Free Republic

You are trying with little success to lie your way through an article. Too bad that this forum is comprised mostly of people with some intelligence. Conservative radio shows are popular because that's what working people want to hear. The liberal audience has their boob-tube for all of their "informational" needs. Because of a watered down educational system, liberals can no longer muster the attention span to listen to radio. They must get their fill of liberal lies through 5 second video clips on Peter Jennings' show or that of Sam Donaldson. George Stephanopolous's show is objective, too, right? Your ideas didn't work for the USSR and they would never work here in America. Try Canada.

Great write up. However, as a Taxachusetts resident I must correct one thing. In 2000, we voted to lower the tax rate back to 5% after Dukakis needed a "temporary" fix in the 80's. And we also voted to allow a deduction for charitible contributions. Both ballot questions passed but then during 2002, our "representatives" decided that we didn't know what we were doing and voted to halt the decrease of the income tax rate at 5.3% and they also thought the charity deduction was a bit much and they put an end to that immediately. Let it be clear that our representatives only represent themselves.

"Pompous Twits" - har har.

But what isn't funny is how these people don't get it. Reasoning with Hitler didn't work either. Good ol' Chamberlain hung his head in shame after letting that dictator walk all over him because he knew his olive branch tactics were useless. Churchill had to grab the bull by the horns to settle things with him. Hussein is no different.

These human doves think they're laying down their lives for humanity when it's our military laying down their lives to protect the doves. If I write anything more, I'll get vulgar.

Buchanan rules. I'm glad he defected from the Republican party. He's the best president that we may never have. There is a huge difference between Republicans and conservatives. I don't think too many people realize this fact.

Blunt and very accurate.

You beat me to the the response that this Flying A so sorely needed.

"maybe it was Juan Valdez..."

Mmmmmmmmmmmmm...coffee...

Kudos to you for making such a great point and also keeping a sense of humor about it. I can barely talk about that issue without cussing up a storm. If only more US citizens would take matters into their own hands to clean up so many messes that our governments won't handle for us.

I thank the Founding Fathers for the 2nd and 1st Amendments every day.

"I'm still wondering where your 6 figure salary fits into this? Anyway,

You, man, are hi-LAR-ious.

I am but a man from the other left coast called Massachusetts however I do offer good advice to these Hollywood denizens...

STICK TO YOUR SCRIPTS. WHEN YOU OPEN YOUR MOUTHS OFF CAMERA, YOU LOSE FANS.

Thank you.

The peanut farmer, although with good intentions, seems to want to further prove just how useless he really was and still is. Why he thinks he can broker peace over there is way beyond me. No Arab will put any faith in a westerner to solve their problems. The Israelis don't care what we do just as long as we keep giving them financial/military support. If he thinks he made progress back in the 70's, why was Sadat assassinated? And the fact that Begin received a Nobel Peace Prize has only served to diminish any integrity that honor used to have.

Jimmy, go home and rest in your golden years. You'd be doing the world a favor.

"were incapable of understanding it"

Easy now. Since there were a few of us that were incapable, perhaps your cummincation was the problem. You sound like a liberal blaming others for your own shortcomings.

He'll have to find another source of taxes--perhaps a clean air tax.

Ha! Mucho funny. But don't spread that idea, it may catch on with the libs.

It's too bad that you regard the truth as insulting. I think what the writer was getting at was that a goverment that would impose the banning of a legal activity in private institutions is bordering tyrannical. It's the mentality behind the measure that is unnerving. The last time I checked, smoking was legal. I don't smoke and if I wanted to go out for a drink without having to inhale others' polluted exhalations, I wouldn't expect the government to force private business owners to appease my tastes.
And I love the government's two faced approach to the smoking problem. They sue the tobacco companies for the cost of health care because cigarettes are addictive but then they hike tax rates on cigarettes under the guise of making people quitting the habit. But if it's addictive, they won't quit because they can't, right? Well, which is it?

Suppose my horoscope says "Be wary of tall people on Monday; fat people on Tuesday." Do I have the right/freedom to adjust my behavior based on what I believe, even if others think it is stupid?
Suppose your religion opposes sex before marriage and my girlfriend and I want to rent your upstairs apartment above you. Which one of the parties is trying to impose his chosen lifestyle on the other?

---

Bob, if you think someone, whether it be an individual or private company, cannot/should not adjust its behavior based on what it believes, then what are you suggesting? That would imply the standardization of thought. Good grief!

It's no wonder that Australia is now trying to stifle free speech. They disarmed the people of their guns a little while ago and now they are trying to shut up possible dissenters. The bigger picture is the move towards one big global government that promotes socialism. So now as US citizens, we have to be wary of foreign countries' laws? Koffi Anan must be psyched by this ruling. Our government has to answer to the likes of the UN and the WTO, so if our own government is not sovereign, I guess it's citizenry should not be either. What is happening to this country???

Your response is witty yet very accurate. In the 2000 presidential debates between the Repubs, when asked about whether or not the candidates were for or against racial profiling, Bush and McCain (hardly a Repub anyway) were staunchly opposed to it. Yet Alan Keyes, a black and the most intelligent candidate to run in decades, said he was for it. His response was something like "if a certain segment of the population commits certain kinds of crimes, it is not racial profiling. It is using your experience." Black America was polled and showed their support for racial profiling of any Arab flight passengers after 9/11. Wasn't it racial profiling that came up with a white sniper in the DC area attacks? But that was okay even though the killer was black. People, you can't have it both ways. Profiling is based on experience so quit your whining.

Not that I am for it, but why all the talk against segregation? I don't know how many responses I read were that of black Americans but it appears to me that black Americans want nothing to do with America anyway. They identify themselves with Africa even though they have been in this country as long as any of the whites. They manufacture clothes with names like "FUBU", an acronym for "For Us By Us." Black Americans are doing just fine segregating themselves. There are black universities, black fraternities and sororities, black beauty pageants and blacks television stations. So is all of this banter about Lott's gaffe just PC posturing or what?