing insanity, and a sight to behold. Username: lkeithlu | On: August 28, 2010 at 8:28 a.m.


Palin / Ted Nugent 2012

  • The Mallard Duck Election *
August 28, 2010 at 1 p.m.
FM_33 said...

If you are a Tea Partier, conservative, or independent, and decry the Federal Government's shoring up of power, then stand against Lincoln. I suggest reading "The Real Lincoln" by Thomas DiLorenzo. Username: Duford | On: August 28, 2010 at 11:49 a.m.


Duford that book was written by a progressive left goon who hates anybody that takes a moderate postion and is against the * New Left * point of view or there rotten ass agenda for the future of this country.

The only thing that you should do with that book is use it for some back up toilet paper when your roll runs out at the crib.

August 28, 2010 at 1:07 p.m.
ITguy said...

Duford, Had the war for states rights been won by the South, this nation would have been much worse off than it is today. We can only speculate what would have happened, but at worst case, there would be a multitude of independent nations on this continent, and it is likely that Hitler would have won the war in Europe because the United States of America would not have existed.

Without a strong federal government, the South would still be segregated. Schools would be 'separate but equal' and you would have to pass a literacy test to vote.

The tyrannical government that you detest insures that the rights of minority citizens are protected. I am glad that Lincoln won the war.

August 28, 2010 at 1:08 p.m.
FM_33 said...

And who cares what other oppressed peoples pay? That's why they all want to move here. Username: rolando | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:44 a.m.


Ya it's to many of them coming over here and that is why my ass wonts to move out !

Our jobs are being given to people that was not even born here and they expect us to be running around here with a damn smile on our faces all the time.

I will not live on my knees for nobody !

Weather they be in this country or from somewhere else taking my damn job away from me.

America better start standing up and stop punking the f**k out !

August 28, 2010 at 1:15 p.m.
FM_33 said...

I am glad that Lincoln won the war. Username: ITguy | On: August 28, 2010 at 1:08 p.m.


Because he was drunk on a half pint of whiskey and raising hell.

August 28, 2010 at 1:17 p.m.
FM_33 said...

No comment. I just find the social impact of losing a war both amusing and fascinating. Username: blackwater48 | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:41 a.m.


Until you're fighting in one yourself and it's your side that lost the whole damn thing.

Now how would you feel if that was you and you seen the other side taking all of your s**t and even just for kick's they was to rape and beat you wife to death.

Then you would not think that that was so fascinating as you stated in that post.

August 28, 2010 at 1:24 p.m.
ITguy said...

FM_33

If you are going to take over from Dewey as the village idiot, please learn proper grammar and use the spell check. Your posts are hard enough to understand as it is without having to translate into English.

August 28, 2010 at 1:27 p.m.
FM_33 said...

The sad truth is the millions of people watch Glenn Beck and believe his every word. Username: ITguy | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:16 a.m.


Only a certain % of the mass herd will believe every word that Beck says.

I hope you're not one of them !

August 28, 2010 at 1:29 p.m.
FM_33 said...

FM_33

If you are going to take over from Dewey as the village idiot, please learn proper grammar and use the spell check. Your posts are hard enough to understand as it is without having to translate into English. Username: ITguy | On: August 28, 2010 at 1:27 p.m.


Ok Grand Titan ITguy !

August 28, 2010 at 1:33 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Your posts are hard enough to understand as it is without having to translate into English. Username: ITguy | On: August 28, 2010 at 1:27 p.m.


If you'tre hard line progressive goon that does not like the truth about your communist masters that control your every move as you try to destroy this country with your Satanic agenda.

August 28, 2010 at 1:40 p.m.
rolando said...

"Why don't all of you play nice."

I started to, xsive, but got sidetracked into answering a trash-post against my better judgment. Hard to teach that particular dog a new trick...

August 28, 2010 at 2:18 p.m.
acerigger said...

FM,Sir,have you been drinking?

August 28, 2010 at 2:22 p.m.
eeeeeek said...

Me.... fear the character all mighty child raping, mass murdering a$$ and it's ba$tard son?

Nope!

I am bit leary of those who created their versions of those characters though.

August 28, 2010 at 2:25 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

Ik,

"I am in one of the highest tax brackets, and I don't get taxed at 50%."

If you are indeed in one of those highest tax brackets, take some time one day and add up all the taxes of any sort that you pay. Include fed income tax, local sales tax, (state income tax if you were not in TN), automobile taxes, property taxes, gasoline taxes, telephone surcharges(taxes), liquor taxes(if you drink), tobacco taxes(if you smoke or chew-I kid), airfare surcharges(taxes), not to mention the increase cost associated with government interference distorting the free market. I think you'll probably end up some where near that 50% mark. I know I am, and I'm NOT in one of those higher brackets(at the moment).

A person can't take a leak (sewer fees) or enjoy a cool summer rain (storm water fees) with out forking over cash to some government entity or another.


Rolando,

I agree with your sentiment re Lincoln, to a certain extent, in that the various states freely entered into a partnership with each other to form the federal government to serve their best interests. When some of those states decided that their interests were not being served, they decided to dissolve their interest in said partnership. Lincoln forced them to stay on at the point of a cannon. Shameful really. Sounds a lot like slavery to me. I wonder what would happen if the U.N. started acting the same way.

August 28, 2010 at 2:48 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Username: rolando | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:49 a.m.

"By the way, lkeith, slaves represented a heavy investment. Only a fool would beat a horse or mule [for instance not comparison] to death or otherwise seriously mistreat them".

Ahh yes, the benevolent slave owner. How quaint. Of course all slaves knew that disobedience, running away, etc. could and did result in a beating, mutilation, selling, etc. Just the threat of this kept most slaves from disobedience and removed the need of slave owners to do harm to their "investment".

Of course sometimes the slave owners were also forced to maximize their "investment" by doing things like selling the children of their slaves to other slave owners for a profit.

But hey, these God fearing slave owners had the Bible to tell them slavery was ok, right?

August 28, 2010 at 2:49 p.m.
rolando said...

I cannot agree, EaTn. We should never forget any of our history; it makes for good [and bad] examples and things to avoid. Forgive? Of course; at least we can...

ALL of my grandparents were immigrants from Germany, Norway, England, and Spain. They arrived circa the Civil War to escape excessive taxation, persecution, death, etc. The only ones who spoke English upon arrival were the English ones. None fought in the war -- too busy farming.

Europeans are still arriving today...but for business reasons aka The Rape Of The West.

I bet the Germans don't think too much about the WW2 Jews and Poles...but they think a whole lot about them. Funny how it works that way -- it has nothing to do with winners/losers but with treatment.

But I digress...a shortcoming of mine.

August 28, 2010 at 2:54 p.m.
Tax_Payer said...

ITguy Says:

FM_33

If you are going to take over from Dewey as the village idiot, please learn proper grammar and use the spell check. Your posts are hard enough to understand as it is without having to translate into English.


I say FM_33 is: as stupid is as stupid does, which is trolling.

August 28, 2010 at 3:02 p.m.
rolando said...

I have often wondered whether Booth was an undercover Northern anti-Lincoln sympathizer rather than a Southern one, blackie. He certainly DID destroy Lincoln's reconstruction plan -- an act that put the deadly anti-South, pro-Northern business Congressmen in the catbird seat. They even impeached Johnson because he had the temerity to disagree with them.

I am not a Southerner by birth but by God's grace, BTW. I was born and raised in SoCal and received a typical Calif second-rate education there. I got disgusted and left in my second year as an EE undergrad. Spending 20-odd years overseas on military duty [with my family] gives one a real-world education unmatched here. History is my passion; ancient history is my favorite. The Civil War has become another.

August 28, 2010 at 3:05 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Scotty, there is no comparison. Sales taxes on items increase with the value of the item: if I can afford a Lexus I can certainly afford the tax (though I always choose a cheap car) I do live in TN, pay no state income tax, and my property taxes are quite reasonable, given the services I receive. The sewer bills I pay are connected to the water I use and go to a local utility, which uses the money to operate (a little high, but there is a historical reason for that) I am not "rich" by hollywood standards, but I want for nothing. Even if I counted food and gas tax, I still am not taxed at near 50%.

My relatives in Europe, however, pay >75% in income taxes, and their fuel taxes are 20X what they are here.

All this aside, to compare taxation (and yes, which representation, because we vote) to slavery is appalling. Rolando's further comments about how slaves are treated by kind "massahs" is insulting and racist. As if somehow the slaves preferred to be owned like cattle rather than have full recognition and rights as human beings. Disgusting.

August 28, 2010 at 3:18 p.m.
rolando said...

ScottyM: Not to lecture [yet another failing of mine], but it was a bit more than a few states withdrawing because their needs were not being met -- although that sure nails it.

Basically, the North was doing to the South what the English King did to his colonies. In short, the South could not ship its produce/cotton, etc directly overseas without paying Northern-imposed export duties first.

It had to sell all its goods to the Northern exporters [at their prices] for very profitable European sale.

It had to import all machinery from the North -- it had no manufacturing to amount to anything.

So I guess that could be a failure to meet its needs; but that's like saying the yellow-fever mosquito caused sickness.

Lincoln folded to the Northern business interests [willingly, perhaps] and "let slip the dogs of war". The hot-headed NoCarolinians gave him his excuse.

August 28, 2010 at 3:20 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

ScottyM and Rolando, I realize you both are attempting to be apologists for the South's endorsement of slavery and their "right" to succession.

The South was guilty of treason, guilty of attacking our nation. That aside, let me give an analogy you might better understand.

I am sure you both supported the Iraq war. After the original excuse of WMD's was debunked the rallying cry by conservatives was we were right to go in and end this "brutal regime" which was persecuting and killing others not of their beliefs, culture, etc. In other words, it was, according to the Bush administration, our duty to end this repression and allow freedom to all citizens of Iraq through democracy.

I am sure you both supported this revised version of why we were in Iraq.

So why would you object to our nation doing what it could to prevent the furtherance of atrocities against blacks such as ownership, beatings, and lynchings prior to the Civil War?

It was the duty of our nation to suppress treason and stop the heinous institution of slavery. Equality and freedom are at the very heart of democracy.

Sorry if that offends people like yourselves.

August 28, 2010 at 3:26 p.m.
rolando said...

Yet two more ill-educated products of our schools and universities speak out. Read your history, ignorant ones.

For that matter, look around.

Check out the White House and the Department of "Justice" to see racism at work.

I said nothing whatsoever here in favor of slavery...slaves were chattel [as were women -- white women].

Only a fool would mistreat either, just as only a fool would destroy his/her carriage because an axle broke.

But all that has changed; now the taxpayers [and their children] unwillingly support the lazy and the willfully indigent.

August 28, 2010 at 3:32 p.m.
rolando said...

One final...slavery, at the time, was not only legal it was constitutional.

"...The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort." -- From The Notebooks Of Lazarus Long.

August 28, 2010 at 3:40 p.m.
woody said...

I must admit, I have read a few comments, up to this point, that made me 'cringe' just a bit. However, only one made me feel as though I needed to get back on here and make one last stand.

FM_33, it was your earlier statement to another that 'got my goat'. "...you forgot two other people that the progressive fear... Almighty God & His son the Lord Jesus Christ

While I may not speak for "Progressives" everywhere, this (cautionary)Progressive (in other words I do believe in looking before I leap and I always engage my brain before I put my mouth in gear)is sick and tired of hearing that I don't have a "Relationship with God" just because of how I may or may not vote.

Best make sure you have not "...built on weak and shifting sand..." lest your words place you on a fast track to the Devil's playground.

I'm through preaching now, Woody

August 28, 2010 at 4:05 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Rolando: "I have often wondered whether Booth was an undercover Northern anti-Lincoln sympathizer rather than a Southern one..."

That's an incredible stretch.

Booth served in the Virginia militia which captured John Brown at Harper's Ferry. His commanding officer was Robert E. Lee.

Booth was an acclaimed actor and performed Shakespeare on endless Northern tours throughout the War. He used part of his earnings to buy badly needed medical supplies and had them smuggled across the border to Confederate hospitals.

He originally planned to capture Lincoln and exchange him for Rebel prisoners of war. It would both demoralize the Union and reinforce the decimated CSA Army. Lee surrendered before he could execute the plan so he executed Lincoln instead.

Yeah, the whole thing smacks of "double agent."

August 28, 2010 at 4:50 p.m.
blackwater48 said...

Dear FM_33,

I need you to focus. Listen to that one voice amid the cranial cacophony chanting, "Leave America. Move to another country. The U.S. is run by a nazi socialist communist racist masonic foreign muslim."

Please. I'm asking you nicely. Just go.

If your heart ain't in it, as the saying goes, get your ass out.

(I sincerely apologize if I offended anyone with my language. I honestly couldn't think of another word with the same impact. Again, sorry.)

August 28, 2010 at 4:56 p.m.
SCOTTYM said...

Ik,

It isn't about whether you can "afford" the taxes or not. It's about the fact that you have to work to earn money (I assume), and that time spent working is a portion of the finite amount time you have to enjoy this life and be free to do as you please. By taking more of your money through excessive taxes, the government is taking more of your life and your freedom than is required to satisfy the Constitutional requirements of the government. It is a form of slavery, most assuredly so when the government is wasting the money and/or giving it to others who are perfectly capable of supporting themselves. Anyone who feels they should pay more is welcome to do so as the local government, the state government, and the IRS will gladly accept your check. Just don't volunteer the rest of us to do the same.

It's my money. I worked for it. I want to keep as much of it as possible to be spent on things I choose to spend it on. Many of those thing benefit society much more than, for example, free telephones for those who also receive food stamps and free housing. Why should they get to sit on their butts in housing that I pay for, eating food I pay for, and talking on their cell phone that I pay for, while I work 70+ hours a week to furnish those things for myself and my family? It is indeed slavery, as I have no choice but to work for the benefit of others and if that isn't slavery, I'm not sure what is.


hd wrote,

"ScottyM and Rolando, I realize you both are attempting to be apologists for the South's endorsement of slavery and their "right" to succession."

Funny, but I don't remember doing anything of the sort regarding slavery. Perhaps your imagination is getting the better of you. I've constantly argued against the subjugation of all people to anyone's whims. See the above.

August 28, 2010 at 4:58 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Scotty, although I agree that welfare cheats should be identified and taken off the roll, and everyone, including progressives, want taxes to be used wisely, we have the power to elect people to positions where they must answer to us. That we haven't (in your and other's position) is our own fault. That's a huge separation from a master making all decisions, including reproduction, food, work, living, everything, for a slave without the slave having the power to choose for themselves. To equate taxation, whatever you deem as appropriate taxation (personally I like having fire, EMS, police, rescue squads, FAA, the FDA etc and am happy to pay out a little to get those) to slavery is morally outrageous.

You do have a choice, in a way. You can move to another country. A slave cannot. Norway provides conception to grave services gratis to its citizens, paid for taxes WAY higher than ours. You could instead live in a 3rd world country, even one with a quasi communist government (like Madagascar) which does not have the infrastructure to collect taxes. You can also live without any services in these countries.

People who cry "excessive taxation" could do more to make sure that their government is making the right choices with their money. They could also elect folks that will make sure that welfare programs help only those who deserve it, and in most cases for a prescribed time to get them on their feet again, not in perpetuity.

I won't beat a dead horse anymore as long as you or rolando stop resurrecting it. Taxation does not equal slavery.

August 28, 2010 at 5:12 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Scotty, when you say that "I've constantly argued against the subjugation of all people to anyone's whims", this is in direct contradiction to what you said On: August 28, 2010 at 2:48 p.m.

  • "When some of those states decided that their interests were not being served, they decided to dissolve their interest in said partnership". You condemned Lincoln for interfering with the South's "interests".

The South's "interests" were to continue the very thing you say you oppose, namely slavery. So you are saying you oppose "subjugation of all people to anyone's whims," but decry the effort by Lincoln to stop that very practice.

Funny, sounds like a contradiction to me. The only "slavery" I see you refer to is your supposed oppression to being taxed too much.

August 28, 2010 at 5:25 p.m.
Ironhorse said...

Abraham Lincoln = Tyrant, War Criminal and Murderer of innocent women and children. His generals executed entire families in ways that would even make Al Qaeda blush. And this piece of garbage is our president's "hero"? Wake up America. Its time to get up off that couch and defend your country!

August 28, 2010 at 5:29 p.m.
SeaSmokie59er said...

Beck was right about one thing, "American is about to change." God help us all!

August 28, 2010 at 6:14 p.m.
hambone said...

Man, this one has turned violent. I'll be back in the morning when some of you have sobered up.

August 28, 2010 at 6:46 p.m.
notlittletommy said...

Let's see: Glenn Beck rally praising the troops and America. Scary, huh, Clay? Yet the honorable Rev. Al Sharpton and his racists friends can march in protest of this event. I'm sure you and these idiots that idolize your fabulous work would have been front and center for the honorable Sharpton. Too bad anything associated with Patriotism or Christianity is shot down and mocked by you and the Left wing Times Free Press. Keep Little ol Tommy in the pocket. He fits just fine. I pity you all.

August 28, 2010 at 8:06 p.m.
rolando said...

Well, it turns out that Good Ole Abe is raising his feet and cowering in fear after all because over 500,000 people showed up for the Glenn Beck/Sarah Palin Rally.

That number, 1/2 million people, was the unfriendly MEDIA's estimate. Probably more like 3/4 million.

August 28, 2010 at 8:06 p.m.
rolando said...

And every one of them and their friends nationwide -- no, worldwide if Maobama and friends let the military vote -- can hardly wait for November to turn the rascals out.

If they are IN, they are OUT.

August 28, 2010 at 8:09 p.m.
notlittletommy said...

You know, Clay, the more I look at your cartoon, instead of Lincoln this could easily be you - exept for the hair. Yea, that's it. Sitting cowardly, in fear of those speaking love and honor in the name of God. If i were you, I'd be cowarding as well. Bless your little heart. Hope you learn something from today's rally. It reminds me of Obama saying he did not know anything about the Tea Party when the movement began. This was months after it began to grow and grow. The main stream media finally had to acknowledge the movement. And with today's peaceful rally, how can the media ignore what is happening? Americans have had it with this administration. To God be the Glory.

August 28, 2010 at 10:20 p.m.
alprova said...

Rolando wrote: "Seeing as how "Honest Abe" completely subjugated and destroyed another nation by violent civil war and DIRECTLY caused the death of more Americans than in all its other wars from the Revolution to Vietnam, he should have been cowering (in shame) from the beginning. [At least 618,000 Americans died in the Civil War; some experts say the toll reached 700,000.]"


You've totally lost it. Please, have the decency to give everyone a courtesy flush of your toilet and chase what ever existed of your credibility.


"Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin plan nothing of the sort -- quite the opposite, actually. The rally is billed as "a celebration of the military, patriotism and American heritage."..."


Of course they are, and Glenn Beck had no idea at all that the day coincided with MLK's "I Have A Dream" speech too.

Yes...everyone believes that one too.


"What really hits Clay and others here right in the gonads are the six most hated, frightening words to any Progressive -- "Glenn Beck", "Sarah Palin", and "TEA Party"..."


Who fears them? They have become the greatest source of humor since the Three Stooges.

August 29, 2010 at 1:06 a.m.
alprova said...

xcisiveporche wrote: "Why don't all of you play nice. That is what makes this country so great is that we can agee to disagree and we can speak about it too. Everyone is right and everyone one is wrong, it just depends on who's eye you are looking through.


If you want to spend your time being a fence sitter, by all means help yourself.

In the meantime, our nation is at stake. Everyone is not right and everyone is not wrong.

There is right and wrong and it deserves to be pointed out each and every time.

August 29, 2010 at 1:22 a.m.
alprova said...

Hotdiggity wrote: "It was the duty of our nation to suppress treason and stop the heinous institution of slavery. Equality and freedom are at the very heart of democracy.

Sorry if that offends people like yourselves."


I wouldn't be sorry one bit for offending them. Why not?

Because people like that are of the opinion that the Civil War in this country had nothing at all to do with the issue of slavery and everything to do with state's rights.

Never mind the simple fact that the reason that the southern states were attempting to resign from the Union was in fact, because the Government had abolished slavery, and by golly, no Yankee was gonna tell them what to do.

For anyone at all to sit in their computer chair and to blame President Abe Lincoln for doing what the vast majority of the people in this nation agree was the right thing to do, is among the more outlandish accusations ever laid in any forum across the country.

For them to further compare taxation issues to any act of an established definition of slavery is beyond all shame.

I am continuously amazed at what some people will defend and how they will totally attempt to rewrite history in their feeble minds, to what end, I will never understand.

These are indeed the people that the modern day Republican love. They know exactly how to tweak them, how to reach them, and how to exploit them in their effort to empower themselves for the benefit of a select few.

The sad thing is that due to their abject ignorance, our nation will continue to suffer for as long as there are people who just cannot stand back and look at things long enough to determine that they are nothing but putty in the hands of Republicans.

August 29, 2010 at 1:51 a.m.
alprova said...

Woody wrote: "While I may not speak for "Progressives" everywhere, this (cautionary)Progressive (in other words I do believe in looking before I leap and I always engage my brain before I put my mouth in gear)is sick and tired of hearing that I don't have a "Relationship with God" just because of how I may or may not vote."


You're absolutely right, Woody, and that is a point that will forever be lost by those who stand on what they think is the "right" side of things.

I'm going to take it a step farther, because I too am more than sick and tired of those kind of judgments.

I dare offer that far too many of the people that look down their noses at progressives in this nation, who additionally think that their religious views are superior to others, are going to be in for a very, very big surprise.

They will not pass go, they will not collect $200, and they will find their just rewards in Heaven a little more elusive than they believe will be the case.

The sad thing about all of this, is that those who would read the above and find themselves offended or indignant by my words, have no clue whatsoever that their very soul is in peril.

August 29, 2010 at 2:09 a.m.
alprova said...

Roland wrote: "Well, it turns out that Good Ole Abe is raising his feet and cowering in fear after all because over 500,000 people showed up for the Glenn Beck/Sarah Palin Rally."


Sorry Rolando. The true number of folks estimated to have attended the event was more like 87,000, give or take a 9,000 person margin of error. Aerial photos were taken and scientifically analyzed.

Had the number of people you cited attended the event, Glenn Beck would have been in violation of the permit he obtained for the event and people would have been turned away. His permit only allowed a maximum of 300,000 people to attend the event.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20014993-503544.html


"That number, 1/2 million people, was the unfriendly MEDIA's estimate. Probably more like 3/4 million."


Really? Cite the source(s) on that one.

Just because the Park Service no longer estimates crowds, it does not mean that others are not up to the task of doing the job very well.

But you know what? Let's have some fun with your estimates.

500,000 people at an event represents about 1 out of every 624 people in this nation.

If every person who attended was a registered voter, and again, there were 500,000 people in attendance, those people in attendance would represent 1 out of every 403 registered voters in this nation.

Now I don't know about you, but I find the above to be a rather weak turnout, considering all the fans that people claim the man has.

The fact is, the man has lost about 2/3 of his advertising revenue over the past year.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201008060024

As a Mormon, whom the more traditional Conservative Christians tend to reject for the departures in their religious teachings, Glenn Beck just spent the day further dividing the Conservative, religious right-wing arm of the Republican Party.

Tea-Partiers are about to find themselves left out in the cold, big time. By November, the resounding response by candidates to reporter's questions will be, "Uh...tea...what?"

August 29, 2010 at 2:59 a.m.

Aug 26 Yahoo news article on Glenn Beck Rally Sources: GlennBeck.com, Fox News, Media Matters, Huffington Post, AlterNet, CBS News, Washington City Paper, Atlanta Journal-Constitution Yahoo shut the post comments down after 106-couldn't stand the criticism of its lousy, incredibly biased article:

" says Alexander Zaitchik at AlterNet, ..Beck is "the media's boldest manipulator of white racial anxieties, fears and prejudice." Were King alive today, Beck would likely excoriate him for being a "progressive cockroach." But the Fox News firebrand is right that black people don't own MLK's legacy, says Cynthia Tucker at the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Dr. King "belongs to America" — and the Bill of Rights he so passionately believed in guarantees Beck the right to his rally, no matter how "odious" civil rights groups think it is".

The only outrage so far is from the far-left media and activist groups such as Al Sharpton's and the Urban Leaugue. Alveda King will also be a speaker and is a frequent guest on the Beck Show who lectures the Left and others who attempt to co-opt what her uncle was all about.

She said MLK wouldn't condone the violence and 'dependency' victimization the Progressive Left in America impose on MLK's civil rights legacy. She and her family also knew Malcolm X, who recanted his violent past at the end of his life and repented that he had encouraged Blacks to hate Whites. To the end of his life, MLK preached that Blacks and Whites need to unite and work together to make America a better place. Since his death, the Federal Gov't, its minions and Progressives, along with the far-Left media and activists have circumvented King's intentions and words to create instead a neo-slave class of Blacks in the Ghetto and as a voting bloc for the Democrat Party. We can see today what 50 years of Progressivism and Marxist ploys have wrought on America and America's minorities.

August 29, 2010 at 5:37 a.m.

Update: Re: ignorant comments above, repeating the far-Left media's opinions ABOUT what Glenn and others are about, instead of actually hearing, reading and listening to their words (and reporting truthfully): The complete rally was live-streamed on youtube and honored many Conservative Blacks in the military, sports, church and business arenas. The singers and speakers, including a very sane, balanced, loving Alveda King, were an inspiration to the crowd and everyone watching.

In comparison, Al Sharpton's rally was 99.9% Black activists and a paltry showing at that. He continually berated Beck and all the rest of the "white, racist bigots" at the OTHER rally. Big surprise.

It's so much easier to bash people like Glenn and Sarah, who are imperfect human beings and admit it, then actually vet and critique the extremely flawed beings in Washington DC, who, in actuality are the real reasons why this country is in the worst shape it's ever been in-and will never admit it. And the fault of those who continue to vote for them, defend them and apologize for nothing.

August 29, 2010 at 5:38 a.m.

Re: lies above by one of the Liars who continually lectures some of us on lying and then has no proof. For years, Northern Europeans and those from Eastern, Western and Southern Europe have continually emigrated out of Europe and into many other countries-on other continents. To the US primarily, where many have been able to start up and succeed at businesses here. Because their socialist/marxist Gov'ts in Europe made enterprise for the individual extremely difficult. The migration continues to this day. Including from Germany, where the jobless rate continues to soar. They badly need illegal immigrants to work on the pig farms, but alas, no illegals want to work with the pigs.

Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Germany, etc. in the '60's/'70's: Gas was $6.00 a gallon, food and rent were sky-high. Almost everyone was poor (except Gov't officials of course) and churches were shuttered. God wasn't allowed. IKEA hadn't gone international and become a huge corporation. Entrepeneurship was almost unheard of. Most people then, in northern Europe would have been loved by the Left here today. They were skinny because they couldn't afford the price of a vehicle and the gas to put into it. They walked everywhere and used a very poor transit system part of the time, or shared driving with others. They ate a diet consisting of mostly grains and canned fish. The farmers in the countryside ate and lived a little better. And this was in and around Stockholm, the 'richest' city in the country. The Swedes had the highest suicide rate in the world, were dour, cold people and kept their emotions tightly controlled. They were educated and most knew English, yet they hated Americans. Not because of our 'war-mongering' either. Because Americans were outgoing and happier and talked to everybody. What a crime! Today, Swedes, Norwegians and Danes have been over-run by Islamic immigrants from war-torn, brutalizing countries like Somalia. Crime has sky rocketed, the Swede's (and other Northern countries) prized 'welfare' system has become bankrupt and corrupted. In the muslim areas, riots, rapes and killings, once a never heard of occurrence, are the order of the day. The once taciturn, dour Swedes are now outraged and complaining. Whoops. Too late, their Gov't did what they wanted to while the people slept (disclosure: I have family and friends, swedes, danes, etc. still living in Northern Europe and here, in North America).

Posted by Jacques Martin on Feb 25th, 2008 Sweden: Industrialized Nation Now, but Banana Republic very soon http://www.eutimes.net/2008/02/sweden-industrialized-nation-now-but-banana-republic-very-soonsee-why/youtubehttp://www.youtube.com (see also Canada, France, Italy, Bosnia, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Eastern Europe, etc, etc.)

aah Tolerance. Gotta love it and it's consequences.

August 29, 2010 at 6:10 a.m.
anniebelle said...

"What really hits Clay and others here right in the gonads are the six most hated, frightening words to any Progressive -- "Glenn Beck", "Sarah Palin", and "TEA Party"..."

Oh, that's rich. The ones that are truly scary were the ones out there looking like they just escaped the pig farm truck. Anyone that follows these deranged un-Americans is far scarier to me than some unknown boogeyman. We know why beck, palin and the tea party masters are in it -- FOR THE $$$$$$ -- what, pray tell, does this mass of morons get out of this?

August 29, 2010 at 6:42 a.m.

The true face of Hatred, bigotry and racism:

The true face of Islam: 330,000 dead Americans in one hour Date: 8/26/2010 Bryan Fischer

What follows is a transcript of part of a speech delivered by a Muslim leader and broadcast on Al Jezeera TV in February of 2009. This broadcast was intended for the whole world. There is no apology from Al Jezeera for airing this; in fact, they aired it precisely because they believe its message and wanted the whole world of Muslims to hear it.

This obviously heightens our concern for a secure southern border, especially after the release of news that our authorities in all their wisdom have released 481 illegal aliens whose country of origin is either a state sponsor of terrorism or a country of “special concern.”

The excerpt speaks for itself: “Four pounds of anthrax - in a suitcase this big - carried by a fighter through tunnels from Mexico into the U.S. are guaranteed to kill 330,000 Americans within a single hour, if it is properly spread in population centers there. What a horrifying idea! 9/11 will be small change in comparison.

Am I right? There is no need for airplanes, conspiracies, timings, and so on. One person, with the courage to carry four pounds of anthrax, will go the White House lawn and will spread this ‘confetti’ all over them and then will do these cries of joy. It will turn into a real celebration.”

Kuwaiti professor Abdallah Fahd Abd Al-’Aziz Al-Nafisi, Al Jezeera TV, Feb. 2, 2009

August 29, 2010 at 7:09 a.m.
Duford said...

ITGuy -- what you're expressing is a fundamental transformation between the founding principles of our nation, what transpired after the Civil War.

To me, what matters most is preservation of private property, the minimization of the monopoly on brute force our governments have, and the peaceful, non-interventionist foreign policy our country was founded on.

What Lincoln did was solidify a strong, central government in our way of life. One that would eventually involve itself in wage slavery (income taxes), forced public schooling, regulatory efforts to control our personal, victim-less decisions, and devalue our currency.

In effect, Wilson, FDR, Carter, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama are all offshoots of Lincoln's power grab. And those, like myself, that actually understand the importance of liberty, see our rights crumbling daily under the iron fist of our government.

PS: To FM_33 -- DiLorenzo is a libertarian, not a progressive leftest. Big difference.

August 29, 2010 at 7:26 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

just what rights are those, duford?

Please be specific. Include those rights removed by Carter and Clinton (and of course restored by Reagan, Bush and Bush II)

Freedom of speech? Protection from unwarranted search and seizure? Freedom to worship at the church of your choice? I am curious: having been an adult through all the presidents you listed except Wilson and FDR, I can't recall our constitution changing. But hey, sometimes we forget things with age.

Oh, please also include what rights are, to use your words, "crumbling daily". Right to bear arms? Right to marry who you choose? Freedom to travel across state lines without having to present documentation? I haven't noticed anything changing in my rights, but hey, maybe you have different rights.

Enlighten us.

August 29, 2010 at 9:48 a.m.
Duford said...

It's more a continuation of the removal/dissolution of our natural rights by government decree than anything. Of which freedom-lovers have fought against since the dawn of our country's birth.

Remember, the basis of a moral government is one that defends personal liberties and upholds contracts between people. Anything more is simply the plundering of various people for the sake of someone else, as all governments through history have done.

For example, the income tax amendment. Do you believe the Founders thought it moral and proper to -- at threat of gunpoint -- garnish several months a year of your wages for the sake of the country? We as a country decry slavery, but wage slavery is mearly the same, a step removed.

I know my premises, my underlying principles. Thus I derive what is necessary and proper for everything in life, including government.

What are your principles? Have you examined them closely enough to expose any hypocrisy between your espoused principles and those you enact/support upon others?

August 29, 2010 at 7:25 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sorry, duford. Your answer is very vague. I want to know (since you accused specific presidents) what rights were lost, and since you did not list Reagan and the Bushes, how these rights were restored during their administrations. You can add Nixon, Ford and Johnson if you want to go further back. The 16th amendment was added in 1913, so I am still unclear as to how FDR, Carter and Clinton are to blame (is Obama on that list too? Poor guy; just into the white house and he has to answer to the 16th amendment?)

Oh, and by the way, I am very clear on my principles and I don't "enact" them on others (whatever that is). My primary goal is to point out when conservatives post lies, exaggerations and misleading info on this blog, or support the imposition of their religious views on others. My primary interest is sound science and science education. That's all. Otherwise, I'm pretty amiable.

Give it another go, would ya?

August 29, 2010 at 7:36 p.m.
Duford said...

I'll requote myself:

"It's more a continuation of the removal/dissolution of our natural rights by government decree than anything. Of which freedom-lovers have fought against since the dawn of our country's birth."

If it's not clear enough for you, that means it's all of whom wish to impose unjust force upon. That would include Reagan, Bush I and II (mentioned II earlier -- ie, Patriot Act, unlawful wiretaps, Entitlement expansions through the Prescription Drug Act).

Mortgaging my future on borrowed or printed dollars before I can even have a say in it = immoral and what Reagan onwards have done.

You see, the battle, whether you know it or not, has been against tyrannical government. Remember, they have a monopoly on force. Think about the implications.

I'm curious -- define as objectively as possible what the proper role of a government is. As you have your principles worked out (which is a good thing, of course), this shouldn't be much of a task to answer.

I'd like to examine the differences between our views -- would probably help explain our two viewpoints better.

August 29, 2010 at 10:08 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union." -- Abraham Lincoln

Does anyone still believe the War of Northern Aggression was all about slavery?

August 30, 2010 at 12:24 a.m.
MountainJoe said...

BTW lkeithlu, if someone else controls 100% of the fruits of your labor, that is a functional definition of slavery.

If you are taxed such that someone else controls 50% of the fruits of your labor, you are effectively 50% a slave and only 50% free.

As long as Congress retains the power to tax your labor, it is solely a matter of their discretion to tax you at less than 100%. They can make you 100% a slave anytime they want.

This is why we MUST get rid of the income tax and the IRS. We are all partially slaves until that day comes.

August 30, 2010 at 12:28 a.m.
hotdiggity said...

MountainJoe | On: August 30, 2010 at 12:24 a.m.

"Does anyone still believe the War of Northern Aggression was all about slavery"?

Yes, probably the majority of Americans. Without slavery there would most probably have been no war.

Almost immediately after Lincoln was elected in 1860 South Carolina left the Union since Lincoln declared his intention to stop the expansion of slavery to other states. SLAVERY. Shortly afterward the other southern states seceded for the same reasons.

Here are a couple of lines from the Declarations of Secession from some of the southern states.

MISSISSIPPI: "In the momentous step which our State has taken of dissolving its connection with the government of which we so long formed a part, it is but just that we should declare the prominent reasons which have induced our course. Our position is thoroughly identified with the institution of slavery-- the greatest material interest of the world. Its labor supplies the product which constitutes by far the largest and most important portions of commerce of the earth. These products are peculiar to the climate verging on the tropical regions, and by an imperious law of nature, none but the black race can bear exposure to the tropical sun. These products have become necessities of the world, and a blow at slavery is a blow at commerce and civilization. That blow has been long aimed at the institution, and was at the point of reaching its consummation. There was no choice left us but submission to the mandates of abolition, or a dissolution of the Union, whose principles had been subverted to work out our ruin."

"It refuses the admission of new slave States into the Union, and seeks to extinguish it by confining it within its present limits, denying the power of expansion".

ALABAMA: "Whereas, the election of Abraham Lincoln and Hannibal Hamlin to the offices of president and vice-president of the United States of America, by a sectional party, avowedly hostile to the domestic institutions and to the peace and security of the people of the State of Alabama... "

Of course the words "hostile to the domestic institutions" means slavery.

Sadly, up until this time the United States had made little attempt to stop the barbarous institution of slavery. That it was moral and right to do so is without question.

Regardless, if there had been no slavery we almost certainly would not of had the Civil War.

August 30, 2010 at 1:19 a.m.
hotdiggity said...

MountainJoe | On: August 30, 2010 at 12:28 a.m.

"This is why we MUST get rid of the income tax and the IRS".

Should we repeal the 16th amendment?

And what do you propose to do to make up the shortfall of monies by doing away with the income tax?

National Sales Tax a la Alan Keyes? What happens when the economy is in a dump and we have no steady stream of income for the government?

Flat Tax a la Steve Forbes? Here are some countries that have a flat tax...

Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Albania, Czech Republic, Estonia, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Iraq, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lithuania, Mongolia, Romania, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia. Iceland also has a flat tax which taxes investment income. If a flat tax WAS instituted then taxing investment income would have the very rich howling since they derive so much of their wealth from this.

The group who would benefit the most is wealthy Americans who now pay upward of 33 percent in federal income tax. No surprise here that Steve Forbes has advocated this for so long.

Does anyone think that a tax pimped by Steve Forbes will be good for the middle class?

August 30, 2010 at 2:31 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Now we are getting somewhere, duford. IN your original post you slammed Democratic presidents only. Hence, your original post was misleading. Readers would assume that only liberals remove rights and conservatives are off the hook or represent true freedom. Now I think you understand why I took issue. You now include conservative presidents in your complaint. Your issue is not with either party, but with the feds.

I take issue with the increased electronic scrutiny that was put in place after 9/11, but I have found that I reap benefits too. Many times my banks have alerted me to attempted ID theft because they are able to track my accounts better.

My opinion on the role of government is that it should provide services that are best done at the national level: the military, OSHA, FDA, application of the constitution, at least some oversight of environment and industry. Completely unregulated capitalism places the almighty dollar over safety and environment, but too much regulation squelches productivity.

There is a segment of society that needs a little assistance, but we let too many who are otherwise able to make a living get on the government tit. I think that there is one group that is best able to determine who are welfare cheats, and that is your local police/fire/EMS. They know their communities in ways that no one else does. I think public assistance should be locally managed, but federally funded.

Do I think our government is too big? Yes, but perhaps for different reasons than those posted here. Take the USPS fo example. For most places FEDEX and UPS out compete the USPS. Yet they are not obliged to serve communities too isolated or too small to be profitable. Everyone dumps on the USPS, yet they continue to provide service EVERYWHERE in spite of having lost the profitable deliveries that help defray the cost of getting to those tiny out of the way places. Do you think that FEDEX and UPS will pick up the slack? Nope-it's not economically advantageous.

This is why health care is like the postal service. With some fed oversight, those that did not get health care before (because they were like those tiny isolated communities to for-profit carriers of mail) might do so. But they are the most expensive. Without participating wholesale, the government is left holding the bill on those most expensive to cover (which is exactly why insurance companies are loath to do it) It's just like forcing UPS to provide service everywhere, and they raise their rates on the rest of us to cover the cost. I'm not implying that I like it, but I can see why it was needed. Is it the right answer? Don't know.

August 30, 2010 at 6:06 a.m.
rolando said...

Duford -- Ignore lkeith. She is the equivalent of a paid political shill hired to upset and divert any opposition by any method.

She -- if she is in fact a woman as she claims -- does not want answers. She only demands and re-demands clarifications of the comments of others, even while refusing or diverting any such demands for proof of HER mouthings. She produces nothing of verifiable substance, yet her specious demands for "proof" go on forever...

The proof is in the pudding -- something she cannot even begin to prepare, much less cook.

August 30, 2010 at 7:07 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Oh, rolando, you silly boy. I always provide proof, often without being asked. It's just that you and yours don't accept proof anytime what I say doesn't square with what you believe. You and canary, though, when presented with evidence that what you have said is wrong, just dodge. It's all right here for everyone to see, you know.

August 30, 2010 at 8:01 a.m.
Duford said...

lkeithlu, the problem with any governmental program -- outside of the scope I've defined earlier -- is that it financially enslaves someone else for some sort of "greater good," as defined by some bureaucratic group.

So the question becomes -- is it morally permissible to forcefully take from one group for the "welfare" of another?

Also, a lot of the hate against capitalism is based in our far-more "corporatism" economy. There's a big difference that's worth researching. Think corporate welfare.

Also, never give up your liberties for the illusion of safety, ie, Patriot Act and illegal wiretaps.

August 30, 2010 at 9:30 a.m.
alprova said...

Ikeithlu, have no fear. Rolando and his sidekick, who sporadically hit and run these days to see what they can stir up, do indeed run, but they cannot hide from their posts and the fact that they NEVER back up what they state.

They are all archived and the pudding that Rolando refers to is never more than a few clicks away, and can be spooned up for one's reading displeasure by merely clicking on their name at the bottom of every post that they offer.

And there is no doubt whatsoever that you, Ikeithlu, have gone to great lengths to support any and every stance you have ever taken on any subject. The proof in that is also contained within your posts.

Rolando is a child in an old man's body. I mean...really....telling someone to "ignore" another poster?

The last time I heard that line, I was playing in a sandbox and I was five years old.

Sheesh...

August 30, 2010 at 9:32 a.m.
alprova said...

MountainJoe wrote: "If you are taxed such that someone else controls 50% of the fruits of your labor, you are effectively 50% a slave and only 50% free."


The flaw in that statement is that no one is ever forced to perform any labor. You are free to choose to be a total bum in this nation and receive nothing at all in the form of compensation that will be taxed.


"As long as Congress retains the power to tax your labor, it is solely a matter of their discretion to tax you at less than 100%. They can make you 100% a slave anytime they want."


And again, you are free to abstain from the tax system anytime you desire. Just quit your job, and move into a cardboard box.

Problem solved.


"This is why we MUST get rid of the income tax and the IRS. We are all partially slaves until that day comes."


Now this, I agree with. Taxes will be inevitable, no matter the method of collection, so getting completely rid of the IRS will not be forthcoming, but making a move to a consumption based tax would be a very smart move.

The only problem is that both political parties are to dependent on manipulating the current system of taxation to buy votes, depending on which one is in power at any given moment, so I wouldn't look for the income tax to disappear any time soon.

August 30, 2010 at 9:45 a.m.
Duford said...

Al -- arguably you don't derive "income" from your labor -- that's purely a corporate/business accounting term.

What you actually do is trade your labor -- creative, manual, etc. -- for wages. Your labor is your property, and what government does is become de facto first recipient to your property.

Government has no moral basis for legally stealing what's naturally yours. It presumes your guilt and levies the burden of collecting the government's "claim" on business owners and you.

There are moral ways to collect taxes; taxes on gas, for example, are used to fund infrastructure like roads. So if you don't drive, you're not taxed. Fair enough.

But forcing the most productive, whose efforts provide employment without the risk of running an enterprise, to provide an outweighed portion of their income, to services that encourage laziness and wastefulness, as a moral way to tax? You're kidding me.

August 30, 2010 at 10:59 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Duford, I agree that paying for laziness is not desirable, but morally we should care for those less fortunate. I'd like to say we could leave it to churches, but so many churches just build big buildings for their flocks. I'd like something a little less dependent on the whim of individuals.

August 30, 2010 at 11:28 a.m.
FM_33 said...

Rolando your enemy's will make you great.

August 30, 2010 at 12:28 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Dear FM_33,

I need you to focus. Listen to that one voice amid the cranial cacophony chanting, "Leave America. Move to another country. The U.S. is run by a nazi socialist communist racist masonic foreign muslim."

Please. I'm asking you nicely. Just go.

If your heart ain't in it, as the saying goes, get your ass out.

(I sincerely apologize if I offended anyone with my language. I honestly couldn't think of another word with the same impact. Again, sorry.) Username: blackwater48 | On: August 28, 2010 at 4:56 p.m.


(FM) Psychc i was just kidding about leaving the greatest country on Earth.


Blackwater48 ( The U.S. is run by a nazi socialist communist racist masonic foreign muslim.")


(FM) You're right about the masonic connection he is suppose to be a "Prince Hall Mason" to be exact. Here is a web site if you would like to read a ton of stuff on that subject from a ministry out of South Carolina with a pastor by the name of David Bey.

www.cuttingedge.org

August 30, 2010 at 12:38 p.m.
FM_33 said...

FM,Sir,have you been drinking? Username: acerigger | On: August 28, 2010 at 2:22 p.m.


No sir.

August 30, 2010 at 12:39 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Abraham Lincoln = Tyrant, War Criminal and Murderer of innocent women and children. His generals executed entire families in ways that would even make Al Qaeda blush. And this piece of garbage is our president's "hero"? Wake up America. Its time to get up off that couch and defend your country! Username: Ironhorse | On: August 28, 2010 at 5:29 p.m.


Ironhorse are you Pro-Abe or not ?

August 30, 2010 at 12:45 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Rolando is a child in an old man's body. I mean...really....telling someone to "ignore" another poster?

The last time I heard that line, I was playing in a sandbox and I was five years old.

Sheesh... Username: alprova | On: August 30, 2010 at 9:32 a.m.


Hitting a man below the belt is sometimes a very bad idea.

August 30, 2010 at 12:47 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Username: alprova | On: August 29, 2010 at 2:59 a.m.


Glen Beck made a ton of money from the event so he must not be all that stupid when you think about it.

August 30, 2010 at 12:49 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Abe was not a perfect president but he did have guts to lead and a heart for protecting this free country of ours.

Jessie Ventura new book covers his assasination in great detail and it's worth a read to learn some new facts on the subject.

He tells about how more then one lone nut was involved in the plot and killing of Lincoln and what was the social forces that helped out in it as well.

August 30, 2010 at 12:57 p.m.
rolando said...

Hm.

Sounds more and more like the assassination was a Northern plot, after all. All that power over an entire section of the nation just going to waste had Lincoln lived to carry out HIS plan for Southern restoration and a welcome back into the fold must have rankled all those who hated the South and wanted to "get even".

Truman got it right with his Doctrine...he sneaked it past the haters.

August 30, 2010 at 2:18 p.m.
rolando said...

alpo never made it out of the sandbox, FM, so hitting below the belt is about as high as he can reach. He seems to like that target area.

But thanks.

August 30, 2010 at 2:21 p.m.
Sailorman said...

Al said

"The only problem is that both political parties are to dependent on manipulating the current system of taxation to buy votes, depending on which one is in power at any given moment, so I wouldn't look for the income tax to disappear any time soon."

Truer words were never spoken. I've said it before - I have no problem paying taxes to support those things which are properly the responsibility of government. I do, however, have a big problem feeding the insatiable appetite of an entity that is provably, and repetitively, irresponsible. (That would be members of the aforementioned political parties)

When you think about the number of laws, and resulting regulations, passed at all levels of government each year, one would almost wonder what's left to regulate and tax. Each and everyone requires some sort of enforcement- i.e an ever expanding bureaucracy.

If you wonder where it will end - well, so do I but I fear not well. Comparing gov spending to that of a drunken sailor is unfair to sailors and I take it personally! :)

August 30, 2010 at 2:28 p.m.
Duford said...

lkeith, you're advocating a step-removed servitude, no matter how prospectfully good your intentions are.

And those actions are always immoral. Volitionary charity and forced wage slavery at the point of a gun are entirely two different things, and only one can be reconciled.

August 30, 2010 at 2:48 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

hmmmm..I'll have to think on that one, duford.

August 30, 2010 at 3:24 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

Yes, we must repeal the 16th Amendment and get rid of the IRS and the income tax if America is ever to be a truly free country. I don't like taxation at all, but the types of taxes originally provided for in the Constitution (import duties and excise taxes) are much less objectionable than an income tax. A general sales tax, as we have in TN, would also be less objectionable than an income tax.

What would I do about the shortfall in revenue? Have the federal government spend a lot less money, that's what. If it stuck to national defense rather than international offense, and only spent money on domestic programs that are actually authorized by the Constitution, we could eliminate the income tax, replace it with nothing and still come out ahead.

Al, the PROBLEM is people being free to do nothing in the way of labor, and be subsidized by those of us who do work. In a free republic, one's labor should never be taxed, as it belongs to the laborer and not to the government. It should ESPECIALLY never be taxed in order to give to those who refuse to work. Penalizing work and rewarding sloth is the exact opposite of a rational policy.

Once upon a time in America, it was work, depend on the voluntary charity of your friends and neighbors if you were truly down and out through no fault of your own, or (if you were able-bodied but lazy) starve. Far too many of us have lost that work ethic and look where it has gotten us: an out-of-control, welfare/warfare state that saps the productive to subsidize the leeches (both individual and corporate). It is a toxic system that must be changed if America is to survive and thrive.

August 30, 2010 at 4:29 p.m.
alprova said...

Duford wrote: "Al -- arguably you don't derive "income" from your labor -- that's purely a corporate/business accounting term."


Be that as it may, you are taxed on whatever labor you exchange for compensation that the Government can track to your wallet.


"What you actually do is trade your labor -- creative, manual, etc. -- for wages. Your labor is your property, and what government does is become de facto first recipient to your property."


What an absurd argument.

I just spent four hours putting a water pump on a neighbor's pickup truck. I didn't charge a dime to my neighbor for my labor. Therefore, the labor I put forth will never be taxed, nor do I consider what I did to be "property," under any definition.

I helped a neighbor in a tight spot, who couldn't afford to pay to have the water pump installed for a rate of $50.00 an hour.

You'd probably bill the guy, since you consider your time the Government's property and all.

I spent the morning beating the Government out of $11.00 in taxes because I failed to collect any pay for the use of their property.

I feel so guilty.


"Government has no moral basis for legally stealing what's naturally yours. It presumes your guilt and levies the burden of collecting the government's "claim" on business owners and you."


File a lawsuit then.


"There are moral ways to collect taxes; taxes on gas, for example, are used to fund infrastructure like roads. So if you don't drive, you're not taxed. Fair enough."


I've paid school taxes for decades and not one child of mine has ever been a student in a public school....ever. Maybe yours have. If so, I'll trade my free health care for paying for your child's education.


"But forcing the most productive, whose efforts provide employment without the risk of running an enterprise, to provide an outweighed portion of their income, to services that encourage laziness and wastefulness, as a moral way to tax? You're kidding me."


I fail to see where "morality" fits into the equation, when it comes to taxes.

As to the rest, I'm not in the mood today to argue with a Conservative over the issue of taxes. It's much like abortion. You're probably well set in your opinions on both, and so am I, so why bother with arguing about it?

You vote, I presume. I definitely vote. We probably cancel each other's vote in terms of effectiveness, for the most part.

I can live with that.

August 30, 2010 at 4:39 p.m.
alprova said...

I do want to go on record to state that any, and I do mean ANY able-bodied person in this nation SHOULD be either working or should be able to prove to the Government at any time that they seeking work as things stand currently.

I know that free-rides exist and I deplore them like anyone else. However, I do not see such an existence of those who abuse the system as a reason to do away with lifelines for those who have nothing, or next to nothing.

Due to my income in prior years, I was drawing a substantial amount of unemployment compensation last year, and so help me God, I took a $60.00 a week pay cut from unemployment to go back to work, when I faced the fact that replacing the income I lost, was not going to come along anytime soon. I drew unemployment for 16 weeks and then I did what I had to do, because I cannot stand not to work.

I'm currently living on about a THIRD of what I was making prior to January of 2009. Part of what I make involves self-employment income from two very small businesses that my wife and I own and operate. I am an accountant, specializing in handling books for small businesses, and my wife is also an agent for a major health insurer.

We also both have steady part-time employment now. We're doing what we have to do to get by.

Progressive and Liberal I may be, but I am not a bum and I never have been. And contrary to the popular belief of some, I am hardly alone. The vast majority of people who vote for Liberal agendas and candidates, work just as I do.

The Liberal people I know will never be rich, nor would they want to be. Why not? Because money does not rule our lives. We don't fret over it, worry about how little we may have, nor do we scheme to make the most we can, especially if it means that in order to amass it, we must deprive those of money who need it the most.

And if the day comes again that I reach a point that I make a six-figure income, I will gladly write those checks to the IRS for the increased amounts that are a part of achieving such a status in life.

I laugh at people that sit around, constantly counting their pennies, afraid that someone is stealing them, worrying all the time that someone is getting something they are not, or worse, that they may be in any manner paying some of those pennies to those who get a free-ride.

While their blood pressure rises and their arteries harden, I simply enjoy life as it comes my way, and thank God for another day of life, no matter what comes my way, be it good, bad, or indifferent.

August 30, 2010 at 5:26 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

What a good post, alprova.

I am most fortunate to have a job I've held for decades, as had my spouse, with benefits. I can almost tell you the day we went from struggling to having disposable income (it felt really weird). I am especially unhappy with people that have children after they join the ranks of the assisted: that seems very irresponsible. If that was something I could change, I certainly would. It's why I think welfare should have a time limit, to encourage people to gain control of their circumstances. However, I know that there are those that are disabled or mentally ill that will always need assistance.

We don't live lavishly, but comfortably. We give to charity, but being atheists, not through a church because we don't belong to one. We also try to give of our time and talents as volunteers. Just like we know not all conservatives are mouth-breathing uneducated bigots, not all liberals are promiscuous pie-in-the-sky dreamers with no morals.

August 30, 2010 at 7:26 p.m.
Duford said...

Hi Al and Lkeith,

Thanks for your responses.

Clearly the buzzword in my posts is "moral." Not necessarily in a Christian sense, but in the sense of fair dealings with my fellow man.

It should follow naturally that how you and I deal with each other should be equivalent to how the government deals with us.

Now, we all know, liberal, conservative, libertarian, that if I walk out, point my pistol in your face, and ask you to pony up 3 months of your annual salary "for the children," or I'll throw your pathetic arse in jail, is immoral. Even if the children are starving on the streets, and you have no connection to them, it's still immoral for the putz to threaten your life, right?

Now, if you voluntarily give that money out of your own good will, we can all agree, religious or irreligious, that this is a moral act, right?

Then why does this simple, easy-to-understand principle get thrown out of debate when we speak of it in terms of what we expect and how we deal with government?

Such is the foundation to any talk about taxes or government; what is its moral basis? You simply cannot disconnect morality from the equation -- the fact that an entity with monopoly power on force can take a portion of your money at will -- should scare the living bejesus out of you, enough that you DEMAND that this monopolistic force is constrained to what is only moral, no more.

...No matter who is sick, no matter what corporation needs bailouts, no matter what.

The fact is that people are compassionate beings by themselves, and can put their own money to use, more efficiently than a government that skims off a portion of it for themselves.

PS: Al -- good job on screwing the government out of its social security, medicare, and medicaid taxes. No need to continue to pay into that monstrous Ponzi scheme, right? ;-)

August 30, 2010 at 10:37 p.m.
MountainJoe said...

I like you, Duford! You "get" it in a way that al and lkeith never will.

If it's not moral for one man with a gun to steal the fruit of your labor, then it is no more moral for 100,000 men with guns to do the same, even though they call themselves the "government."

This is why the IRS must go.

August 31, 2010 at 10:35 a.m.
Duford said...

Thanks -- required reading for all is Atlas Shrugged, then Capitalism: An Unknown Ideal, both by Ayn Rand.

August 31, 2010 at 10:50 a.m.
FM_33 said...

Username: alprova | On: August 30, 2010 at 5:26 p.m.


Good post.

August 31, 2010 at 1:30 p.m.
FM_33 said...

I say FM_33 is: as stupid is as stupid does, which is trolling. Username: Tax_Payer | On: August 28, 2010 at 3:02 p.m.


That's not what you moma said last night !

August 31, 2010 at 1:33 p.m.
FM_33 said...

alpo never made it out of the sandbox, FM, so hitting below the belt is about as high as he can reach. He seems to like that target area.

But thanks. Username: rolando | On: August 30, 2010 at 2:21 p.m.


Not even buddy ....watch it !

August 31, 2010 at 1:34 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Rolando any time somebody says something nice about you why is it that you always start acting like a bastard towards them ?

Got any clue !

August 31, 2010 at 1:36 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Truman got it right with his Doctrine...he sneaked it past the haters. Username: rolando | On: August 30, 2010 at 2:18 p.m.


Harry Truman was also a 33rd degree mason as well. Did you know that Rolando ?

Hmm...so who's doctrine was Truman following ?

Got any clue !

August 31, 2010 at 1:40 p.m.
FM_33 said...

I say FM_33 is: as stupid is as stupid does, which is trolling. Username: Tax_Payer | On: August 28, 2010 at 3:02 p.m.


That's not what your moma said last night ! Username: FM_33 | On: August 31, 2010 at 1:33 p.m.

August 31, 2010 at 1:41 p.m.
FM_33 said...

This is why the IRS must go. Username: MountainJoe | On: August 31, 2010 at 10:35 a.m.


LOL.....will never happen so come out of that spell you're under and smell the coffee.

August 31, 2010 at 1:42 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Maybe Lincon's plan at reconstruction was disrupted when Booth killed him. Username: blackwater48 | On: August 28, 2010 at 10:43 a.m.


Booth was not the only killer !

August 31, 2010 at 1:43 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Username: FM_33 | On: August 30, 2010 at 12:38 p.m. Did you find this comment to be useful? Yes | No 0 of 1 people found this comment useful. Suggest removal


Sorry folks to break it to you but the truth is the truth.

The person who gave me the thumb down on that post should also know that "Sarah Palin" also has a friendship with the Prince Hall Masonic Lodge up there in Alaska.

She was supported by the lodge during her run for Gov. of that state.

The Mason's will confirm this fact !

August 31, 2010 at 1:59 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Rolando you got a lot of growing up to do.

Maybe you should travel around the country for a year and live in different places.

Why not try it you're young and not married with no kids so what's the excuse.

August 31, 2010 at 2:12 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

FM, no offense, but rolando is not young, nor is he provincial. I believe he has traveled and even lived abroad.

August 31, 2010 at 3:46 p.m.
FM_33 said...

FM, no offense, but rolando is not young, nor is he provincial. I believe he has traveled and even lived abroad. Username: lkeithlu | On: August 31, 2010 at 3:46 p.m.


Oop's......

August 31, 2010 at 4:57 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Not to defend rolando (as he would NEVER reciprocate) but I don't like misinformation. I'm sure rolando is as worldly as the rest of us.

August 31, 2010 at 5:12 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Rolando must let go of the hate and learn how to give out some positive energy.

He acts like a little brat that has had his way all his life.

August 31, 2010 at 5:36 p.m.
alprova said...

Duford wrote: "Now, we all know, liberal, conservative, libertarian, that if I walk out, point my pistol in your face, and ask you to pony up 3 months of your annual salary "for the children," or I'll throw your pathetic arse in jail, is immoral. Even if the children are starving on the streets, and you have no connection to them, it's still immoral for the putz to threaten your life, right?"


Of course, but then you're vastly overstating, like most those with a conservative opinion, as to how taxes in this nation are collected. That argument is not new, and it has been bantered about time and again.

Even the most wealthy of taxpayers receive services from the Government, including the social services that taxes go to fund. They may not, as it turns out, receive more than they put in, but that's the way it is and the way it has always been.


"Now, if you voluntarily give that money out of your own good will, we can all agree, religious or irreligious, that this is a moral act, right?"


Sure.


"Then why does this simple, easy-to-understand principle get thrown out of debate when we speak of it in terms of what we expect and how we deal with government?"


Because as we all know, but some shove under the rug, is that most Conservatives who amass larger incomes, who also amass much larger bank accounts, resent with every breath, paying taxes in larger amounts.

They are often consumed by the demand that they fork over more than others. They work relentlessly to avoid paying taxes. That in my opinion, makes them rather immoral, if we're going to discuss it on that level.


"...the fact that an entity with monopoly power on force can take a portion of your money at will -- should scare the living bejesus out of you..."


Well let's face it: if the Government, or those in need, had to rely upon those with the ability to pony up the dough to fund the functions of Government or to assist those in need, we would indeed have a third world environment on our hands.

If you ask me, the forced pay tax system, although flawed for taxing what one earns, is one of the things that makes us strong as a nation. I know that some would cringe when they read that, but Americans in general are among the most selfish of people when it comes to money. So forcing them to pony up what is needed is necessary.


"The fact is that people are compassionate beings by themselves, and can put their own money to use, more efficiently than a government that skims off a portion of it for themselves."


Having compassion is one thing, and doing something about it is quite another. Many people talk the talk, but not enough walk the walk.

Those who are doing a-okay quite often have little compassion for those who are in dire straits. And I'm sorry, but the proof in all that is no farther away than a quick analyzation of the Republican voting record in the Congress and the Senate.

August 31, 2010 at 6:59 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Just to pick a nit: Americans are actually quite generous in times of need. The tsunami in SE Asia, Katrina, and other natural disasters come to mind.

August 31, 2010 at 7:13 p.m.
hotdiggity said...

Username: Duford | On: August 31, 2010 at 10:50 a.m.

"required reading for all is Atlas Shrugged, then Capitalism: An Unknown Ideal, both by Ayn Rand".

Self interest as a virtue. An interesting concept. I'm sure you know that Alan Greenspan studied under Rand and applied her principles in his decisions regarding the economy. Unfortunately when these principles of self interest resulted in the economy entering the greatest recession since the Great Depression Mr. Greenspan stated that his philosophy, honed under the tutelage and writings of Ms. Rand, were flawed.

Mr. Greenspan, under questioning from a House panel regarding the meltdown, "Greenspan called the role of self-interest and rationality "a flaw in the model…that defines how the world works."

http://www.capitalismmagazine.com/markets/alan-greenspan/5330-Alan-Greenspan-Capitalism.html

September 1, 2010 at 12:02 a.m.
Duford said...

Hot, I'd expound on it more in-depth, but Greenspan is just another opportunist of libido dominere (the lust for power).

Rand suspected he was a flake. Greenspan even wrote a wonderful paper on the moral efficacy of the gold standard and how monetary systems must require it (otherwise you get fiat currency systems that are easily manipulatable by the government as they are now).

Funny thing is, his low-interest rate policies, not to mention the fact he'd have ANYTHING to do with the Federal Reserve, is proof in the pudding that he cares little for free market ideals.

In fact, I'd go so far as to put a lot of blame on him for the economic turmoil we have now...

September 1, 2010 at 9:05 a.m.
MountainJoe said...

On the money (no pun intended) again, Duford. Glad to see someone else on here with a clue (harrystatel is pretty good at understanding the issues too).

September 1, 2010 at 12:37 p.m.
Duford said...

Al,

You need to differentiate between what is moral and what is law. Something can be immoral and legal, just as something else can be moral and illegal.

Regardless, you need to take a stand on either side. If you think that it's criminal and wrong for me to force your wages from at the threat of a gun or prison time, certainly you must be consistent in that feeling concerning our government? Just because "it's just the way it's always been" is not a rationale for continuing such a policy.

September 1, 2010 at 1:25 p.m.
FM_33 said...

Ho hum the HG is dead !

September 13, 2010 at 5:53 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.