Free Republic

I despise Max Cleland who is nothing but a lieing socialist. However, I want a senator that will vote against the presidents homeland security bill. (Why dont we just call it state security so that everyone will recognise a department of homeland security for what it is, the SS.)

"Western efforts to steer the country out of its violent past and toward integration with Europe."----This quote from your article shows the tre intentions of the 'west' (read globalists) in the Balkans.

Hoplite, Albanian muslims were pouring into Serbia and Kosovo illegally before the war. Resistance to this led the war. Killing Albanian muslims whom you are at war with for invading your land is not genocide despite the pleadings of the UN gloabalists who want to control the region. Why do you suppose that information realeased on Milosovic's trial has been stymied as of late? Because he is winning. Dont expect him to win though. He'll be railroaded by the court.

Bush is not a nationalist. He is a one world globalist attempting to further subvert the constitution and our God given rights while centralising power nationally for the purpose of handing over further power to the communist U.N.

Hear Hear

I think it is an exaggeration to say that Bush is more liberal than Clinton. Certainly Bush has had more success instituting leftist, collectivist programs, but Im sure Clinton would have liked to pass alot more, but he was stopped, because 'republicans' oppose democrat socialist programs. 'Republicans' only support socialist programs put forward by one of their own.

In reality, Republicans and Democrats are two sides of the same coin on the national level. As George Wallace said years ago, 'Theres not a dimes worth of difference between republicans and democrats.' Most republicans are RINO and most democrats are right with them. When was the last President we had that wasnt on the CFR?

Its easy to control the two parties at a national level with big money donations to support the propoganda machines of the two parties. In reality, it matters little if the democrat or republican candidate wins the race. The primary systems assure that two socialists go into the main election, and the apparent desire for the States to appeal to the masses in a false election makes the outcome self evident. We need some State legislatures to take charge and appoint electors to the electoral college with no pretense of an election of the masses, the way our system was desinged.

I didnt write the quote you attributed to me.

"Evolution is the only "widely accepted" scientific theory that continually falls apart under scrutiny. Nobody is still, today, hotly debating Einstein's Theory of Relativity, or Newton's Theories about gravity, or many, many other theories, for the simple reason that they WORK."----Actually, thats not true. Einsteins general theory of relativity presented a completely different explanation of gravity than did Newtons. Certainl Newtons theory seems to work over a certain realm of phenomenon and are still used to describe those phenomenenon, but Einstein's theory of gravity is different. There are other alternate theories being asserted to explain a whole host of scientific information, though most of them dont show much promise of becoming widely accepted currently. There is still a big push to combine quantum theory with earlier scientific theories. Like Einstein, many scientists find quantum theory with its probabilistic nature and its admission of inability to know anything with complete accuracy inherently unacceptable and are actively seeking alternate explanations. Evolution just fails more glaringly.

From a 'scientific' viewpoint though, it is often not the failure of a theory that we're concerned with, but the success. A theory may fail in many ways, but if it is successful even over a limited range it can be useful.

If creationists believe what they infer from their extrapolation, they have faith in their extrapolation. Furthermore, in order to have faith in the extrapolation, they must have faith in their 'facts' be it observations or measurements. So, no, its not substantially difference than the faith of the creationists. The difference is in what you have faith in.

Hear hear. Get government out of education.

One thing though, dont worry about in God we trust on our fiat currency. Worry about the fact that it is a fiat currency and work to put us back on a metal standard.

Im glad to see the shot at the courts for not removing the real unconstitutional programs as well.

The first ammendment doesn't apply to anything but Congress.

Scott Herrin committed no crime except littering. He doesnt deserve to be sentenced to anything as long as he took the cat out of the pool and cleaned it up.

The NAACP wants to rewrite history in a strange Orwellian fashion. Im glad that some politicians in South Mississippi had the nerve to return the flag to its proper place in a historical display.

'And Rep. Mackay was just foolin' when he said, "There was only one reason for putting the flag on there, like the gun rack in the back of a pickup truck, it telegraphs a message."'----

No, he wasnt fooling. The problem is that both you and the current general assembly completely missed the message being sent. The flag symbolises the willingness of the South to fight against a tyrannical federal government that had overstepped its constitutional bounds.

The minutes of the 1956 debate do exist and they clearly say that the reason for the change was to prepare for the upcoming centennial of the war.

The UDC opposed the flag change, but the SCV supported it.

The documentation in the 2000 reports documents unrelated facts and then speculates that these facts helped the 1956 legislators make their decision. For example, they document the use of the 'Battle Flag' by the Dixiecrats, but they assume that this was done to promote racism(a false assumpition), and they further assume that the 1956 legislatures incorporated the design into the Georgia flag because of the Dixiecrats(another unfounded assumption.) The report is not a scholarly work but a propoganda piece.

The link you listed is from the 2000 General Assembly, many of whom wouldnt know a snake if it jumped up and bit 'em. Despite their insistence to the contrary, the members of the 2000 General Assembly that made the report started with a foregone conclusion and argued fallaciously to 'prove' their point. They argued that the Confederate Battle Emblem on the Mississippi flag werent racist because it was placed their before such connotations were attached to the flag. They said that the connotation of the flag had changed by the time the Georgia General Assembly placed the emblem on the Georgia flag and cited the Dixiecrat revolt as a major source of the change in this connotation. They went so far as to quote dixiecrats that said the flag sent a clear message. The problem is that the current legislature misconstrues that message as one of racism. The true message of the battle flag when it flew in the Revolution of 1861, when it was used by the Dixiecrats, when it was placed on the Georgia flag in 1956, and today is resistance to federal tyranny and support for limited constituted government. It supports State's rights and signifies the South's willingness to fight such tyranny. The 2000 general assembly misconstrued this message based on their biased view of the flag before the research started. Their bias is obvious to all with a reasonable grasp of Southern history. Hell, they refer to the first battle of Mannassas as the Battle of Bull Run. It should be obvious that government schools and media have done the job of their yankee propoganda masters.

Their are alot of people who know better than the current general assembly. The ones who new best were the ones who passed the flag change back in 1956 and specifically, the man that designed the 1956 flag. They both said and continue to say that it was desingned as a memorial to the Confederacy and the ideals of State's rights.

When I was in the federal Navy, people used to always come by and say, why do you fly your flag(one of the few personal items we were allowed to display was a State flag). They said people from Georgia and Texas always fly their State flags. Nobody else does. Sadly, with the change of the State flag we have gone from a flag that most took pride in to one that nobody takes pride in. Even the carpetbagger and scalawag sellouts in Atlanta that passed the flag change dont fly that flag.

Yes, the pre1956 flag was the Stars and Bars(first national flag) with the Stars Replaced by the Georgia Seal. The words of the legilature at the time said that the flag change was to memorialize the soldiers. The man who designed it said that the reason for the 1956 flag was to memorialize the Confederacy(even if it was redundant). The discussion during the presentation and passage of the bill to chang the flag in the 50s never even mentioned Brown vs. the Board of Education.

The St Andrews Cross and mullets were not added in protest of Brown vs. Board of Education. They were added as a memorial to prepare for what was then the upcoming centennial of the Revolution of 1861. You can check the record of the debate in the legislature on the bill. Thats what they said. Brown vs. Board was never mentioned.

No. Im from Polk County, Georgia. My family has been here for nigh on 200 years, though considered part of Paulding Conty before it was called Polk and Cherokee County before it was split to form Paulding.

Yep, they sure do. And the spell colour with a u and sabre re instead of er.

I despise the ACLU. It is a communist organisation. However, I also despise the unconstitutional and misnamed 'USA Patriot Act'. The spying powers endorsed by it are unconstitutional and I oppose them.

Ahh, mature debate and discussion. Nothing like baseless name calling.