Free Republic 1st Qtr 2021 Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $84,412
95%  
Woo hoo!! And now less than $3.6k to go!! Let's get 'er done. Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by conservatism_IS_compassion

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Shouldn't conservatives stop ignoring The British Empire's role in slavery?

    02/22/2021 11:54:36 AM PST · 148 of 159
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kozak
    The British Empire, especially the Royal Navy, did more to end slavery around the world than any other organization in history.
    No major institution anywhere systematically delegitimated the institution of slavery anywhere until the Christians - especially Protestants, and especially British MProtestants - did so. Essentially the Christians of the American South were uniquely situated to be the last to “get" - that is, accept - the word.

    Published argumentation defending slavery imposed by Christians never occurred anywhere except in the American South. For the simple reason that that was the only place where slavery by Christians both was entrenched and was under Christian moral attack.

  • Why is Progressive Nationalism so misunderstood?

    02/15/2021 8:41:14 AM PST · 24 of 29
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ProgressingAmerica
    I would not be surprised if we had a time machine and could go back and ask the world’s biggest tyrants - Khan - Pharoah - Caesar - King George III; they would all agree. Government is society. I bet they would all agree.
    Yes, they would all agree - for the simple reason that the difference between “society” and “government” is freedom. No difference between society and government? No freedom.
  • Why is Progressive Nationalism so misunderstood?

    02/14/2021 6:44:50 AM PST · 17 of 29
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ProgressingAmerica
    "Patriotism" is a euphemism for government.
    "The nation" is a euphemism for government.
    "The country" is a euphemism for government.

    That's progressivism.

    Back in the middle of the Eisenhower Administration, a HS teacher gave a homework assignment: “Do we have to do what society says?”

    That night I agonized over the question and came up with the conclusion that the answer was “No,” on the basis of freedom.

    The next class I verbally gave that answer, and the teacher replied, “We like to say ‘society’ when we mean government.” I instantly recognized that as ProgressiveThink. But I was, unfortunately or perhaps fortunately for my grade, struck dumb for a way to express my disagreement. The actual answer is, IMHO, given by Thomas Paine in the first two paragraphs of Common Sense:

    SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins.
    Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness;

    the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices.

    The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions.

    The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

    Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one . . .
    For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest . . . — Thomas Paine,Common Sense (1776)
  • What you need to know about Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine - Comparing it to the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines

    02/12/2021 10:23:49 AM PST · 22 of 53
    conservatism_IS_compassion to rigelkentaurus
    Not everyone should want a vaccine.

    If you’re superannuated and have specific health issues, it makes more sense to get vaccinated than if you were in your twenties and have no specific issues.

    And as far as kids are concerned, very little benefit to vaccination. You have to be pretty sure it’s free of side effects in that case.

  • What you need to know about Johnson & Johnson's COVID-19 vaccine - Comparing it to the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines

    02/12/2021 10:09:10 AM PST · 19 of 53
    conservatism_IS_compassion to SeekAndFind
    IMHO it’s crucial to understand what “95% effective” means.

    I read on FR that that means 95% better than getting a placebo. And people don’t all get Covid even if they don’t get vaccinated.

    Thus, Moderna vaccine was administered to 15,000 people, and the results compared to 15,000 control group. That means that if, say, the control group had 1000 covid cases, and the Moderna vaccine also had 1000 cases, the vaccine didn’t do any good even tho only 1/15 of its group got covid.

    But in fact, Moderna only had 11 covid cases - and none of them were hospitalized. That’s “only” 95% better than the control group - but there weren’t any hospitalizations, let alone any fatalities, in the Moderna test group. And even for moderate cases, 11 out of 15,000 is pretty good odds, wouldn’t you say?

    I was given the Pfizer vaccine, and its simple “95% effective” number is about the same as Moderna’s. I just hope the numbers behind that percenage are as good as Moderna’s. But beggars can’t be choosers, and anyone who wants the vaccine is a beggar.

  • More sunlight equals less COVID transmission, new study suggests

    01/25/2021 1:07:15 PM PST · 43 of 56
    conservatism_IS_compassion to justlittleoleme
    Now we know Joe Biden’s plan! Tilt the earth’s axis so it’ll always be summer!
  • Report: Sen. Patrick Leahy Expected to Preside over Second Trump Impeachment Trial

    01/25/2021 12:47:13 PM PST · 173 of 241
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ChicagoConservative27
    Chief Justice Roberts declines to preside, for the logical reason that this is an “impeachment” (scare quotes) of a private citizen, not an actual impeachment of an actual president.

    There is nothing constitutional about the procedure; it merely is a marker that the Democrats are laying down that if Mr. Trump were to run and win again, they would not yield the WH to him. Entirely lawless. It’s also intended as a political cudgel against Republican senators.

    But it’s kind of an honorary second term, in the sense that the only natural born citizens of America over the age of 35 and not eligible to be elected president of the US are two-term presidents and, in the conceit of this “impeachment,” Donald J. Trump.

  • We're eight months into this pandemic, and Donald Trump still doesn't have a plan to get this virus under control. I do.

    01/23/2021 8:51:05 AM PST · 29 of 33
    conservatism_IS_compassion to antidemoncrat
    take credit for all the work Pres. Trumphis predecessor did to try to get it under control and then blame him for all the failures . . . under the Biden his own “plan”.
    Precisely the FDR political playbook. There wasn’t any difference between FDR’s economic plan and Hoover’s, either.

    The actual difference is, Biden inherited a good but limited plan. FDR inherited a disastrous plan and doubled down on it.

    History can’t tell us whether Hoover would have gotten a clue before 1936, only that FDR never did get a clue. What passed for “an economic clue” was the jump in demand for American war materiel starting with Britain’s declaration of war in 1939.

    Not Pearl Harbor but the Fall of France (May 1940) caused the FDR-sponsored 18-month transition to an industrial war footing. And that ended the economic Depression.

  • Humblegunner's 20th Anniversary on Free Republic!

    01/23/2021 8:04:23 AM PST · 136 of 209
    conservatism_IS_compassion to humblegunner

    Bump.

  • Montana House Passes Bill with Constitutional Carry

    01/23/2021 7:44:49 AM PST · 13 of 29
    conservatism_IS_compassion to marktwain
    It would be great if we could get that understanding of the First Amendment out of SCOTUS.
    It is not too much to say, IMHO, that we have to have "that understanding of the First Amendment out of SCOTUS.”

    Because without it, we are left at the mercy of the cabal of socialists - card-carrying Democrats and cryptoDemocrats who brandish their membership in “the media” as their credential for functioning as an Established Priesthood whose word may not be challenged.

    And on an episode of Life, Liberty, and Levin, President Trump and Mark Levin agreed on the necessity of challenging Sullivan.

  • Montana House Passes Bill with Constitutional Carry

    01/23/2021 6:51:40 AM PST · 11 of 29
    conservatism_IS_compassion to marktwain
    To understand my position on “constitutional” carry, please read this screed of mine about 2A’s twin, 1A:
    1. The defining characteristic of journalism is negativity to the point of cynicism about society, and the defining characteristic of the Democrat Party is that it has no other principle conflicting with its determination to go along - and thus get along - with the journalism cartel. Thus, journalists have no inclination to libel Democrats, and plenty of inclination to libel Republicans.

    2. Under the Warren Court’s fraudulent New York Times Co. v. Sullivan decision, officials - Republicans or (as if) Democrats - are strongly inhibited from attempting to sue for libel.

    In Sullivan, the Court claimed that

    ". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment”
    The fallacy in that claim is that - as all courts prior to 1964 had held - the intention of the framers and ratifiers of the First Amendment understood and intended that the (existing, state) laws against libel would not be affected by 1A.

    Under the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, individual or state rights not explicitly affected by the Constitution are not modified by the Constitution. Libel is not mentioned in 1A, and libel is not affected by 1A. It is no more complicated than that.

    1A no more gives a printer the right to deny a politician the reputation their behavior has earned than 2A gives a gun owner the right to shoot Steve Scalise.

    Scalia wrote the Heller decision delineating his (SCOTUS’s) reading of what “the” RKBA was understood to be in 1788.” He had to do a deep dive into history to inform his decision - not just say, “RKBA is not to be infringed.” That is only the beginning of the story.

    Obviously the Federalists who composed the Constitution took 9A and 10A for granted. They did not include a bill of rights in the Constitution for that reason and because trying to comprehensively enumerate all rights of the people and of the government would have been a fool’s errand.

    Common Law was and is the fruit of an evolution in law. The Federalists’s objective in composing the BoR was to suppress controversy over rights. That is, to assure everyone that the Constitution did not change any rights tacitly.

    So in a real sense the first eight amendments simply tee up the ball, and 9A and 10A are the club which drives the ball. Thus, the Warren Court’s Sullivan decision is a fraud. And thus, Heller isn’t a simple one-page ruling.

    And that is what Scalia’s “original meaning” interpretation of the Constitution is all about.

  • Leaked Zoom Call Shows Federal Employees Sabotaged Trump

    01/20/2021 9:02:40 AM PST · 67 of 67
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Vaquero
    Ike tried to warn us
    . . . but he didn’t mention the union of the press cartel and the Democrat Party with the “military-industrial complex."
  • Leaked Zoom Call Shows Federal Employees Sabotaged Trump

    01/20/2021 8:26:55 AM PST · 66 of 67
    conservatism_IS_compassion to freedomjusticeruleoflaw
    People who WANT to work for the gubmint are NATURAL Leftists. They will ALWAYS lean to government power, and ALWAYS think that it is good.
    Hammers thinking everything is a nail.
  • 'You start to feel stupid': Tech workers can't leave SF fast enough

    01/18/2021 7:22:21 AM PST · 35 of 47
    conservatism_IS_compassion to noiseman
    This guy has learned nothing. He didn’t really want to escape leftism. he just wanted a cheaper place to live.
    He just wanted to escape the fruits of leftism.

    The problem is that leftist voters are in denial of the inevitability of those fruits.

    The fruits of leftism are what you have to get when you create a government big enough to solve all problems - and give the power to the kind of people who want, nay lust, for that power. People who are happy to be priests of government and cynical journalism as their gods.

    “Bad News” journalism is cynical about society and uncritical of government action, only of government failing to act “enough.”

  • Is Truth Irrelevant?

    01/13/2021 10:54:04 AM PST · 22 of 22
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin; jazusamo
    Up until 1964, no court had held that the First Amendment affected pornography law or libel law. Pornography law still stands - but the Warren Court cavalierly (and unanimously!) eviscerated libel law in that year when it handed down its New York Times Co. v. Sullivan decision. Which made the fatuous claim that
    ". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment”
    That gives the First Amendment - gives the first eight amendments - too much credit. Obviously the Federalists who proposed the ratification of their unamended constitution took the Ninth and Tenth Amendments
    Amendment 9
    The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
    and
    Amendment 10
    The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

    as being implied in that document. That is, that the rights mentioned (but not necessarily specifically defined) in the first eight amendments would have been protected by 9A and 10A even if the first eight amendments had not been proposed and ratified.

    Rights come with responsibilities, and although you could - with sufficiently specious argument - claim that 2A gave that infamous rifleman the right to shoot Steve Scalise, no one would buy that for an instant.

    And in precisely the same way, it was entirely fatuous for the Warren Court to assert that

    ". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment”
    Sullivan (unanimously, with enthusiastic concurrences) held that public officials (including judges) presumptively could not sue for libel. Despite the fact that the right to sue for libel existed at the time of the ratification of 1A, that libel is not mentioned in 1A, and that the Christian nation which was the US (do a search for “Sundays” in the Constitution and explain why the first day of the week was taken for granted as a weekly holiday) would not have ratified 1A if they had the slightest thought that it authorized libel against anyone.

    And given to cryptoDemocrat nature of establishment journalism, that has meant that journalists feel no obligation to the truth. They will inflate the virtues of Democrats shamelessly - and just as shamelessly libel Republicans.

  • Is Truth Irrelevant?

    01/13/2021 9:57:45 AM PST · 21 of 22
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin
    Is Truth Irrelevant?
    The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing. — Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
    It follows that the relevance of truth is related to wisdom. But that wisdom can be elusive.
    sophist
    1542, earlier sophister (c.1380), from L. sophista, sophistes, from Gk. sophistes, from sophizesthai "to become wise or learned," from sophos "wise, clever," of unknown origin. Gk. sophistes came to mean "one who gives intellectual instruction for pay," and, contrasted with "philosopher," it became a term of contempt. Ancient sophists were famous for their clever, specious arguments.
    philosopher
    O.E. philosophe, from L. philosophus, from Gk. philosophos "philosopher," lit. "lover of wisdom," from philos "loving" + sophos "wise, a sage."

    "Pythagoras was the first who called himself philosophos, instead of sophos, 'wise man,' since this latter term was suggestive of immodesty." [Klein]

    philosophy
    A fondness or love for wisdom that leads to searches for it; hence, seeking a knowledge of the general principles of elements, powers, examples, and laws that are supported by facts and the existence of rational explanations about practical wisdom and knowledge.
  • Social Media Picking and Choosing vs Bakeries (Vanity)

    01/11/2021 3:30:37 PM PST · 10 of 10
    conservatism_IS_compassion to rey
    Why can a baker be forced to make a cake for something he disagrees with but a social media platform may pick and choose?
    For that matter
    Philippians 2:9

    Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name,

    10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;

    11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

    . . . wold make a splendid advertisement, wouldn’t it?
  • After Unused Vaccines Are Thrown in Trash, Cuomo Loosens Rules

    01/11/2021 2:59:26 PM PST · 17 of 18
    conservatism_IS_compassion to moovova

    👌

  • After Unused Vaccines Are Thrown in Trash, Cuomo Loosens Rules

    01/11/2021 12:25:41 PM PST · 9 of 18
    conservatism_IS_compassion to glimmerman70
    since he is a democrat he is immune from any wrong doing.
    It would be an impeachment count if it were Trump doing it.
  • Twitter Loses $5 BILLION in Market Share as Stock TUMBLES After Platform Bans President Trump

    01/11/2021 11:45:34 AM PST · 70 of 133
    conservatism_IS_compassion to BlackFemaleArmyColonel
    Banning the leader of the free world is not only a violation of the 1st amendment, but part of yet another coup by big tech corporations and the Democrats to try to illegally remove Trump from office.
    The First Amendment has nothing to do with the case. Any more than the Sullivan decision stating that
    ". . . libel can claim no talismanic immunity from constitutional limitations. It must be measured by standards that satisfy the First Amendment”
    has anything to do with the actual Constitution and Bill of Rights.

    The Federalists thought the Constitution as drafted preserved our rights - as then understood - without the Bill of Rights. Else what earthly hope could they have had of getting the Constitution ratified by people who were determined to preserve those rights? The Ninth and Tenth Amendments articulate explicitly the way the Federalists always took for granted that the Constitution would be read.

    Although the first eight amendments obviously have the force of law, to the Federalists they were old news, not in any way ground-breaking. And since rights of the states and of the people obviously are a zero-sum game - since the government’s right to restrict something limits the individual’s right to do that thing (and vice versa) - nothing can be inferred by what the First Amendment does not say. 1A says exactly bupkis about libel law and therefore it does not modify libel law. All protestations of the Warren Court in its unanimous 1964 Sullivan decision to the contrary notwithstanding.

    Mr. Trump’s recourse is to sue the socks off of the cryptoDemocrat media. And the Democrat Party’s recourse is to pack SCOTUS to prevent it from ruling honestly.