05 May 2004 @ 10:31 AM 

I think this one says it all…



Tags Categories: Uncategorized Posted By: Mark
Last Edit: 05 May 2004 @ 10 31 AM

EmailPermalinkComments Off
 05 May 2004 @ 10:29 AM 

I might have discussed the differences before, but this article, Installing a republic; saving our own brings back the importance of knowing the difference.

In the 1950s, a great American constitutionalist from Indiana, Sen. William Jenner, warned that “a democracy, the will of the majority is law. Anything is allowed, provided that the majority approves. There are no checks and balances, and the rights of the individual are not protected.”

The senator continued by quoting from a U.S. Army Training Manual, which defined democracy as “government of the masses,” which can result in “mobocracy, demagogism, discontent and anarchy.” Liberals quickly had that manual removed from every military unit and installation.

If we had a true democracy, all it would take is a 51% vote on anything to make it legal. Things like bringing back slavery, or worse yet, open season on minorities. Don’t laugh, because in 1960 such a vote could have come about, and to the detriment of the Black community.

The United States has a Representative Republic, where the People hire persons to serve for limited terms to represent a certain area or state and to discharge those duties as they see fit, but also considering input from their constituents. My lawmakers do not always agree with everything I do, nor would I expect them to. But I do expect them to listen to my input, and they do so. When I send letters to Washington to state my position for or against certain subjects or policies, I always get back a polite letter, even if my representatives aren’t voting my way.

Always remember, we live in a Republic.

Tags Categories: Uncategorized Posted By: Mark
Last Edit: 05 May 2004 @ 10 29 AM

EmailPermalinkComments Off
 05 May 2004 @ 10:12 AM 

Here you go. This article, The Greens’ Favorite Terrorist shows you what they are capable of.

The guise of modern-day terrorism is no longer limited to Palestinian suicide-bombers or the visceral images of the tragedy of 9/11. In a world of ever-increasing ideological disharmony, a new, equally violent terrorist has emerged – the eco-terrorist. Like the purveyors of radical Islamic terrorism, the eco-terrorist uses fear, intimidation, and violence in attainment of its goal, which for the eco-terrorist is simply the reclamation of the Earth to its pre-humanity condition, no matter what the cost. Heading-up this domestic terrorist offensive of radical animal-rights and extreme environmentalism is Paul Watson, who, even amidst the nation’s grief over 9/11, made the audacious and frightening statement, “There’s nothing wrong with being a terrorist, as long as you win.” Emphasis mine.

You can’t reason with these people. You can’t defeat them in the arena of ideas, because you can’t convince them of any ideas other than their own. It’s pretty sad that there are people like this in the world. Not people who think that we need to preserve the environment, but those who will go to any lengths to carry out their agenda, including killing human beings.

Terrible, just terrible.

Tags Categories: Uncategorized Posted By: Mark
Last Edit: 05 May 2004 @ 10 12 AM

EmailPermalinkComments Off
 05 May 2004 @ 10:02 AM 

It seems we live in fortuitous times. The doctor who treated Senator Kerry’s 1st “combat wound” documented it separately from his medical records and kept it all these years. Kerry Purple Heart Doc Speaks Out.

To sum up the article, it looks like then-Lt Kerry fired a mortar round at the shore, which hit some rocks and exploded, ricocheting some fragments around and one got stuck in his arm. It required only a second to pull out and a simple band-aid to cover the wound.

You make your own decision on if he deserves a Purple Heart for it or not. But I’ve got to tell you, I picked up a bigger sliver of glass in my foot from walking around barefoot, and I pulled it out myself.

Tags Categories: Uncategorized Posted By: Mark
Last Edit: 05 May 2004 @ 10 02 AM

EmailPermalinkComments Off
 05 May 2004 @ 9:52 AM 

This article, Gun-Proofing Children, brings up a serious and essential subject.

A little story about myself and my son: When my son was a young child, he was gun-proofed. He could recite the four rules of gun safety, and he had his own .22 rifle. He knew if he wanted to ask a question or see a gun, Dad would take the time to show him whatever he was curious about. He also cleaned his own rifle after going to the range. One time he broke the rules and accidentally pointed his rifle at another person. I snatched the gun away from him, then had my son apologize to the person he pointed at, then he apologized to the rangemaster as well. He then sat on the sidelines until I was finished shooting. He never broke a rule again.

He was also taught the NRA’s Eddie Eagle way: If you see a gun, STOP! Don’t touch! Leave the area! Tell an adult! That way if he found a strange gun he knew not to touch, or if he was visiting a friends house and the “friend” brought out a gun, he was trained to leave the house immediately and come home.

THIS IS THE WAY YOU TEACH A CHILD ABOUT GUNS! You teach them about what a gun does, not that it is an “evil” thing. When you teach about guns the Liberal way, you invite more curiosity about them and bring about the very thing you were “trying” to avoid.

Like the article says, you can’t child-proof a gun, but you can gun-proof a child.

Tags Categories: Uncategorized Posted By: Mark
Last Edit: 05 May 2004 @ 09 52 AM

EmailPermalinkComments Off
\/ More Options ...
Change Theme...
  • Users » 7
  • Posts/Pages » 2,130
  • Comments » 255
Change Theme...
  • VoidVoid « Default
  • LifeLife
  • EarthEarth
  • WindWind
  • WaterWater
  • FireFire
  • LightLight

About



    No Child Pages.