Thursday, July 4, 2013

What It Means To Be a Proud American... In Part

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny


Stirring words spoken by a man who happened to be the President of the United States of America who although elected twice to the highest office in the land by the American People would not even receive the nomination of his party were he running in 2016. A shame, but the stark truth. Those who really know and understand his record realize this truth.

A big h/t to the Left Coast Rebel blog.



Happy Independence Day!!!




24 comments:

  1. Lets look at this a little differently:

    On one hand you talk about the "nanny state" and how we are losing our freedoms to an autocratic government.

    Then on the other hand you want to salute the troops as the ones who ensure our freedom.

    Nothing is more autocratic and speaks volume to the concept of government, especially big government than the military.

    Look at all the "freedoms" we lost due to the Patriot Act; which is nothing more than a government act taken to "ensure our freedom."

    So, exactly how does one protect their freedoms from the government who's troops we glorify by claiming that "freedom isn't free?"


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, we could look at it a little differently. However I have done so many times over. Perhaps that is why I do not see the point in throwing the baby out with the bath water so to speak.

      Striking a balance that insures our freedoms and liberties is not the same thing as the over bloated MIC we now have or the Patriot Act, and there are others.

      You see TAO, I am settled in my what are rather independent and libertarian views. I am perfectly comfortable as I chuckle over the insanity of the fringe elements.

      So, with respect to your closing remarks, they are for you to figure out. I already have.

      Delete
  2. "Nothing is more autocratic and speaks volume to the concept of government, especially big government than the military."

    There are many things as autocratic, and speak to the concept of government, in addition to the military. In fact, just about every government action/law can be deemed autocratic to a degree. But few of these other autocratic measures (such as, for example, Obamacare's provision to punish companies for paying people to work more than 30 hours a week, or Eminent Domain where the government steals a family's home to make room for a shopping mall) are mandated by the United States. The military is.

    Not sure how much I agree with you on a lot of the MIC things you say, Les, but I am sure we could engage in "smart" cuts to military spending, reforms in the contract process, foreign aid cuts, that would say at least 25% of the budget in that area.

    ReplyDelete
  3. As for this...."[Ronald Reagan] would not even receive the nomination of his party were he running in 2016."

    If they did, they could look hypocritical in their criticism of Obama's debt. Yes, Obama chose to triple the deficit problem that Bush left him (and the Republicans are correct to criticize him for this). Reagan did something similar, significantly deepening the debt compared to his predecessor.

    Deficit hawks are rare birds.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Reagan was a wonderful president. He did what I believe a leader should do: He nurtured, restored, polished and aggrandized our national esprit de corps.

    Frankly every president who followed in his wake just "stank on ice" by comparison.

    A great deal of what it takes to be successful has far more to do with SPIRIT and SELF-IMAGE than with anything material.

    Either we believe in the United States of America -- as envisioned by our Founders -- or we do not.

    Once we cease to believe in the ideals of our Founders, we will cease to BE the USA, and will rapidly degenerate into just another failed socialist cesspool of mediocrity and ever-escalating rates of mutually-shared poverty.

    That, of course, has been the prime objective of the evil geniuses who've been craftily engineering our downfall through the encouragement of ever-increasing rates self-indulgence, sloth, ignorance, disrespect for parents, church, established norms and high ideals in general. In short the kind of mentality that exalts the likes of Paul Simon, Joan Baez, Pete Seeger and John Lennon's whining, self-pitying simplistic, dispiriting crap -- and the unbridled, regressive savagery of Rock 'n Roll in general -- while abandoning the wisdom, tenderness, manly vigor and energizing, inspiriting qualities of Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, John Philip Souza, George Gershwin and Leonard Bernstein -- and even the charm and glory of American musical comedy.

    The value of any Civilization may best be measured by the merit and innate quality of its culture.

    Ours has been successfully rotted out from within. What Lincoln, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini, Tojo and Hirohito failed to accomplish, Marx, Freud, the Frankfurt School and the Progressives surely did -- without anyone's taking notice, till it was too late.

    The Frog that is or was the USA has been stewing in a pot for the past hundred years. That pot, Alas! is now at the boiling point.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's sad that you see only military people are heroes in our society. The military represents only 1% of our society. They are not the sole protectors of liberty in our country. I'm surprised that such an open minded person would think the military is the only place to find heroes in our society. And you are wrong, the military is NOT the only place to find heroes in our society.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You Sammy, like most progressives are wrong, dead wrong. Point to one thing, anything which indicates I do not believe yjrtr are everyday heroes. I dare you. You can't.

      Everyday there are Moms and Dads, Teachers and Firemen, Policeman, Doctors and Nurses, Businessmen and Laborers, Artists and Musicians, (the list can be added to) that are doing doing things that matter, that move society ahead and are in their own way heroes.

      Thanks for the input...

      Delete
    2. Your posted video of Reagan talked only about military heroes. The video started by Reagan saying we are looking in the wrong places for heroes, that we must look at Arlington and the military for our heroes. They are heroes, but not the only heroes. You chose the video, which I presume reflects your thinking, or why else would you post it. I am not a liberal and again, am surprised you think that. I have no idea where you got that.

      Delete
    3. Well Sammy, I have no idea why you felt it was a valid assumption on your part that I did not recognize others are heroes as well.

      So, perhaps you get the assumption thingy now. I intentionally referred to you as a progression, not knowing what you are so that if I were wrong I could make the point I just did.

      I also find our men and women in uniform to be heroes as well. Do you have a problem with that?

      Delete
    4. "I have no idea why you felt it was a valid assumption on your part that I did not recognize others are heroes as well."

      Because you never mentioned any other heroes and the video only mentions military heroes. You could have easily in your copy mentioned other types of heroes, but you did not. A glaring oversight? One can only go by what you post, not what you do not post. It would seem important to mention military people are not our only heroes.

      I already stated that military people are heroes in my original comment, so I assume you want to make a point, that has no basis in fact.

      Delete
    5. What- evah...

      dmarks, want to take a stab at who Sammy is? ;-)

      Delete
    6. Sammy did not mention black people, so he must hate them, by his (twisted, loony left) logic.

      Delete
  6. When historians look back, say a hundred years from now, at the 1980's and probably 20 years beyond, Reagan will be remembered as the President who began the decline of the American empire. Marked by militarism, class stratification and stagnation, deindustrialization/free trade/institutional illegal immigration, and power in the hands of the banks and massive multi-national corporations, this period will not be recalled with any honor for anyone like Ronald Reagan - the man who began the dismantling of America.

    JMJ

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. jmj, you are without a doubt a buffoonish character. If you weren't so entertaining I just might not publish your comment.

      Delete
    2. If anything, Reagan slowed down some, the dismantling of the country. Despite his massive debt problem.

      Delete
    3. Reagan was not the the originator of "cut taxes, but not spending?" Check the record of History, you will find he was; and you will find that succeeding Republican presidents followed the same failed policies. As did gubernatorial Republican candidates (and other positions) started the "No New Tax Pledge" and other motions of no new taxes. The result being 17 trillion in debt, I call that bankruptcy. It's no surprise you do not. It certainly is a decline in America. I don't know who you think I am, but I now know who you are. Rather egotistical for you to think I am the only one who thinks you are wrong. Continue on with your delusions.

      Delete
    4. Tax revenues kept increasing after the tax cuts. The "17 trillion in debt" resulted from massive increases in government spending.... from both Democrats and Republicans.

      I call this bankruptcy too. It's time to cut way back on government spending.

      "I don't know who you think I am"

      I think you are the Anon who is fixated on Les' true statements concerning the Holocaust earlier.

      Delete
    5. Also, time to roll a big boulder of truth down the hill toward you, Sammy:

      "and you will find that succeeding Republican presidents followed the same failed policies....The result being 17 trillion in debt"

      Actually, at least 40% of this debt was racked up by Democratic presidents. This is soon to be half. That's close to half of the debt problem right now resulting from the "failed policies" of Democratic presidents alone.

      Not arguing a "Democrats evil, Republicans good" sort of thing, but to address your unintellectual blind partisanship and point out the facts of a bipartisan problem.

      Delete
    6. The terrible economic situation we find ourselves in thanks to GWb and the refusal of the Republicans to raise taxes. For this reason I attribute the vast majority of the debt to the Republicans. Look what happened when we increased taxes by only a tiny amount under Clinton! We got a surplus. But Dennis is right about one thing: his huge boulder of lies has crushed the truth. Many uninformed people blame Democrats and our current president when it is Reaganomics that is responsible for our economic woes.

      Delete
    7. "For this reason I attribute the vast majority of the debt to the Republicans."

      Reality: Around 40% of it is caused by Democratic presidents.

      "Look what happened when we increased taxes by only a tiny amount under Clinton! We got a surplus."

      We didn't. Check Obama's own Treasury Department figures. They show a constant deficit all the way through Clinton's years.

      Delete
  7. Reagan was a terrible president, possibly the worst in our nation's history... certainly in the top 10. FreeThinke is wrong on that, as well as absolutely everything else he wrote. I agreed with none of it. I am, however, in 100 percent agreement with Jersey in regards to the terrible presidency of Reagan. Spot on. Although RN already threatened to not publish Jersey... so am I wasting my time composing a reply? Two comments that agree about Reagan being a terrible president might be more than RN can handle.

    The video RN posted gets a BIG thumbs down from me. Many of the wars we have fought have been completely unnecessary. If we had spent that money providing for the needs of the people instead of the needs of the profit-driven military industrial complex, and instead of on tax cuts to further enrich the already wealthy... our nation would be very different today. And Reagan played no small role in bringing our nation to this point, just like Jersey said. I wouldn't call him "buffoonish" at all. He seems quite intelligent to me.

    Also, there is no provision in Obamacare that punishes companies for paying people to work more than 30 hours a week. It the greed of employers that causes them to punish their employees by not providing healthcare. The government can't mandate that employees be allowed to work 40 hours, but there should be some kind of penalty that could be assessed to companies that care more about their own greed then their employees well being. Obviously money is the only thing these greedy SOBs care about.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "Also, there is no provision in Obamacare that punishes companies for paying people to work more than 30 hours a week."

    Here, a Marketwatch link, is one of the countless references to the specific provision in Obamacare that punishes companies for paying people more than 30 hours a week. Another thing Obamacare does that is also job-killing is penalizing companies for hiring more than 50 people.

    Sorry, this is well known. But with this statement, it appears that you have done little or no research about Obamacare. Because this penalty is one of the central pieces of it.

    "It the greed of employers that causes them to punish their employees by not providing healthcare."

    Very much wrong. You are attacking paying people fair compensation as "greed". You, again, are entirely wrong. You may think that businesses have tons of money to hand out as unearned gifts to those who don't earn it, but the fact is, they don't. Another fact is that if companies are forced into "providing healthcare" of a certain level, they are forced to cut pay/benefits/etc in order to pay for this. It ends up hurting families: instead of being paid a larger amount of money that families can decide what to do with, they are paid a smaller amount of money, along with a top-down forced healthcare plan they may or may not need.

    I am all for Obama delaying the "force companies to fire people and cut hours" mandate. I think, though, that it is just a good start. Why not put it off 4 years instead of 1. And of course the individual mandate can be put off also. Another good idea.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Dennis, I know what you are talking about, but it isn't a "punishment". I know you think it is, as higher profits for the wealthy and the screwing of workers is something Dennis cheers, but there is no punishment in Obamacare. None. Also, no forcing companies to fire people. That isn't in Obamacare either. If any company chooses to do this it is because of greed, not because they were forced to do anything. Your link does not work BTW. It does not connect to Marketwatch.

    Obama's own Treasury Department figures do NOT show a constant deficit all the way through Clinton's years. You are referring to the national debt. The budget under Clinton resulted in a surplus. This reality is well known.

    Also, I am interested in knowing what the "true statements" that you refer to are (regarding RN and the holocaust). The same anonymous commenter referred to them a few times on my blog. I'd like to know what these comments I keep hearing about are.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.