Header Image (book)


Wednesday, September 23, 2015

New Voices: Progressive John & Patriotic John Debate

About American exceptionalism:


  1. Obviously, I think we're an exceptional country.......it's only since we've started championing things that aren't exceptional and are even antithetical to the human spirit that we've started to fall, like socialism, people who want to harm us, dangerous human behaviors, some wars, a government with far too much power, people not educated well enough to see trouble ahead which the past clearly taught us..........

  2. "an exceptional country"

    A nation can only be as "exceptional" as the people in it. If [we] continue to move more and more in to Socialism and the constraints it imposes on individualism, it's axiomatic that the freedom which allowed us to be exceptional will wane to a vestigial remembrance of what once was. We are, once again, threatened, in the forthcoming election, by two hard-core socialists and possibly a carry-over from our present, disastrous, situation who is obviously 'two bricks short of a load'. Will America find the fortitude to pull itself out of its impending demise or will we continue down the path to mediocrity or worse?

  3. What an obnoxious pair of JERKS!

    Stop SCREAMING!!! P-L-E-A-S-E!!!!!!

  4. FT,
    It's the new comedic style. IMO, the staid, refined styles no longer reach the new generation -- yes, the new generation of voters.

    The same seems to apply to the 2016 National Election.

    1. Could that be why dignified, soft-spoken unflappable Dr. Carson is still doing well in the polls, and why the articulate, elegantly incisive, well-spoken Carly Fiorina just moved into second place?

    2. FT,
      I don't know which demographic (age group) has driven those polls favoring Carson and Fiorina.

      I've read that more and more young people are moving into the camp of Sanders. And, yes, I mean young voters registered as GOP. But who can discern the truth at this point?

    3. It will all come out in the wash done in the ENEMEDIA'S Laundry, AOW.

      I believe you could take that to the bank.

      THEY report what THEY want us to hear and accept as ESTABLISHED FACT. Then THEY decide what OUR verdict will be based on THEIR biased, manipulated, heavily distorted presentation of that evidence.

  5. The toilet was invented in America too by John Crapper. Get that libtard scmubag off that thing and out to the woods where he can do his business by a tree and wipe himself with poison ivy.

    1. Wrong, the device was first introduced in Elizabethan England.

      Remember the left is here to help you with your fact checking.
      It's not a right wing strength.

    2. I'm afraid the ever rude, incorrigible Ducky is right in this one, Kid. Here's a way he might have contradicted your assertion in a way that would increase our knowledge, instead of merely trying to slap you down:

      From WIKIPEDIA:

      "The flushing toilet was invented by John Harrington in 1596. Joseph Bramah of Yorkshire patented the first practical water closet in England in 1778.

      "Thomas Crapper (1836-1910) was a plumber who founded Thomas Crapper & Co in London. Contrary to widespread misconceptions, Crapper did not invent the flush toilet. He did, however, do much to increase the popularity of the toilet, and developed some important related inventions, such as the ballcock. He was noted for the quality of his products and received several royal warrants.

      "Manhole covers with Crapper's company's name on them in Westminster Abbey are now one of London's minor tourist attractions.[2][3] Thomas Crapper & Co owned the world's first bath, toilet and sink showroom, in King's Road until 1966. The firm's lavatorial equipment was manufactured at premises in nearby Marlborough Road (now Draycott Avenue)."

      I suppose it's important to note that the toilet was NOT invented by an American. The rest is interesting, but I daresay hardly of vital importance in The Great Scheme.

      We live in a DEBUNKING age, Kid, so it well behooves us to be absolutely sure of our facts to make sure the debunkers have less ammunition with which to derail the main thrust of points we "traditionalists" try to make.


We welcome civil dialogue at Always on Watch. Comments that include any of the following are subject to deletion:
1. Any use of profanity or abusive language
2. Off topic comments and spam
3. Use of personal invective