Feb 29, 2016

Our Founding Fathers Had An Uncompromising Need For Personal Weapons

Which They Would Not Give Up

Common Sense Commentary: After our Founding Fathers suffered and sacrificed the horrors, pains and losses of war, in defending their rights to freedom from a cruel, abusive and hugely armed, power grabbing government, they wrote these words into our Constitution's Bill Of Rights ... "A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Their struggle against the pompous, power hungry, King of England had proven their need for a free people to stay well armed if they were to remain free. We had better not forget this fact.RB

This from a fellow American Patriot

My old Grandpa said to me, "Son, there comes a time in every man's life when he stops bustin' knuckles and starts bustin' caps and  usually it's when he becomes too old to take a whoopin".

I don't carry a gun to kill people; I carry a gun to keep from being killed. I don't carry a gun because I'm evil; I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the World.

I don't carry a gun because I hate the government; I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

I don't carry a gun because I'm angry; I carry a gun so that I don't have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

I don't carry a gun because I want to shoot someone; I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed and not on a  sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

I don't carry a gun to make me feel like a man; I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they  love.

I don't carry a gun because I feel inadequate; I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

I don't carry a gun because I love it; I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

Police protection is an oxymoron: Free citizens must protect  themselves because police do not protect you from crime; they just  investigate the crime after it happens and then call someone in to  clean up the mess.

Personally, I carry a gun because I'm too young to die and too old to take a whooping'!



In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control: From 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control: · From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.----------------------- Germany established gun control in 1938: From 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and others who were unable to defend themselves were rounded up and exterminated.
China established gun control in 1935: From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Guatemala established gun control in 1964:

From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminate
Uganda established gun control in 1970:

From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956:

From 1975 to 1977, one million educated people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
56 million defenseless people were rounded up and exterminated in the 20th Century because of gun control.
You won't see this data on the US evening news, or hear politicians disseminating this information.

Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws adversely affect only the law-abiding  citizens.

With guns, we are 'citizens'; without them, we are 'subjects'.

During WW II, the Japanese decided not to invade America because they  knew most Americans were ARMED!

Gun owners in the USA are the largest armed forces in the World!

If you value your freedom, please spread this anti-gun control message to all of your friends.

The purpose of fighting is to win. There is no possible victory in defense.

The sword is more important than the shield and skill is more important than either.




I'm a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment! Our Founding Fathers included it in our U.S. Constitution for a very good reason. They had experienced what it meant to live under the tyranny of a dictatorial government and were determined to prevent that from happening again to them, their descendants and countrymen (you and me). So don't waste their suffering, sacrifice and experience of being dominated by an abusive, power mad government. The history of unarmed citizens, unable to protect themselves, is all bad. The 2nd Ammendment is still considered the most important in the Bill Of Rights because it protects all the others. RB


Feb 27, 2016

Liberal Socialist Democrats Already Know It All So Don't Bother To Read This

Common Sense Commentary: Snopes says, of this, "Unproven" , but that is what they always say when they don't want to track down facts of what they don't like. "Proving" or "Disproving" it is their job not the public's. That is the business they are in. But, like the left wing media, they approve what they want to publish and trash what they don't. Just see the videos at the bottom, then you decide. RB

Face The Munich

A Female Physician in Munich, Germany 
sends a message to the world ..................

Yesterday, at the hospital we had a meeting about how the situation here and at the other Munich hospitals is unsustainable. Clinics cannot handle emergencies, so they are starting to send everything to the hospitals.

Many Muslims are refusing treatment by female staff and, we, women, are refusing to go among those animals, especially from Africa. Relations between the staff and migrants are going from bad to worse. Since last weekend, migrants going to the hospitals must be accompanied by police with K-9 units.

Many migrants have AIDS, syphilis, open TB and many exotic diseases that we, in Europe, do not know how to treat them. If they receive a prescription in the pharmacy, they learn they have to pay cash. This leads to unbelievable outbursts, especially when it is about drugs for the children. They abandon the children with pharmacy staff with the words: “So, cure them here yourselves!” So the police are not just guarding the clinics and hospitals, but also large pharmacies.

Truly we said openly: Where are all those who had welcomed in front of TV cameras, with signs at train stations?! Yes, for now, the border has been closed, but a million of them are already here and we will definitely not be able to get rid of them.

Until now, the number of unemployed in Germany was 2.2 million. Now it will be at least 3.5 million. Most of these people are completely unemployable. A bare minimum of them have any education. What is more, their women usually do not work at all. I estimate that one in ten is pregnant. Hundreds of thousands of them have brought along infants and little kids under six, many emaciated and neglected. If this continues and Germany re-opens its borders, I’m going home to the Czech Republic. Nobody can keep me here in this situation, not even double the salary than at home. I went to Germany, not to Africa or the Middle East.

Even the professor who heads our department told us how sad it makes him to see the cleaning woman, who for 800 Euros cleans every day for years, and then meets young men in the hallways who just wait with their hand outstretched, want everything for free, and when they don’t get it they throw a fit.

I really don’t need this! But I’m afraid that if I return, that at some point it will be the same in the Czech Republic. If the Germans, with their nature cannot handle this, there in Czechia it would be total chaos. Nobody who has not come in contact with them has no idea what kind of animals they are, especially the ones from Africa, and how Muslims act superior to our staff, regarding their religious accommodation.

For now, the local hospital staff has not come down with the diseases they brought here, but, with so many hundreds of patients every day – this is just a question of time.

In a hospital near the Rhine, migrants attacked the staff with knives after they had handed over an 8-month-old on the brink of death, which they had dragged across half of Europe for three months. The child died in two days, despite having received top care at one of the best pediatric clinics in Germany. The physician had to undergo surgery and two nurses are laid up in the ICU. Nobody has been punished.

The local press is forbidden to write about it, so we know about it through email. What would have happened to a German if he had stabbed a doctor and nurses with a knife? Or if he had flung his own syphilis-infected urine into a nurse’s face and so threatened her with infection? At a minimum he’d go straight to jail and later to court. With these people – so far, nothing has happened.

And so I ask, where are all those greeters and receivers from the train stations? Sitting pretty at home, enjoying their non-profits and looking forward to more trains and their next batch of cash from acting like greeters at the stations. If it were up to me I would round up all these greeters and bring them here first to our hospital’s emergency ward, as attendants. Then, into one building with the migrants so they can look after them there themselves, without armed police, without police dogs who today are in every hospital here in Bavaria, and without medical help.

Common Sense Comment: Is it true? It is exactly what these videos portray ....



Feb 26, 2016

My First Positive Thought About Trump

Common Sense Commentary: Of course all the candidates, except the Democrats, have sworn they are Conservatives and true Christians, and all claim to be opposed to abortion, same sex marriage, mass immigration and a weakened military, but some of their records contradict it, including Trump's. Now, Al Sharpton suggests that he might leave the country if Trump is elected. If I thought he really meant it, that would be enough "hope" for me to vote for Trump... if he was the only choice against Hillary. At least he couldn't mess the country up any worse than the Democrats and RINOs already have.  You can't get much farther down in the barrel than the bottom ... until the rusted out bottom gives way. RB

Here is the first glimmer of light that Trump may have a slight Conservative bent ... if you can believe anything Al sharpton says, even in humor. RB

This from The Washington Examiner

Al Sharpton might 'get 

out of here' if Trump wins

Rev. Al Sharpton told attendees at a Center for American Progress Action Fund event Thursday he would flee the country if Donald Trump won the election, in order to avoid being deported by Trump.
Sharpton, a Democrat, had positive feedback for many of the Republican presidential candidates until he got to Trump.
"If Donald Trump is the nominee, I'm open to support anyone [else], while I'm also reserving my ticket to get out of here if he wins, only because he'd probably have me deported anyway," Sharpton told attendees, who responded in laughter.

Sharpton, who has participated in various national protests condemning police brutality, did not explain why he thinks Trump would deport him, though both New Yorkers have publicly shared their differences of opinion on various issues. 
Really ? That's news to me. RB

Feb 25, 2016

Our Capitol Going Up In Smoke ... Marijuana Smoke

No surprise ... Now that anything goes in our declining nation.

Common Sense Commentary: Since our President brags about his use of illegal narcotics in the past (and secretly continues to do so), lesser mortals like Washington's lobbyists, politicians, bureaucrats, their aids and hangers on, feel no restrictions on their own use of it. The trend to depravity has been set .. by our left-wing leaders. Just another "Hope and Change" accomplished in Washington.

From Washington Post

D.C. smells like marijuana, 

and residents don’t really care

By Perry Stein  November 20 

The smell near the Columbia Heights Metro station Wednesday night was unmistakable. A lit joint in hand, Tony Lee stood outside a residence talking with friends as the typical evening bustle passed them by, no one paying the group of men any special attention.“The community I’m in, everyone engages in smoking,” said Lee, a 34-year-old District resident who runs his own small construction firm. Plus, he said, if he’s not smoking, he smells the remnants of other people getting high throughout the city on a daily basis anyway.

“I’ve grown accustom to it,” he said.

This cavalier attitude toward marijuana — and the distinctive waft that accompanies it — seems to be the new norm in D.C in the year since the city voted to legalize possession of small amounts of pot.

According to a new Washington Post poll, 57 percent of District residents say they smell marijuana at least once a month. And of these residents, 45 percent say the once-illicit scent doesn’t bother them at all, and 17 percent say it doesn’t bother them “too much.” Fewer than 4 in 10 respondents say they are irked at least some by the smell.

As of February 26, marijuana is legal in D.C.—sort of. Here are the ins and outs of the complex new pot law. (Gillian Brockell/The Washington Post) This prevalent and very public perfume may be a new feature of the nation’s capital, but these statistics are just building on residents’ long support of laxer marijuana laws.

In November 2014, 70 percent of District residents voted in favor of Initiative 71 — a ballot initiative that legalized the growing and possession of marijuana. Initiative 71 went into effect in February, and since then, support for the law hasn’t lost any steam.

Sixty-nine percent of residents still support the law, according to the poll. The numbers most notably break down along generational lines: Only 41 percent of residents 65 and older support marijuana legalization, but the number jumps to 64 percent among 40-64 year-olds and 82 percent among those younger than 40.

Feb 24, 2016

Muslims In Australia Rioting And Screaming "Obama, Obama, We Want Obama"

Common Sense Commentary: So, Mr President,  just keep on telling us and the world that Islam is a "Peaceful Religion" and thereby revealing your secret soul. Historians know it to be the single most consistently violent religion ever to call itself a religion ... for nearly 1400 years. I think I am now understanding your propensity to side with the faith of your fathers as a strategic political move to appeal to the many Muslim nations and the 1.4 Billion Muslims in the world. It may earn you the Secretary General's chair of the United Nations when you finish off the United States, but though that is most likely your goal, and you may wind up as King Of The World, it won't last long and you will then stand before God and answer to the King Of The Universe. How ironic ... and even possibly Biblical, it would be for the King Of The World, to rise to the capstone, pinnacle of the despotic dictators' pyramid... only to fall to the furnace floor of the Lake of Fire. If you should possibly read this, I would be glad to come to D.C. to  explain to you the truth of the One God and Creator who is the Father of Jesus Christ.... but not Mohammad. RB.

"And ye shall know the truth, and the 
truth shall make you free." John 8:32.

 Video of Muslim Riots in Australia now....

Feb 23, 2016

To Clear The Air, Here Is What The Haves And Have Nots Have And Have Not

Common Sense Commentary: Since repetition is the mother of learning, it
seems in order, during periods of national insanity, to repeat what the U.S. Constitution guarantees each citizen equally and what it does not. And since a lunatic fringe, led by their President, is now constantly referring to the U.S. Constitution as a "flawed instrument", and want to flush it down the toilet ... with its defenders, we Constitutional, Flag Waving, America Loving, Pro-Sanity Patriots want to clear the air of smoke and lies and restore the Left Wing Socialists to sanity.... not public office.  I, a small voice in this wilderness, do now publish, with it's preamble, The Wrong Rights Greedy Socialists do not have, followed by The Rights Both Sane And Insane Americans do have, In The Constitutional Bill Of Right Rights. RB

 The Wrong Rights
The following has been attributed to Lewis Napper, a Jackson, Mississippicomputer programmer. He didn't expect his essay--a tart 10-point list of "rights" Americans don't have--to become an Internet legend.

'We the sensible people of the United States, in an attempt to help everyone get along, restore some semblance of justice, avoid more riots, keep our nation safe, promote positive behavior, and secure the blessings of debt-free liberty to ourselves and our great-great-great-grandchildren, hereby try one more time to ordain and establish some common sense guidelines for the terminally whiny, guilt-ridden, delusional. We hold these truths to be self-evident: that a whole lot of people are confused by the Bill of Rights and are so dim they require a Bill of NON-Rights.'

You do not have the right to a new car, big screen TV, or any other form of wealth. More power to you if you can legally acquire them, but no one is guaranteeing anything.

You do not have the right to never be offended. This country is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of dummies, and probably always will be.

You do not have the right to be free from harm. If you stick a screwdriver in your eye, learn to be more careful; do not expect the tool manufacturer to make you and all your relatives independently wealthy.

You do not have the right to free food and housing. Americans are the most charitable people to be found, and will gladly help anyone in need, but we are quickly growing weary of subsidizing generation after generation of professional couch potatoes who  achieve nothing more than the creation of another  generation of professional couch potatoes.

You do not have the right to free health care. That would be nice, but from the looks of public housing, we're just not interested in public health care.

You do not have the right to physically harm other people. If you kidnap, rape, intentionally maim, or kill someone, don't be surprised if the rest of us want to see you get the blue juice.

You do not have the right to the possessions of others. If you rob, cheat, or coerce away the goods or services of other citizens, don't be surprised if the rest of us get together and lock you away in a place where you still won't have the right to a big screen color TV or a life of leisure..

You do not have the right to a job. All of us sure want you to have a job, and will gladly help you along in hard times, but we expect you to take advantage of the opportunities of education and vocational training laid before you to make yourself useful.

You do not have the right to happiness. Being an American means that you have the right to PURSUE happiness, which by the way, is a lot easier if you are unencumbered by an overabundance of idiotic laws created by those of you who were confused by the Bill of Rights.

This is an English speaking country. We don't care where you came from, English is our language. Learn it!

You do not have the right to change our country's history or heritage. This country was founded on the belief in one true God. And yet, you are given the freedom to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. The phrase IN GOD WE TRUST is part of our heritage and history, sorry if you are uncomfortable with it.

The Bill Of Rights You Do Have Are These.... properly attributed to the founders of the United States Of America, not a Socialist among them. RB

The Right Rights

Amendment I Freedoms, Petitions, Assembly
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Amendment II Right to bear arms
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Amendment III Quartering of soldiers
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Amendment IV Search and arrest 
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Amendment V Rights in criminal cases
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Amendment VI Right to a fair trial
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed; which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defence.

Amendment VII Rights in civil cases
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

Amendment VIII Bail, fines, punishment
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.

Amendment IX Rights retained by the People 
The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X States' rights
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.

Feb 22, 2016

Ronald Reagan's Plan For Fiscal Survival Before Calamity Arrived

A Stitch In Time Saves $90000000000000 Gazillion.

Common Sense Commentary: We know that "God" is the answer behind every unknown factor, every known fact and every question. But Jesus also dealt in immediate, human physical terms when He fed the 5000 with a little bread and fish, when He turned the water into new vine, when he said "cast your net on the other side", and when he pulled a gold coin from a fish's mouth to pay taxes. God filled the Psalms, Proverbs and Ecclesiastes with simple common sense lessons concerning seed, sowing, garments, labor, honesty, waste, frugality and "study the ant" wisdom. It's always best to have your feet on solid ground even if your head is in the clouds. Humility, Common Sense  and a Love For Labor is always better than Vanity, Formal Education and a Disrespect For Labor. "A stitch in time" sounds trite to an educated nitwit but it is a major rule of avoiding crisis in life and saving time and material.

We don't need rulers with a New World Order philosophy, but Humble and Sincere ones with Common Sense. They can hire Doctorates and Geniuses by the thousand, but Leaders need the ability to Reason, Perceive, Think, Analyse, Use Logic, Love the people and act only in their interests. Reagan came close to that.
He had a plan for solving mammoth problems while they were still small, but it was as yet too far-sighted for his advisors, geniuses, and doctorates to perceive. Here is that plan only recently brought to light. RB

Feb 20, 2016

Some People Just Have A Way With Words ... Including Lucifer

And 435 Congressmen, less about 5, plus one sitting President and one female who is fighting for his chair.

Common Sense Commentary: About every four years since Lucifer announced his campaign for God's office, politicians have pledged to the gullible voters, vowed upon their mother's grave and sworn upon the Bible that they would fulfill their campaign promises. As with April Fool's Jokes, there have been maybe ten or twelve who kept their word. So now the nation is so fouled up that anybody who wants the job of President either has a death wish, a narcissistic ego, a dictator's lust or ... maybe even a patriot's heart. RB

Here are a few notable confirmations of my exaggerated observation.

Apolitical Aphorisms

If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. ~Jay Leno~
The problem with political jokes is they get elected. ~Henry Cate, VII~

We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office ~Aesop~

If we got one-tenth of what was promised to us in these State of the Union speeches, there wouldn't be any inducement to go to heaven. ~Will Rogers~

Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river. ~Nikita Khrushchev~

When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become President; I'm beginning to believe it. ~Clarence Darrow

Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you. ~Author unknown~

Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. ~John Quinton~

Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other. ~Oscar Ameringer~

I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them. ~Adlai Stevenson, campaign speech, 1952~

A politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country. ~ Tex Guinan~

I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians. ~Charles de Gaulle~

Instead of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks. ~Doug La      

There ought to be one day -- just one -- when there is open season on senators ~Will Rogers~

Feb 19, 2016

What Is A Bitcoin? A Microscopic Magnetic Field On A Computer

Common Sense Commentary: Hugo Salinas Price is one of my favorite authors. He is an humble, intelligent Mexican billionaire, with common sense, who does his best to influence Mexican politicians to make wise decisions. He is also a generous philanthropist and a very decent man.

What Is a 'Bitcoin'?

A "Bitcoin" is a microscopic magnetic field on a computer memory. The inventors of the "Bitcoin System" allow a person to purchase one or more Bitcoins for fiat money and to move the purchased Bitcoins around the world, from one computer to another, free of interference by any governmental agency.
Those who promote the Bitcoin System sing the Bitcoin's praises as being a money that is free of any interference or influence by any government agency or monetary authority, and the owner's Bitcoin property is known to no one but the owner. Secrecy and privacy are the Bitcoin's great merits.
Additionally, Bitcoins are promoted as free of inflationary risk, for the fanciful reason that the Bitcoins are "mined" - evoking the strenous labors of the gold-miners in their dark caverns - by specialists who must rack their brains to "mine" Bitcoins and produce new, additional Bitcoins to contribute to the Bitcoin System as their property. This is a reminiscence of the old, discredited doctrine that "Labor is the source of all value."
Thus the Bitcoin is supposed to be a great triumph of technology favoring the rights of the individual to his property and privacy, and these claims are undoubtedly true. But, does this make the Bitcoin a new type of money?
The answer is "No".
"Commerce" or "Trade" is the indirect exchange of goods and services between individuals or companies.
All commerce today involves indirect exchange; that is to say, we sell something in exchange for something else, which is money, and then we use the money to exchange it for what we wish to purchase.
The money we once used - gold or silver - was simply the commodity which allowed those who participated in indirect exchange to effect their exchange at the lowest possible cost to both sellers and purchasers.
Gold and silver are the commodities whose marginal utility falls at the lowest rates - gold first, followed by silver - of any commodities known to man. This is the reason that they were used as money, once upon a time.
When they were used in indirect exchange, both the sellers and the purchasers of the exchanged goods did so at the lowest possible costs to themselves.
The Bitcoin is not a commodity. It is a magnetic field on a computer. It cannot have "marginal utility" because it is not a thing, but an idea represented by a magnetic field.
The fundamental idea touted to enhance the "value" of the Bitcoin is that "Bitcoins are scarce", as if simple scarcity is the source of value. The fact is, that scarcity does not necessarily make a thing valuable. Would you like to purchase a packet of my hair, cut recently? It's extremely scarce, you know.
There is a reason why the Bitcoin has obtained a measure of success. The reason is that all Bitcoins are microscopic magnetic fields on computers, just as all "money" today, in banks around the world, are microscopic magnetic fields on computers. So the Bitcoin is one scam offering a new, self-proclaimed imaginary "money" competing with another huge, established scam also offering only imaginary "fiat money".
The Bitcoin is merely a new-arrival on the scam scene, as an alternative to the established scam scene of exclusively fiat money in all the world's banks.
For the time being, the established scam has the upper hand, because a) fiat money (in about 174 varieties around the world) is the "owner in possession" of the perversion of the original system of real money, which perished in 1914, and b) people are accustomed to it, since they have been using it for a century.
You own Bitcoins? Have fun! You will be crying, at some point down the road, but you will be able to cry secretly and privately, with none the wiser -and with your losses safely in your hands, of course.

A second article on Bitcoin also by Hugo Salinas Price.

Suppose someone wished to sell his house, way back in the 1890's when gold was used as money, and somebody came to that person and said, "I'll give you "x" ounces of gold for your house", and suppose the offer was accepted. This was a commercial operation, where goods traded hands - the owner of a house sold a house, and received gold; the other party delivered some gold and purchased a house.
When, bygone days, a house was sold for gold coins, all that the seller had to regard was the quantity of gold in the coins offered and whether that quantity was satisfactory or not. Gold was recognized as money!
Now suppose you wish to sell your house today, and someone offers to pay for it in "x" number of Bitcoins. The quantity of Bitcoins - unlike a quantity of gold in yesteryear - would mean absolutely nothing to you. You would have to relate the Bitcoins to something else, namely the dollar. You would want to know for how many dollars you could exchange your Bitcoins. The answer would determine whether or not you sold your house.
It is quite clear that the Bitcoin can only aspire to be aderivative of the dollar. It cannot aspire to anything greater: to have an independent, sovereign value, since, unlike gold, it is not something - something that has a physical existence.
The dollar is presently rising in its exchange value against all other currencies. But no one can deny that the dollar is itself a fiat currency, and that in all history, absolutely all fiat currencies have ended in the total collapse of their value in exchange.
What future awaits the Bitcoin when the fiat dollar finally crashes? Without a dollar to refer to, what is a Bitcoin? It is "the shadow of a dream".
What I am getting at is that the Bitcoin is a non-thing. It will never be able to have an independent, sovereign value on its own, because it is a non-thing, just like all currencies in the world today are non-things, including the (temporarily) Almighty Dollar, which became an absolute non-thing precisely on Sunday, August 15, 1971.
The creators and promoters of the Bitcoin are perhaps acting in good faith, but they are individuals enthralled with technology. The Bitcoin may indeed be a technological marvel, but the creators and promoters of the Bitcoin do not understand money, and they do not understand that the creation of money cannot be accomplished by technology, no matter how sophisticated it may be. The ignorant public of today is also bewitched by the marvels of technology and has been thoroughly deceived by false economists about what money is and must be, and this opens the way for such fantasies as the Bitcoin.
I stand by my opinion that the Bitcoin is, in fact if not in intention, a fraud; it is an attempt to muscle-in on the enormous scam of universal fiat money, which is a curse upon mankind. And as a scam, it will go to the dust-bin of History, along with the world's present fiat money system.

Feb 17, 2016

Are You Intelligent, Honest And Agree With Me On This Question?

Common Sense Commentary: Here is an exercise in intelligence and  honesty discovery.

To prove you are intelligent and honest, I ask you Republicans, Democrats and Independents the question below the following statement ....

One American Political Party is supported by a vast majority, but not 100%, of the following categories of voters: News Network reporters, Unions, Hollywood play actors, advocates of open borders to illegals, the 45.3 % of US households who pay no income tax, abortionists, able bodied Medicaid recipients, prison inmates, drug pushers, homosexuals, bureaucrats, Socialists and Atheists.

My question is, which Political Party is it? ........ You see, you do agree with me and are an honest and intelligent Republican, Democrat or Independent. I only asked the question. You gave the answer. This is why I cannot vote for a member of that Party. If you are a member of that Political Party, which of the above categories do fit in? RB

Feb 16, 2016

Self Described Socialist, Bernie Sanders, Never Had A Real Job ... Like Obama

Common Sense Commentary: What a dizzying commentary on the state of American integrity, or even sanity, if it turns out we have to choose between the self professed superman, narcissist, Donald Trump, and the self professed socialist whiner, who never had a real job, Bernie Sanders, for the highest office in the world, President of the United States. But the only other choice for Democrats is Hillary or maybe Biden, which is just as bad. Then there is Bloomberg who double clutched from Democrat into Republican into Independent. That's kinda like Trump shifting gears on everything he ever did or said and Hillary lying about every thing she ever did or said. But if there ever was a lazy, shiftless looser, its Bernie Sanders.

Who is Bernie Sanders?
Article by Thomas Lifson

Before he achieved political office, Bernie Sanders never had a steady paycheck in the first four decades of his life. Now, he aspires to the highest office in the land where he could play a decisive role in shaping the circumstances under which the rest of us work and receive (when we can) our paychecks.  It is a sobering record, as Investor’s Business Daily explains it: His family managed to send him to the University of Chicago. Despite a prestigious degree, however, Sanders failed to earn a living, even as an adult. It took him 40 years to collect his first steady paycheck — and it was a government check. “I never had any money my entire life,” Sanders told Vermont public TV in 1985, after settling into his first real job as mayor of Burlington. Sanders spent most of his life as an angry radical and agitator who never accomplished much of anything. And yet now he thinks he deserves the power to run your life and your finances — “We will raise taxes;” he confirmed Monday, “yes, we will."One of his first jobs was registering people for food stamps, and it was all downhill from there.Sanders took his first bride to live in a maple sugar shack with a dirt floor, and she soon left him. Penniless, he went on unemployment. Then he had a child out of wedlock. Desperate, he tried carpentry but could barely sink a nail. “He was a shi**y carpenter,” a friend told Politico Magazine. “His carpentry was not going to support him, and didn’t.  "Then he tried his hand freelancing for leftist rags, writing about “masturbation and rape” and other crudities for $50 a story. He drove around in a rusted-out, Bondo-covered VW bug with no working windshield wipers. Friends said he was “always poor” and his “electricity was turned off a lot.” They described him as a slob who kept a messy apartment — and this is what his friends had to say about him.The only thing he was good at was talking … non-stop … about socialism and how the rich were ripping everybody off. “The whole quality of life in America is based on greed", the bitter layabout said, “I believe in the redistribution of wealth in this nation."So he tried politics, starting his own socialist party. Four times he ran for Vermont public office, and four times he lost — badly. He never attracted more than single-digit support — even in the People’s Republic of Vermont. In his 1971 bid for U.S. Senate, the local press said the 30-year-old “Sanders describes himself as a carpenter who has worked with ‘disturbed children.’ ” In other words, a real winner." He finally wormed his way into the Senate in 2006, where he still ranks as one of the poorest members of Congress. Save for a municipal pension, Sanders lists no assets in his name. All the assets provided in his financial disclosure form are his second wife’s. He does, however, have as much as $65,000 in credit-card debt. Well, at least he hasn’t pulled a Clinton and enriched himself via influence-peddling. But it is quite clear that envy is a deep part of his psychology. That has become the source of focus in his life, something that obviously was lacking until he got into politics. Can a man who was unable to earn a decent living, unable to keep himself in an orderly environment, without political office really be the chief executive of the United States Government? Sure, Sanders may not be a hypocrite, but this is nothing to brag about. His worthless background contrasts sharply with the successful careers of other “outsiders” in the race for the White House, including a billionaire developer, a world-renowned neurosurgeon and a Fortune 500 CEO. The choice in this election is shaping up to be a very clear one. It will likely boil down to a battle between those who create and produce wealth, and those who want to steal it and redistribute it!... Envy is a terrible vice and it is the probable cause for the Socialists credo of 'redistributing wealth'. Taking from Peter to pay Paul, even though it is stealing, has always attracted the Paul’s of the world; but it does not produce wealth. It produces sloth — and it always fails. Like the dog biting its’ tail, there is not enough nourishment for it to survive; but there is a great deal of pain.

Fred Good's And My Drive To The Arctic Circle

Common Sense Commentary: Of all the things my friend Fred Good and I saw and experienced on our three week, 10,000 mile drive, from Texas to the Arctic Circle and back, here he tells of one incident, and no doubt the most important one, of our adventure. I might add, while I drove, Fred sang every old cowboy song ever written, plus some, and kept me entertained with a hundred different stories. We slept in the back of that Suburban every night in some places where only Bears, Mountain Goats, Lunes and Camp Robber Green Jays live. As one old cowboy once said .... "It was quite a ride Fred". P.S.  What do you think about driving to the Panama Canal, Fred?

I believe it was in the early 90's that Dr. Rayburn Blair and I were driving to the Arctic circle in Alaska in Dr. Blair's Suburban. We were driving up a mountain road in North Dakota when we noticed a white Ford passed at a brisk speed with quite a smoking tail pipe . The drivers long blond hair was blowing through the left front window. Dr. Blair remarked that 'The little lady must be in a hurry. As we reached the mountain top and heading down we could see the white Ford parked with the hood up and black smoke coming from the motor. The person with long blond hair was bent over looking at the engine . We had passed the vehicle, but Dr. Blair turned around and said "We need to help the lady. .However, we found out that "The Little Lady" was actually a man . This happened many years ago, yet I remember his name because of what transpired. He told us that his name is Russell Liberman . He said that his car had blown a piston . He asked us to take him to the nearest town and he would call someone to pick him up. As we drove down the mountain Dr. Blair (to my astonishment) asked Russell if he had been in prison ?  He said yes "I just got out". Dr. Blair said, Russell, for some reason you have allowed other people to impress upon you that you are less that your brother. That you were borne with less. Russell, I want you to know that when you were conceived that there was millions of cells within your mothers womb that God could have created a whole lot of people, But God reached into the darkness of your mothers womb and from the millions of cells he picked you Russell. You are one of the greatest things God ever created !  As we came to stop in the next town, Dr. Blair led Russell to the Lord. As you are probably aware, the name Liberman is a Jewish name. Before we left Russell I gave him my business card and asked him to call if he felt like it .

We arrived back home from Alaska . About six monthsh passed. One morning I was told that a man was on the phone that we had given a ride in North Dakota. I picked up the phone an asked ,"Is this you,Russell" He said Mr. Good I can't believe you remembered my name. I am calling to tell you and Dr. Blair that I am reading the Bible and going to church. I am serving the Lord.

Maybe you can see why I remember the Name of Russell Liberman .

Feb 15, 2016

Rule One In How Not To Lose: The Pitbull Tactics Of John Paul Jones

You Are Not Defeated Until You Quit!

Common Sense Commentary: This year is the 237th anniversary of one of the most famous sea battles ever fought. John Paul Jones and his 140 Marines lashed their smaller ship to the much larger British ship and, like a pitbull, they sank their teeth into it's throat and never turned loose until their victim simply ceased to struggle. It was America's first real victory at sea and an inspiration/motivation be be and do our very best and never, never, never quit. RB

John Paul Jones, the famous Scottish sea captain, who fought on our side during the Revolution that bought our freedom , had 140 Marine sharpshooters aboard his ship, the Bon Homme Richard, when he tangled with the larger, British Serapis  on 23 Sept. 1779. Maybe that's why he felt confident enough to yell, "Sir, I have not yet begun to fight!" when asked during the height of battle if he would surrender his ship.

Jones probably didn't use those exact words that busy night at sea 236+ years ago. Tradition has a way of tidying up slogans. Whatever Jones said about not quitting, and he never quit, chances are he threw in a few well chosen phrases that could blister paint.

History records no famous sayings by the 140 Marines aboard the Bon Homme Richard with Paul Jones. They were too busy fighting. Without those Marines and their marksmanship, Jones and his immortal quip might have been forgotten long ago. "I have not yet begun to fight" would sound pretty hollow if he had lost.

He didn't lose. American and French Marines helped a gritty sea captain reach down the throat of defeat and pull out a victory. The refusal of Jones to surrender and the Marines' deadly fire gave special backbone to the greatest sea encounter that occurred in the age when ships had wooden sides. Marines then carried muskets primed with powder from cowhorns and fired with flints.

The American Navy had few ships during that first war with Britain. The only vessels that seemed aggressively interested in fighting the enemy were those captained by John Paul Jones. Other captains and crews typically preferred safe merchantman targets and rich prizes to divide. Jones, however, was a fighting officer, not a sea merchant. Even when the crews on his ships were mutinous and eager for prize money, not British cannon, Jones had other ideas. "I propose to go in the way of danger," he said, and it wasn't rhetoric.

When Jones sighted a British man-of-war, he didn't fill sails and run. He attacked. To crews that were usually assortments of many nationalities, this tendency of Jones was highly unorthodox and unpopular. Jones behaved as if war imposed the duty to fight rather than an opportunity for profit. It made him the greatest of sea captains to Continental Marines who shared his enthusiasm for the Colonial cause.

Marines regularly sailed with Jones on his voyages. They became an essential ingredient in his personal formula for winning a sea battle. In fact, Jones' career as an American naval officer and the Marines began about the same time. On December 3, 1775, the flag was hoisted on his first navy ship, the Alfred. Less than a month earlier, on November 10, 1775, the Continental Congress had authorized the first two Marine battalions.

Recruiting of Marines took place initially at Tun Tavern in Philadelphia, with tavern keeper Robert Mullan as a recruiting officer. Complements of Marines were assigned to naval vessels; and they began earning their reputation as seagoing fighters, especially when under way with John Paul Jones.

A year before the meeting between Bon Homme Richard and Serapis, Marines sided Jones in one of the boldest exploits of the Revolution.

Spring 1778: Jones took the 18-gun sloop Ranger into the Irish Sea to harass British shipping and commit any other mischief he could dream up. One scheme particularly seemed mad even for John Paul Jones. He proposed to do what no one had managed for centuries: invade England.

The target was Whitehaven seaport where Jones decided to give the British a dose of what they had been dishing out in New England. Most of his officers and men looked on the venture with complete disfavor. Two ships officers even feigned illness to avoid leading a shore party.

"Don't volunteer" wasn't the slogan of the Marines on the Ranger. Lieutenant Samuel Wallingford, USMC, volunteered to lead one of the two boat crews. Jones took the other in this historic invasion.

Actually it was more of a hit-and-run Commando raid than invasion, but it was a towering insult to the British that brutally sabotaged morale. The landing was made near dawn, April 23, 1778. Ships were burned in the harbor and Whitehaven citizens shaken up by this sudden blow from the sea. Where were the vaunted "wooden walls" of the British Navy? Where was their protection?

One group of men from the Ranger shortly after landing headed for a British pub and "made very free with the liquor." It was some beach party. By 0600 all hands were back aboard the Ranger. They took no loot, so by business standards then foremost with many crewmen, the raid was a failure.

But the strategic payoff for the American cause was that the British suddenly had less affection for the American war adventure than ever before. To the British, civilized warfare was something to fight at a distance. Now Jones and Wallingford shoved it into their own front yard.

The British newspaper, Gazetteer and New Daily Advertiser, May 5, 1778, showed how ill-prepared people were even for a small taste of the real thing. "The people of Whitehaven," it announced, "can never recover from their fright; two thirds of the people are bordering on insanity; the remainder on idiotism."

Coastal residents moved inland. Mothers scared children into obedience with the name "Jones." Soon even false rumors that Jones was coming could start panic. Perhaps worst of all, Jones' work struck the British in the pocketbook. "Such a damp on commerce has the American privateer called the Ranger made," declared the Gazetteer, that insurance rates on merchant shipping quadrupled.

That in-and-out raid at Whitehaven proved a brilliant demonstration of psychological warfare long before it had a name. Inevitably Jones was described as a "formidable and desperate pirate." And Whitehaven wasn't the end of the Ranger's work during that voyage.

The very next day, April 24th, Jones ordered an attack on the 21-gun Drake. The odds were not good. Drake was the superior ship with a disciplined British crew, and Jones had a mutinous crew behind him when the attack began. This was another instance of Jones fighting the war as if it were war rather than a chance for booty. But Jones stationed his Marines, committed the Ranger, and then his men had to fight or be killed. They fought. "The action was warm, close and obstinate," Jones later reported.

The battle lasted slightly over an hour. It followed Jones' classic pattern for sea engagements. He concentrated his cannon, 9-pounders, on the Drake's rigging. Object: Slow her down. And he used his Marines to make the deck of the Drake dead man's country.

One of those killed by a Marine musket was Captain Burden, commander of the Drake. With sails and rigging battered, captain lost, and withering musket fire raking the weather deck, the Drake's colors were struck. She was thoroughly beaten by a sailor named Jones and a group of sharpshooting Marines.

Three were killed on the Ranger. One was the young Marine officer who volunteered at Whitehaven, Lieutenant Wallingford. He commanded the Marines aboard the Ranger and directed their fire in the battle. He was one of the earliest Marine Corps officers to die in battle at sea, performing his duty.

During the Revolution, what Jones won at sea, he often lost ashore. He didn't lose the Ranger to an enemy vessel with more guns, but he lost her when he returned to port. The Revolution was another war in which politics often meant more than victory. The Ranger was assigned to a second captain, and Jones was ashore in France without a ship.

Benjamin Franklin, the American Commissioner in France and a friend of John Paul Jones, thought fighting captains should be encouraged to fight. Among other things, Franklin was a genius at scrounging. With his help, a ship was located for Jones. It was a tired French veteran of many voyages around Africa to the Orient, the Duc de Duras.

Jones in his usual meticulous fashion outfitted her for sea, including borrowed and doubtfully safe cannon. He renamed her Bon Homme Richard, the French name for Benjamin Franklin's "Poor Richard." Then he assembled a motley crew from the ports and prisons of Europe. Some sailors were English, signed on from French jails. Of the 227 seamen, only 79 were Americans.

The Richard also carried 137 Marines, mostly French volunteers in the American cause, and three Marine officers, Lieutenants James J. O'Kelly, Eugene McCarthy, and Edward Stack.

When the Richard put to sea in the summer of 1779, it was accompanied by French privateers and an American frigate, Alliance, led by another politically appointed captain, Pierre Landais.

Comes that fateful moonlight night of 23 September and the meeting with Serapis, in the North Sea a few miles off Flamborough Head, England. The news that Jones was afloat in British waters spread, and nearly 1,500 climbed the chalk heights of Flamborough to watch. What they witnessed on the shadowy waters below was one of the greatest sea battles in history.

Earlier Jones had sighted the 44-gun Serapis and the 22-gun Countess of Scarborough convoying a large merchant fleet. The merchant ships hurried for cover, and the other ships with Jones wanted to take after them, ignoring the British warships. Why ask for trouble with easy profit for the grabbing?

The Serapis, under Captain Richard Pearson, was superior to the Richard by any measure used. It was new, had protective copper sheathing, and a main battery of twenty 18-pounders versus the Richard's six 18's that Jones feared were, like the ship, past their prime.

Serapis was also the faster and more maneuverable ship. It could turn quicker and bludgeon Richard with its heavy guns. So Jones did more than ask for trouble. He grabbed it. He attacked the Serapis, ordering the same tactics that had worked before against the stronger Drake. Whenever they were close enough the Marines on deck and in the tops should turn the deck of Serapis into a rehearsal for hell. His cannon should foul the enemy's rigging, cut her speed.

The encounter began a little after 1900 and lasted about three hours. Jones' fears for the 18's proved warranted. Two exploded on first firing, killing their crews, and putting the other 18's out of action. Serapis proceeded to pound the Richard with broadside after broadside. Jones had only his smaller deck cannon and his Marine sharpshooters with which to counter.

He also had his own skills at shiphandling during battle. Since the Richard was being shot to pieces by the British big guns, Jones maneuvered to grapple. At first the Serapis easily avoided the sluggish Richard. But Jones' persistence and seamanship eventually worked. The Serapis was slowed. Marines kept sailors from handling sails properly. Jones seized his chance to attach lines and make fast.

Pearson sent men to cut the lines, but Marines loading and firing with swift efficiency made it impossible for an English sailor to get close. Jones is supposed to have borrowed a musket from a Marine and personally taken care of one British volunteer. Fourteen sailors on the Serapis bravely tried to reach the connecting lines. None made it.

The Serapis' helm was also rendered unmanageable by the Marine crack shots. Eleven helmsmen attempted to control the wheel and failed. Lieutenant Stack and Marines in the maintop were especially effective in keeping the deck of Serapis a haven only for dead heroes. Soon no one on the British vessel could or would venture topside or away from cover.

Trying to break the Richard's death grip, Pearson let go his port anchor. He hoped the shock would free Serapis, but the maneuver had a reverse effect. The two ships were jolted together, starboard to starboard. The smashed and leaking Richard had the Serapis, snug and close, for a life preserver.

The two ships were tightly linked in a weird dance by the light of the moon. Serapis with 18-pounders on its gun deck could blast away unopposed at the helpless Richard. Jones, down to three small deck cannon, fired at the mainmast of Serapis as Marines kept the British decks cleared.

What were the other ships doing while the main contestants were fighting to the death? Early in the battle, the Countess of Scarborough approached to help her sister ship. That was too much for one of the French privateers. While the other French ships cautiously avoided trouble, Captain Cottineau took the Pallas into action against the Countess.

And that second American warship, the Alliance? During most of the battle her strange captain kept his ship well out of range. Finally when it seemed the Richard was in extremis and hadn't a chance, the Alliance came on.

Even then, efficient broadsides from Alliance against the British ship would help Jones immensely. The second American ship, under her captain's orders, fired several broadsides-at the Bon Homme Richard!

Landais' traitorous strategy came out later. He wanted the Richard to sink and Jones to die. Then he could seize the wounded Serapis, have all the glory and profit for himself. At sea, it was that kind of war.

With traitors to port and the enemy to starboard, each dealing death, there is no wonder that members of Jones' crew were heard crying for quarter. Captain Pearson called across by voice trumpet to ask if the Richard had struck.

"No, sir, I haven't as yet thought of it. I'm determined to make you strike," was Jones" reply. Afterward Jones said, "I was determined to conquer or die in the attempt."

At that point in the battle, dying seemed his inevitable fate. He had no defense. His offense was three small cannon firing at the Serapis' mast and muskets in the hands of Marines.

A large number of released British prisoners rushed on deck, certain the Richard was sinking. With any kind of leadership, they could have seized Jones and his ship. But Jones faced them, ordered them to man the pumps or drown. They pumped.

When Pearson demanded again if Jones was through, the captain who wouldn't quit is supposed to have said, "Sir, I have not yet begun to fight."

Whether he said it or not, Jones, his musket-firing Marines, and the seamen who held fast lived it. By objective and reasonable standards of war, Jones lost that battle several times. But he had learned the secret of not losing: Don't quit.

A Scottish sailor with Jones named William Hamilton landed a grenade through an open hatch. It exploded with devastating effect on the gun deck of the Serapis. Captain Pearson was afraid his mainmast was about to go, and the Marine musket fire was incessant. Those facts and the grenade killed his zest to carry on. Pearson caved in before Jones and struck his colors.

During the three-hour battle, 67 Marines on the Richard were killed or wounded. Without their musket fire, the results would have been different. It would have been Jones, not Pearson, who handed over his sword. Or more probably, Jones would have been dead, and the crew of the Richard would have surrendered with their indomitable captain gone.

But the Marines were there and did their job.

The old Bon Homme Richard also did its job. The ship stayed afloat until the victory was won. Two days later, 25 September 1779, the Richard sank in the North Sea. She went down bow first. Then she came up permanently in the history and drama of the sea.

John Paul Jones, in command of the Serapis, repaired what damage he could at sea and sailed for a Dutch port. The Countess of Scarborough was present as a second prize. Pallas, the French ship that fought, and the others that didn't, sailed in company. The Alliance, with Pierre Landais still commanding, was part of the victory squadron too.

Was Landais hanged for his cowardly or traitorous acts off Flamborough Head? No, he wasn't even punished. Jones seized the Alliance from him, but that was later reversed. Landais was captain of the Alliance when she got under way for America. He went insane during the voyage, and one of his officers had to assume command.

As for Jones, he was ashore and shipless once again in France. He had only one more American command and fought no more battles at sea for the cause of freedom under the American flag. He was simply too good at his job and too professional to please suspicious politicians and ambitious-for-profit seamen.

It was 126 years before something like justice was achieved for John Paul Jones. In 1905 his remains were removed from an unmarked grave in Paris and escorted by an honor guard of four American cruisers home to the country he served that September night in the North Sea. He was placed in a marble shrine at Annapolis with these words nearby: HE GAVE OUR NAVY ITS EARLIEST TRADITIONS OF HEROISM AND VICTORY.

We remember John Paul Jones and his victory 236 years ago. We should also remember Wallingford on the Ranger and those other Marines who sailed with Jones. When the going was roughest, they stood to the challenge and helped Jones teach us once and for all how not to lose.

Author unknown.

Feb 13, 2016

The Left Offended At Heidi Cruz's Sincere And Loving Christian Words

Common Sense Commentary: How far from our roots have we strayed when
simple Christian discussion is translated as scandalous and not to be tolerated. RB

This from National Review

Scandal of the Day: 

Christian, Heidi Cruz, 

Says Christian Things

By David French

The scandal du jour, from the ignorant, anti-Christian sectors of the Left, comes courtesy of a brief excerpt of a radio interview with Heidi Cruz, Ted Cruz’s wife: For those who don’t have 92 seconds to listen, here are the quotes that caused Ken Meyer at Mediaite to call Cruz’s statements a bizarre rant: We are at a cultural crossroads in our country, and if we can be in this race to show this country the face of the God that we serve — this Christian God that we serve is the foundation of our country, our country was built on Judeo-Christian values, we are a nation of freedom of religion, but the God of Christianity is the God of freedom, of individual liberty, of choice and of consequence. Jon Green, a regional field director for Barack Obama’s 2012 campaign, also found this excerpt offensive: I think that’s something that this country really needs to be reminded of, is that Christians are loving people, are nonjudgmental people, but there is right and wrong, we have a country of law and order, there are consequences to actions and we must all live peaceably in our own faiths under the Constitution. And Ted is uniquely able to deliver on that combination of the law and religion. Green comments:  Thomas Jefferson envisioned a wall of separation between Church and State. Ted Cruz envisions that wall being torn down entirely. He’s not judging, he just thinks people who disagree are wrong and bad. In reality, Heidi Cruz’s comment represents a standard (and accurate) expression not just of Evangelical beliefs, but also of American history. Christians aspire to “show the face of God” in all that we do — by imitating as much as we can our Savior, Jesus Christ. We fail often, but we’re better for the effort. As for Cruz’s statement that our nation was built on “Judeo-Christian values,” only sheer ahistorical revisionism would downplay the role of the Christian faith and Judeo-Christian values not just with the Founders, but in the founding generation, and the generations that followed. Though there have been (and are) many notable and patriotic atheists who’ve made immense contributions to American life, atheism did not build the United States of America. Moreover, it’s critical to remind Americans — especially when the media exalts and celebrates secularism — that, yes, our commitment to individual liberty is derived in large part because our earliest Christian settlers fled religious persecution and — ultimately — envisioned a nation uniquely dedicated to limited government and individual liberty — including religious liberty. The Establishment Clause, in fact, was envisioned as a guarantor of religious freedom — and not as it is used today, as a mighty hammer of state religious discrimination. I agree with Heidi. A President Cruz would safeguard individual liberty because he’s a Christian, not in spite of his faith.

Hear the tape of Heidi's comments at this site:

Feb 12, 2016

"Give Me Your Mobsters, Terrorists, Religious Fanatics Yearning To Live Free ...Of Charge"

The inscription on the Statue of Liberty, so recognized worldwide, is “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”  This quote comes from Emma Lazarus' poem, New Colossus, which she wrote for a fundraiser auction to raise money for the pedestal upon which the Statue of Liberty now sits. The poem did not receive much recognition and was nearly forgotten after the auction. In the early 1900s and after her death, one of her friends began a campaign to memorialize her New Colossus poem. The effort was a success, and a plaque with the poem's text was mounted on the pedestal of the statute. Here is the entire poem.
The New Colossus
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,With conquering limbs 

astride from land to land; Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates 

shall stand A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame Is the 

imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles. From her 

beacon-hand Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes 

command The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame."Keep 

ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she With silent lips. "Give 

me your tired, your poor,Your huddled masses yearning to breathe 

free,The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.Send these, the 

homeless, tempest-tost to me,I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Common Sense Commentary:

The inscription does not say, "Give me your mobsters, terrorists, 

and religious fanatics yearning to rob, kill, rape and live free ... off 

of the tax-payers." That never has been what the Statue Of Liberty 

stands for. She was not intended, with unveiled face and freedom 

for females, as well as males, to invite heretics who enslave little 

girls and women. Her welcoming presence in New York Harbor was 

not intended for foreign mobsters, who corrupt, rob and push drugs,  

or terrorists and religious fanatics whose god sends them to kill 

those who disagree with them ... In their words, "Infidels". No, our 

Lady of Liberty is there to welcome, in the words of The Colossus, 

".... your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breath 

free." That does not include criminals and Muslim terrorists.

But, vote hungry politicians and our present President have perverted  

these words to include unvetted terrorists, a host of Russian mobsters, 

Albanian mobsters, Asian mobsters and Mexican Mafia. Whatever 

happened to the old fashioned Italian mob, the Mafia, Costa Nostra?

They are being outnumbered and bumped off by all these other crooks.

At least these foreign mobsters are just criminals, murderers, drug 

pushers and welfare cheats. They don't intend to kill the U.S. Golden 

Goose. Unlike Muslim terrorists, these foreign mobsters don't want to 

destroy the source of all those Golden Eggs .... just rob the nest and only 

kill those few who try to stop them ... not the entire nation. If our rotten 

government doesn't have the character or courage to deport or destroy 

both the immigrant mobsters and the immigrant Muslim terrorists, you 

can be sure you and I will have to face them at our door, in the night or on  
the street ... sooner or later.