Header Image (book)


Saturday, January 17, 2015

Open Thread

So, what's on your mind?

Here is your chance to opine within the parameters listed below:

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

Note: comments consisting of blog gossip will be deleted as soon as an administrator of this blog becomes aware of such comments.


  1. The Obama administration sent stoo9ge number two ( stooge number one being Joe Biden) to show the United States’s support of France after the recent slap in the face over the Obama’s administration being AWOL and missing the Paris rally after the terrorist attack against the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo. The walking Zombie John Kerry brought out his fellow Ultra Liberal James Taylor to sing “You’ve Got a Friend”

    Needless to say this was a total disaster and a childish way to “Hug and Kiss up to the french. Nile Gardiner, director of Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation, blasted this decision, calling it “embarrassing, humiliating and “cringe worthy.”

    “This whole event had an air of desperation and not only didn’t work, but perhaps even made things worse ”. Gardiner said. “It was a sad attempt by the Obama presidency to make amends for its appalling failure to show up at the Paris rally.

    In humiliating fashion, you have the Secretary of State up behind an Old Fat like James Taylor a nauseated groveling walking corpse, trying to give the impression that the administration cares about the trans-Atlantic. It doesn’t. This is Kerry and the administration leading from behind.”
    Once again this is amateur hour by the Obama administration on the world stage. U.S. allies are looking for robust American leadership …. A musical performance in Paris cannot disguise the immense failure of the Obama administration foreign policy. This regime is a disgrace to our country.

    Kerry should have sang, "just call and I'll be there" (within a week or so)
    The Obama Kerry Pelosi Reid Clinton ship has sunk, along with their bag of stooges and leftwing celebrities like James Taylor, Joy Behar, Jane Fonda, Sean Penn, Danny Glover, Alec baldwin, George Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Tim Robbins, Woody Allen, Larry David, Tom Hanks, Bill Maher, Morgan Freeman, Spike Lee, Whoopi Goldberg, Rosie O'Donnell, Oprah Winfrey, Barbra Streisand, Kerry is a nut case who should have stayed home with his Nut-case wife, and the other liberal scum.
    I just can’t describe how stupid Kerry must have seemed, there are just no words to describe the incredible insanity of that kind of liberalism.

  2. We have IDIOTS running our country, but I guess that James Taylor is better than sending Justin Bieber there! And it's too bad they didn't feel the same way about our four men in Benghazi.

  3. Le's begin with a question or two:

    Much has been made -- by leftist academics, of course -- of the supposed differences between Marxism, Fascism, Fabianism, Communism, Socialism, Progressivism, Liberalism, Statism and the Democrats, as they've developed in the past hundred years.

    Since all are COLLECTIVIST in nature, most openly HOSTILE to CHRISTIANITY, and therefore ANTI-INDIVIDUALIST, and all inevitably lead to DICTATORSHIP -- i.e. tyranny, despotism, authoritarianism, totalitarianism, which in turn are forms of slavery, I can't see any significant difference among them, can you?

    I see that infamous group as a rough parallel to the Christian movement as it has developed since the Reformation. "How so?" you ask.

    All right, here goes: The Roman Catholic, Greek and Russian Orthodox churches, the Coptic Church, the Church of the East, the various branches of the Lutheran Church, the Episcopal, Presbyterian, Methodist, Baptist, Dutch Reformed churches, the Quakers, the now-defunct Shakers, the Seventh Day Adventists, the Assembly of God, the Jehovah' Witnesses. the Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints better known as Mormons, and others ALL identify themselves as CHRISTIAN churches, yet there are difference among them that keep them divided and largely at odds.

    Most claim to be The One True Church to the exclusion of the others, BUT they ALL want identify themselves as CHRISTIAN.

    I believe the same could -- and should -- be said for all the various branches of LEFTIST IDEOLOGY all of which are united in their opposition to INDIVIDUALISM, CAPITALISM, CHRISTIANITY, SELF-DETERMINATION and above all a militant opposition to LIBERTY.

    I hope someone will take the time to discuss what I have just said, add to it, introduce contrast and enrichment while sedulously avoiding mockery, derision, hectoring, badgering, cliché-ridden rhetoric and canned opinion gathered frim Central Propaganda Mills of any stripe.

    1. You mention the Shakers, FT.
      There was an obvious drawback for most people in their philosophy.
      It's unfortunate the philosophy couldn't spread further because it was very productive both in economics and the arts.
      Shaker design is absolutely brilliant in utility and aesthetics.

      I don't imagine it's worth mentioning Dorothy Day and the social welfare component of the Roman Catholic church which produced Michael Harrington and The Other America. The Holy Father is clearly promoting aspects of this doctrine.

      Of course if you study the history of the early church you find collectivism.

      Myself, I think the current right wing sects in America are interested in two major themes:

      1. Control peoples sexuality

      2. Promote laissez-faire capitalism

      In fact any idea of individualism degenerates into oppression through a warped Calvinist lens.

      Then there are the existentialists like Kierkegaard, Tillich, Marcel and Niebuhr who probably are out of favor with more conservative Christians.

      Complicated but frankly I believe you are more interested in labeling people (often quite inaccurately) than listening to them.

    2. Ducky, I am following your line of reasoning, as I did FT's as well, and I agree with FreeThinke, and I also see validity in your argument.

      The one thing I do not understand is why you keep calling it Calvinist. Didn't he believe everyone is predestined to either heaven or hell when we are born? Or are you referring to his stern, austere morality?

      I don't think the rightwing is quite so homogeneous as you imagine it, just as the left is not either. FreeThinke describes it best. Both camps are loose collections of people sharing some general beliefs but in no way in lockstep.

      Interesting you mentioned Kierkegaard. I love his work, but I only started diving in a year or so ago. I have also been drinking deeply of Miguel de Unamuno, another proto-existentialist. It's a pity both men were overshadowed in the minds of the general public by the nasty, sour atheistic existentialists like Nietzsche and Sarte, who are both brilliant, but many believe them to be the whole of Existentialism.

      In my previous ignorance, I thought Existentialism was atheism.

      I find Unamuno and Dostoevsky much more accessible, and along with Kierkegaard (a little harder to get through, but extremely rewarding) more pleasant reading.

      I can understand the atheism of Sarte, and to a lesser extent, that of Nietzsche. Once you plumb the depths of existentialism, I don't see you can stay on the fence on the question of God.

    3. Duck,
      Of course if you study the history of the early church you find collectivism.

      Yes, but entered into voluntarily and not as the rule of civil governance.

    4. SF,
      You mentioned Dostoevsky.

      The epilogue of Crime and Punishment involves Raskolnikov's finding personal faith (as opposed to institutional, church, faith). Sonya is his redemption, possibly symbolic of Christ.

      There is much more to this tome of a novel -- a novel I love, BTW.

    5. Silverfiddle, don't we confuse the question of the existence of God with the question of God's nature?
      How we know God's nature is the more important question, no?

      "My religion is to seek for truth in life and for life in truth, even knowing that I shall not find them while I live."
      --- Miguel de Unamuno

      True for many but it puts us at odds with those who claim to have found that absolute truth.
      Those are the ones I call "Calvinists". I don't use it in a strict sense but let's face it, many on the religious right absolutely believe that America is ordained by God to be the worlds leader and rule as it pleases. Any problems that arise are the responsibility of ... pick it, leftists,collectivists, Muslims, gays or whomever.
      NEVER do they question their premise or allow any doubt. America was created by God and destined to create God's kingdom on earth through the glories of laissez-faire kapitalism. I guess FDR was the devil who ran everything off the tracks.

      Meanwhile, we are all still avoiding Spinoza as far as I can tell.

    6. Interesting that Unamuno, unlike Kierkegaard, stayed within his Church.

      I'm reading "On the God of Christians (and one or two others), by a philosopher named Remi Brague. He treats at length the question of who is God, and he does so humbly.


      I agree with you that the question of God's nature is the more important one. We take it on faith that God Is, but What is his nature? That is what sorts us out into groups.

      I am beginning to see the value of humility as I navigate middle age.

    7. PART ONE - DUCKY SAID: (Please read my responses between the lines)

      DUCKY: You mention the Shakers, FT. There was an obvious drawback for most people in their philosophy. It's unfortunate the philosophy couldn't spread further because it was very productive both in economics and the arts. Shaker design is absolutely brilliant in utility and aesthetics.

      FT: I'm a great admirer of the Shakers for most of the reasons you cited Ducky. although there is no way I could see their way of life as a good universal role model for the economic health and strength of the nation. I even did a paper on the Shakers in graduate school, and found many aspects of their way of life most engaging. I'm surprised you didn't point out their identity as a COMMUNAL organization, which they were. However, as AOW said to you in reference to early Christian communalism, the Shakers' unique brand of communal identity was entirely VOLUNTARY. No one was FORCED to join the Shakers or FORCED to STAY with them. One could argue that any close-knit family unit is a type of communal living, but again it's largely been a matter of CHOICE -- at least in our society. The obvious Achilles Heel in the Shaker movement was their proscription against SEX in any form whatsoever. Mother Ann Lee, who'd suffered horribly in childbirth, when married to Abraham Standerin in England, managed to convince herself and her followers that SEX was THE greatest EVIL and was responsible for most-if-not-all of the woe in this world. Such a preposterous doctrine was obviously doomed to fail in the long run, but it did work very well -- for a select few special souls -- for about a hundred years

      DUCKY: I don't imagine it's worth mentioning Dorothy Day and the social welfare component of the Roman Catholic church which produced Michael Harrington and The Other America. The Holy Father is clearly promoting aspects of this doctrine.

      FT: I did try to read The Long Loneliness once, and found it ineffably dreary. Thinking along such lines may be perfectly righteous and worthy at some level, I wouldn't dare say it isn't, but dwelling on misery and wretchedness, as so many folks of that sort do, seems based more in contempt for comfortable middle-class society than any love for the poor and downtrodden. And that has been my problem with leftists in general all along. The Bolshevik's barbaric treatment of Czar Nicolas and his family is all we need to know to prove that pure, savage HATRED was the primary motive in all they did. Nothing like Self-Righteous Wrath to bring out the brutish beast in any of us.

    8. PART TWO - DUCKY SAID (my responses between the lines)

      DUCKY: Of course, if you study the history of the early church you find collectivism.

      FT: I believe we've covered that above.

      DUCKY: Myself, I think the current right wing sects in America are interested in two major themes:

      1. Control peoples sexuality

      2. Promote laissez-faire capitalism

      FT: I agree to a limited extent about sexuality being a morbid preoccupation of SOME -- but certainly not ALL -- who identify as Christians. I have limited patience with that, myself, but don't feel it's incumbent on me to try to FORCE my views on ANYONE. I try to give a wide berth to those who do feel that way. HOWEVER, the unbridled licentiousness and loss of depth, loyalty and affection in personal relationships we've been living with since The Sexual Revolution is deplorable. The evils it has spawned are patently obvious to anyone not an absolute imbecile. What to DO about it, however, is certainly open to debate.

      DUCKY: In fact any idea of individualism degenerates into oppression through a warped Calvinist lens.

      FT: You misuse the term "Calvinism." What you mean, -- I think, -- is that a grimly authoritarian, even tyrannical church organization is certainly oppressive and inimical to human happiness and to healthy forms of progress. I certainly agree with that, but it's been found in most organized forms of Christianity until recently. Terrifying people is no way to lead them to Salvation. What you fail to acknowledge is that temporal forms of Utopian Ideology -- Marxism in particular, and all it's many derivatives -- have led to even GREATER acts of despotism, cruelty, mass murder and widespread destruction than those of the religious sort -- not that EITHER is the least bit excusable. Mankind's greatest ENEMY is his overweening Lust for Power and Conrol over he lives of others.

      DUCKY: Then there are the existentialists like Kierkegaard, Tillich, Marcel and Niebuhr who probably are out of favor with more conservative Christians.

      FT: Too big a topic for now, and frankly out of my depth since I received my religion, such as it is, more from direct experience than from reading books ON religion and philosophy. I have been praying earnestly since childhood -- and received helpful answers more often than not -- have studied the Bible, spent the better part of forty-five years heavily involved in churches of various Christian denominations, know a great deal about music written for the Church, which happens to be THE bedrock of Western Civilization -- the mother, father and nursery out of which grew most of our greatest works of music, art, architecture, literature, and our finest ideas of law and governance. Beyond that my knowledge is limited.

      DUCKY: Complicated but frankly I believe you are more interested in labeling people (often quite inaccurately) than listening to them.

      FT: Well, Ducky, you would think that, because that's what you WANT to think. You like to denigrate me, because I have firm convictions based on experience and observation over a seventy-four year that you find distasteful. I, of course, feel the same about YOUR, apparent, convictions, but the only thing I object to about you is the persistently rancorous, condescending, pointedly insulting tone you take much of the time. Thank you for dropping that at least for this exchange.

    9. AOW: Brothers Karamazov is my Dostoevsky favorite.

    10. All I can say to FreeThinke's well-stated response is, Bravo!

    11. Religion is by nature tribal and anti-individualistic. This is silliness.


    12. Jersey: Indeed.

      Just look at progressivism

    13. SF to FT @ 4:50:00 PM EST,
      Bravo, indeed!

      I haven't read Brothers Karamazov in a while. I think that I'll put it on my summer reading list.

    14. Jersey: Everybody got it but you.

      Don't you get tired of that?

    15. Tired of the lowest common denominator of political thought ruling the day? Yes.


    16. @ Jersey: "Tired of the lowest common denominator of political thought ruling the day?"

      You've summed up progressive groupthink beautifully!

  4. Here's a story the loud mouths on the left who supported Al Sharpton won't talk about.
    As we start the new year, I’ve been thinking about all the talk from the progressive socialist far left about money in politics – which we’ll soon see ramping up in advance of the presidential election cycle of 2016. Related to that is the rise of crony capitalism — Solyndra comes to mind.

    The last thing our free market economic system needs is government nepotism picking winners and losers in the marketplace. However, even more disconcerting is that corporate extortion based on political agendas is beginning to plague our economy, played out by none other than the poster child for race baiting extortion, Al Sharpton.

    Good old Al seems to have developed quite a nice little “consulting business,” essentially shaking down corporations for cash in order to burnish their images.

    As reported by the New York Post, “Want to influence a casino bid? Polish your corporate image? Not be labeled a racist? Then you need to pay Al Sharpton.”

    “For more than a decade, corporations have shelled out thousands of dollars in donations and consulting fees to Sharpton’s National Action Network (NAN). What they get in return is the reverend’s supposed sway in the black community or, more often, his silence.”

  5. I am so sorry you've, apparently, been defeated by the trolls, AOW. Fruitful discussion may be all too rare among the blogs, but it has NO CHANCE at ALL of developing when a blog goes into permanent moderation.

    I hope nothing too terrible has happened either at home or in your daily walk that has made you take this regrettable step?

    1. FT,
      Not planning on permanent moderation.

    2. FT: Please, please, please stop making statements like "defeated by the trolls" when a blogger takes some anti-troll action.

      It insults the blog host and just sounds crabby and petulant.

    3. As do YOU in your rejoinder to me, my friend. AOW and I have too solid a friendship to let anything like that bother us. I would have thought the same of YOU.

      Frankly, I was surprised AOW published that remark (I wouldn't have had I been in her stead), because it was (I thought quite obviously) meant for her alone. I was frustrated, because I had taken a good deal of time to write that bit of commentary very early this morning, and when the blog was still blocked at 10:30 AM, I felt frustrated and annoyed, Yes -- ANNOYED.

      Surely it is my right as a human being occasionally to feel and express annoyance? Never have and never will have any pretensions to sainthood.

    4. Of course it is your right, but I sympathize with anyone grappling with the drooling idiots who want nothing more than disrupt good conversation.

    5. FT: I apologize for coming off brusque, but when a blog host is being besieged by trolls, it smacks of piling on to crab to her about it.

    6. FT,
      Frankly, I was surprised AOW published that remark (I wouldn't have had I been in her stead), because it was (I thought quite obviously) meant for her alone.

      Too sick right now to sort out much. This virus is kicking my a$$!

      I hope that I'm not up all night tonight with the task of dealing Mr. AOW's terrible symptoms (worse than mine).

      I didn't take FT's comment(s) as piling on.

      I rarely resort to comment moderation, but physical woes here wore me down.

      I rarely let the drooling idiots bother me, but today was an exception. I just didn't have time to blogsit this blog early in the day.

    7. I knew something must be wrong, AOW. Unfortunately, this morning "inspiration" struck, and I was over eager to share the results. Giving way to egocentrism is never a good idea, though I certainly meant no harm, as I'm sure you know.

      So sorry you and your Mr. are ill. Sickness is an awful thing.

  6. Your friend in solidarityJanuary 17, 2015 at 10:11:00 AM CST

    Don't let those idiotic leftist's defeat you. Keep Strong.

    1. Oh, leftists don't defeat me.

      This virus that Mr. AOW and I have? Well, that's a different matter. Both Mr. AOW and I were up most of the night with vomiting, diarrhea, resulting loads of laundry, etc.

  7. Your friend in SolidarityJanuary 17, 2015 at 11:10:00 AM CST

    But I read where Octopussy kind of dictated his or her options to you, that's where I thought you were weakening

    1. Nope, I'm not weakening.

      I routinely remove imposters' comments when I detect them.

    2. I fully support AOW in this. Sock puppetry can be fun, but I hate imposters, and we smash them upon detecting them at WH, regardless of who we think they are or who they are claiming to be.

    3. It all depends on WHAT they have to SAY, and the MANNER in WHICH they say it. We're ALL "impostors" in the blogging world. I don't care a fig what "label" anyone chooses to use. All that interests me is the CONTENT of his or her thought, and whether or not the INTENT is mischievous, corrosive or benevolent. I trust my instincts on that, and have to say have seldom been wrong.

    4. FT: You're endorsing sock puppetry, and I agree with you.

      A different creature is someone coming here and impersonating,say, Les Carpenter. That is dirty pool and should always be flushed, regardless of message, author or intent.

  8. One aspect of the Paris attacks that should receive attention is the source of the guns.
    The guns have been traced and apparently the arrests in Belgium have occurred largely because they were the gang of suppliers.
    For all our surveillance in America could we do that tracking?

    The next point, I can't completely vouch for because I heard it on a podcast (The Majority Report) and can't find any other mention.
    A group of "firearm owners" attempted to prove that the attack could have been largely thwarted if the "Charlie" office staff had been armed and failed in each of its mock ups.
    Not relevant in itself because its so inconclusive but it does point to the fact that a lot of our gun rhetoric is unsupported and just drivel out of the NRA handbook.

    When do we start a real conversation?

    1. Ducky,
      Simple logic says that if the Hebdo staff were armed, say weapons stashed in desks or something informal like that, they would at least have had a fighting chance. That's about all we can conclude with certainty.

      The international arms market is hardly the fault of the NRA.

    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    3. Ducky, you're correct. A group did conduct recreations of the Hebdo shootings. The gun control cabal has seized on the results with salivating glee [as they are wont to do] without understanding that the recreation is still a guess at best. The discussion is available for anyone who wishes to look for it, and contains the details not reported by the gun control cabal, such as encumbrances with safety equipment that would not be present in an actual situation.

      The gun "rhetoric" has routinely trumped the childish fetish with the 'scary' NRA and the fascination with cosmetic features of firearms, in regards to reason and logic.

      And.....we of the gun rights position, have been here all along waiting on 'real conversation. Your side keeps throwing petulant tantrums. When you grow up, we'll still be here, ready to talk.

    4. Well CI, correct me if I'm wrong.

      Someone like that mentally ill Ohio man who wanted to kill Boehner would be able to walk into any Ohio gun show and just load up.
      Now that isn't rhetoric. Same for anyone on the "No Fly" list or quite probably anyone the FBI is interested in either in person or by proxy.

      Absolutely untraceable.

      When you use loaded language like the "gun control cabal" you are clearly trying to rig the game.
      Please note that I did not "salivate with glee" but instead stated that there was opportunity for discussion. Silverfiddle immediately jumped in with a statement about "simple logic" decides the issue.
      Nothing else necessary, just "simple" logic.

      So once again we have a situation where gun loons mischaracterize the arguments on the left and starts in with statements like "when you grow up".
      I've grown up and I've lost the need for fetishes unlike a lot of gun loons.

    5. C'mon, Duck. Cut me some slack. I did not make an imperious case closed statement.

      I said they would have had a better chance at defending themselves. That's hardly an ironclad statement that if they had had guns they would all still be alive.

      You cannot see the logic of my original statement? You don't believe that if they had weapons they would have had a fighting chance? Really? C'mon, this isn't ideology or politics, it's simple logic.

    6. To answer your question on the bartender: Yes, if he cleared the background check, he can buy the weapon, just like he could wait for Boehner to exit the club, drunk and staggering, and run him down with an automobile.

      If someone is on a no-fly list for some reason that makes it dangerous for them to own a gun, then that should feed into the background system, as should people deemed mentally incapable of responsible gun ownership.

    7. "Well CI, correct me if I'm wrong."

      That's what I'm here for. You DO know the federal regulations regarding sales at gun shows, right? Who did the guy in Ohio purchase from at the gun show?

      "When you use loaded language like the "gun control cabal" you are clearly trying to rig the game."

      I don't consider my civil liberties to be a 'game', but how is my accurate attribution regarding gun control....any worse than your favorite standby of 'gun loons'?

      "I've grown up and I've lost the need for fetishes unlike a lot of gun loons."

      You've proven that a lie by your fetish with the NRA and willful ignorance of the tactics used by those on your side. Why won't YOU have a 'real conversation'? I'm game anytime, here [as appropriate], on AOWs radio show, my site, SF's, etc....

    8. The fault, dear Ducky, is not in our GUNS, but in OURSELVES.


      If it weren't guns, it would be spears, if it weren't spears, it would be knives, if it weren't knives it would be rocks, if it weren't rocks, it'd be broken glass, if it weren't broken glass, it'd be fists, etc.

      There is a sickness deeply embedded in the souls of FAR TOO MANY who want to torture, maim, murder, loot, vandalize, destroy property and generally wreak havoc.

      No amount of impassioned rhetoric, Draconian legislation, feces flinging al la Code Stink, or bilious displays of bad temper by the likes of Sinn D. Sheetpan is EVER going to do anything to ameliorate the situation.

      Only a sincere conversion to the ways of Jesus Christ could hope to do that.

    9. HA, HA, HA,HA, HA, HA!

      Europe needs STRICTER Gun control...


      Europe needs more Gun control ...

      Right to Possess Firearms:
      In Belgium, the right to private gun ownership is not guaranteed by law

      In Belgium, civilians are not allowed to possess military weapons, automatic firearms, and their ammunition, concealable firearms, silencers, laser sights, and high capacity cartridges

      Regulation of Automatic Weapons:
      In Belgium, private possession of fully automatic weapons is prohibited.

      Regulation of Semiautomatic Assault Weapons:
      In Belgium, private possession of semi-automatic assault weapons is permitted only with special authorisation

      Regulation of Handguns:
      In Belgium, private possession of handguns (pistols and revolvers) is permitted only with special authorisation

      In Belgium, only licensed gun owners may lawfully acquire, possess or transfer a firearm or ammunition

      Reason Required for Firearm Possession:
      Applicants for a gun owner’s licence in Belgium are required to establish a genuine reason to possess a firearm, for example, hunting, target shooting, collection, personal protection, security

      Minimum Age for Firearm Possession:
      The minimum age for gun ownership in Belgium is 18 years

      Gun Licence Background Check:
      An applicant for a firearm licence in Belgium must pass a background check which considers criminal and various other records

      Required for Firearm Licence:
      In Belgium, third party character references for each gun licence applicant are not required

      Domestic Violence and Firearms:
      Where a past history, or apprehended likelihood of family violence exists, the law in Belgium does not stipulate that a gun licence should be denied or revoked

      Firearm Safety Training:
      In Belgium, an understanding of firearm safety and the law, tested in a theoretical and/or practical training course is required for a firearm licence

      Gun Owner Licensing Period:
      In Belgium gun owners must re-apply and re-qualify for their firearm licence every three years for permits to carry weapons. General licences for firearm possession are issued for an undetermined period.

      Limit on Number of Guns:
      Licensed firearm owners in Belgium are permitted to possess 1 firearm per authorisation

      Limit on Quantity, Type of Ammunition:
      Licensed firearm owners in Belgium are permitted to possess a limited quantity of ammunition

    10. Europe has OD'd on Gun Control and enacted every liberals "wet dreams" for legislation in this area short of all out confiscation.

      Let's face it folks, nothing short of total confiscation will ever satisfy their insatiable appetite for totalitarian government and the "told you so's" that come from perfect HINDSIGHT.

    11. Thersites,

      Great work battering down the ramparts of ignorance.

      I don't know how it is in Belgium, but in Germany, the Germans I knew who owned guns belonged to a shooting club, and they had to keep their guns at the club, even pellet guns.

    12. In CANADA all guns were confiscated YEARS ago. It is illegal to own one under ANY circumstances.

  9. With Mr. Tereza Heinz-Kerry's week-late hugs and tritely trotting out James Taylor, US foreign policy has collapsed into farce.

    This comes after Obama and his amateur warlord gang (McCain, Graham, Samantha Power and Susan Rice) arming and training the 'good' terrorists in Syria, only to watch them defect to ISIS.

    And this after tipping over Libya and watching it all burn. And these people and their fanboys and fangirls dare criticize Bush?

    Obama has doubled-down on every horrible Bush failure, to the point that the adults on the left are becoming worried.

    Leslie Gelb (a liberal Kissenger, Brezensky type) sums it all up

    Survival at Stake.

    Even people who voted for Obama are waking up to the reality of how dangerously incompetent he and his girl gang of amateur warlords are.

    1. Beatrice Littler said:

      IsTerry kerry still ALIVE?

      if so, it's incredible. She's older than GOD.

  10. MLK was a big fat phony. According to his best friend and partner in the Civil Rights Movement, Ralph Abernathy, King was a womanizer who had a thing for white prostitutes, and he was physically abusive with them as well.
    He was also a plagiarist. He stole parts of his "I have a dream" speech from another black man (a Republican).
    There are plenty of black role models that would be far more positive than MLK, but blacks have been so brainwashed by the Democrats who exploit them, they're programmed to only want to follow the charlatans. Instead of advocating personal responsibility and hard work and self-reliance, they preach bigotry and dependency. With the leaders they choose, it's no wonder they're still on the bottom rung of society. You would think they would have made the connection by now.

    1. What an idiotic comment.

      MLK did more than any other individual in this nation's history to correct a great injustice and improve race relations. Like all men, he had his faults, but he achieved a great outcome, and he did it peacefully and by appealing to our common Christian heritage.

      Martin Luther King was a great man, and you are an ignorant shitwad.

    2. Information You DeserveJanuary 18, 2015 at 9:10:00 AM CST

      Number 1) I don't think that was Silverfiddle who wrote the above.
      Number 2). What he wrote is not True. Martin Luther King was NOT the great man the he has made out to be.

    3. It was Silverfiddle, you drooling garbage heaps.

      If you're too stupid to see King's contributions to our nation, then there's nothing further to discuss. Go dig deep enough in any historical figure's life, and you will find skeletons. History is spilling over with people who produced great public accomplishments but who had personal peccadilloes.

      So, congratulations for bring up old news and joining the likes of rabid, America-hating Howard Zinn. Your parroting what you've read follows his method perfectly.

      Would you rip the story of King David out of the Old Testament?

      Did you know Ronald Reagan was the only president to be divorced? Should that change our view of him?

      And I suppose you're both lily white? Why don't you two put your heads together and make an ass of yourselves.

    4. Could that "Information You Deserve" WAS REALLY the Queen of the Smut Hut....the gal who runs sex links into poor areas of the internet....calling them "blogs?"

    5. "King's contributions to our nation,"????

      What was that, may I ask?

    6. You're not Oso. You're a dimwitted imposter.

      Discrimination based upon color was all too routine in this nation. Indeed it was embedded in much of our culture.

      He appealed to the angels of our nature and defused what could have been an explosion of violence without end.

      He cause many to stop and reconsider their barely-examined assumptions, Now, only the slobberiest of little pathetic pissant weasels continue to harbor animus towards people who don't look like them.

    7. I couldn't agree more, S.J. The blacks have been in desperate need of good, solid leadership since Abrascam Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation.

      Unfortunately, The Reverend Martin Luther King, Junior, who was a bit better than you want us to believe, but not by much, and decidedly flawed in more ways than you enumerate, was martyred. That enabled the myth making machinery of the enemedia to create the quasi-Christ-like image now accepted as simple truth by just about everyone under the age of sixty, just as "everyone" automatically accepts the media driven notion that Richard M. Nixon was a wicked, scheming crook who nearly destroyed our sacred democratic process, etc.

      Whatever the enemedia encourages the American Public to believe, you may be fairly certain it is the product of elaborate tendentious prevarication.

      The enemedia, –– who daily shapes Public Opinion, and hypnotizes the vast majority of us into accepting whatever the Master Baiters, who own and operate virtually all major organs of communication, and therefore set the agenda, want us to believe –– is Orwell's diabolical Ministry of Truth made manifest.

      Those few of us left who remember better times, because we lived through them, and were in close touch with family members, teachers and mentors born in the nineteenth-century before the ravages of Progressivism and Cultural Marxism took over still understand reality from a perspective no linger possible for those who've spent their entire lives brainwashed by the post-WWII enemedia.

      MLK has become a symbol of a longed for ideal that never reached fruition. His humanity and the true nature of his character and disposition have been lost in the realm of Manufactured Myth and Legend.

  11. John Kerry's insane decision to bring out the old useful idiot James Taylor to sing "You've Got a Friend" in Paris yesterday has been met such with complete distaste by the entire world including by our own Ambassador to France. I just can’t in any way fathom the need for Kerry to bring any sort of entertainment along with him,. Especially an ole Hippy form the 60's! What did he expect the outcome of that to be Did he really expect that everyone would tear up and feel sorry for our stupidity in not attending the Anti-terrorism rally?
    Perhaps he would have done better if he had a Floor Show with Joan Baez singing Kumbaya, and the cast of the Lion King dancing around!

    I finally had the chance to watch the video of the two clowns Kerry and Taylor making jerks out of themselves. When I first saw it, I said to myself “He didn't really do this, did he”? I thought that I was watching a Photo-shopped Youtube. To me it looked like Kerry was standing there not even knowing what the hell to do, he looked as if he couldn't even wait to get the hell out of there.

    If Kerry wanted to embarrass the United States any more than that, I doubt if could have.

    What could be in more stupid and embarrassing that President Obama sending this dumb looking fool of foreign relations than the blatantly having that lame idea of having a 70 year old Hippy, dressed in a warm and fuzzie outfit singing "You've Got a Friend" to the French as a response to the Paris murders of 16 people? But when you think of it, I guess that it would be something that you’d expect from a community organizer.. It was right up there with giving Queen Elizabeth an iPod with CD’s of his speeches.

    In a way, I felt sorry for James Taylor, but then again, we should NEVER EVER feel sorry for useful idiots, they made their own beds, so let them sleep in them.

    Who the hell are these nut jobs in charge of Country, Elmer Fudd, and Mr. Magoo? All that I can say is that if the imbeciles who voted to re-elect him aren’t sorry and embarrassed now, then again they are so stupid they are incapable of embarrassment.
    Think about it. Obama Royally screws up and doesn't go to France for the rally and the march, and not only doesn’t he send anyone of importance to represent us.
    but they try to make up for it by doing this insane side-show act!.

  12. I’m sorry Silverfiddle, although I totally agree with your previous comment, but I’m not convinced per se with your last, about King's contributions to our nation. Numerous psycho social research studies support the view but more than other variables. I think that you tend to mirror the values of the thoughts of the blacks accordingly.

    If you accept the view that certain religious denominations are more authoritarian than others, then the issue of strict and cruel child-rearing practices comes into sharper focus. The authoritarian mindset approves the use of coercive means to shape, control, and enforce behaviors in accordance with an absolute set of standards. It values obedience, respect for authority, work, tradition, and social order. The authoritarian model is indifferent to pain and suffering. Thus, in my view, when we speak of “religion,” we are actually talking about an authoritarian mindset.
    Racist ideology is sometimes manifested openly, in insults, malicious jokes, acts of hatred, inequality. Nevertheless, in many cases, it is deeply rooted in values, beliefs and stereotypical attitudes usually originated in the child’s upbringing. .
    Spare me about the authoritarian thinking that inflicts strict upbringing to force submission. When a total ignorant preacher as righteous as somebody like the false Reverend Al Sharpton tries to avenge themselves without qualms by inflicting the same cruel practices on their own race. Society will commend these authoritarians as upstanding enforcers of the community standard. Thus, cruelty passes from generation to generation and flourishes under cover of piety and patriotism, often with this injunction: like, It’s is for your own good.
    Child abuse and neglect is a serious social problem. Research indicates that a significant number of children in the United States have been victims of physical abuse. The figures show that ethnic minority children (e.g., African Americans, Native American Indians/Alaskan Natives, and Pacific Islander children) have higher rates of reported child abuse and neglect compared to their non-Hispanic white counterparts. It has been argued that health practitioners, social workers, and mental health counselors should take into account race, ethnicity, and sociocultural factors when working with child abuse and neglect cases.
    Cruel practices have social and historical implications, and consequences . Violence is learned in the home, as well as in the streets.. Obedience is a condition of beatitude. Sometimes abused and traumatized children reenact their childhoods on the political stage and turn themselves into demagogues and tyrants, or become the adherents, adulators, and henchman of tyrants and lunatic ideologues. Cruel and abusive child-rearing practices are the source of all injustice and tyranny in the world.

  13. PS. To Silverfidle
    Ever think that there could be more than one person with the same screen name?
    I never claimed to be the "Oso" that you thought I was.
    But I do go by that name, regardless what you think.
    And that does not make me an imposter .

  14. Oso: You have a point about screen names. There are people out there with the same one. Often though, a name with no profile or a hidden profile can be the sign of an imposter.

    So, 'Oso,' Was this you over at FreeThinke's?

    Oso January 14, 2015 at 3:42 PM

    I havn't looked at these blogs in a long time...

    So, was that you?

    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    2. So, what were Kings contributions to our Nation? May I be inclined to ask?
      As I don't know of any off hand other than the fact that he was a "trouble maker".

    3. Wrong thread. Pull your head out of your beer glass.

    4. Oso? Hello? Oso?

      He must be attending an MLK Day KKK rally...

    5. If it's the "wrong Thread" the why the hell are you writing about the same subject. You drooling pile of garbage heap!

    6. Wow. You're a real original thinker.

    7. Gene Poole said

      Dear oh dear! Matthew Arnold's ignorant armies are clashing by night again. Will it never end?

  15. I guess that it’s easy to forget that Martin Luther King was reviled as a Communist why some people do not see his a the Hero that many others do.
    Today is Martin Luther King, Jr. Day and many American’s are honoring the man who said “that he had a dream that all men are created equal”.

    But it’s also worth remembering that it was not always this way. King was widely reviled in his lifetime, attacked as a troublemaker, a liar, a womanizer, a con man and yes a communist.
    Like it or not, these are part of his legacy as well. They remind us that even some Americans were once demonized and derided. And although we don’t want to think of our “Heros” that way, it may be true that they are as others claim that they are. We don’t want to see our heros whitewashed in history, we lose a sense of the respect that we held so dearly.
    As someone who can recall, back when Martin Luther King was traveling around the U.S., I remember whenever he would leave a city, there would be chaos and riots. He would go and stir up the blacks, much like Al Sharpton does these days. I also remember that he attended the, Communist training school in Tenn. Many of the Left Wingers of the time went there to be trained in there, I know, Pete Seeger was a member of both the Young Communist League and the Communist Party and made no bones about it, Paul Robeson, Charlie Chaplin was clearly a commie and J. Edgar Hoover tried to have him deported, Harry Belafonte was a singer who first began his career before the communist-fronted youth groups, and Rosa Parks attended classes there. I still don't understand how America can honor M. L. King! I guess the blacks had to be placated, so Liberal politicians gave them this holiday! There were more qualified black, who never got this honor, why?

    That’s why I can’t help but smile when I hear some of the figures honoring Dr. King today. And lets call it as it is. We see some people disrespecting others that we may call “OUR” heros as well. For example look at what the Liberals say about some of the people that us conservatives look upon as OUR HEROS, such as Ronald Reagan.

    And I would surely tale a Condoleezza Rice, over a Hillary Clinton. And for that matter a George Bush over a Barack Obama. And a John Bolton over a Susan Rice, anytime!
    And how can anyone possibly have any respect for Bill Clinton? You would have to be crazy to respect that Jerk, who didn’t have any respect for his own office and I’d put Ted Kennedy in the same class. Or should I say “Classless”.

  16. To the MLK haters:

    MLK took the peaceful path when so many others just wanted to burn it all down. He did not incite riots, unless you consider free people marching peacefully for their God-given rights a criminal act.

    He appealed to the shared Christian values of blacks and whites, and that was a great part of his genius.

    But anyhoo... Keep stirrin' that pot. You're no better than Jesse Jackasson and Al Shartbum. In fact, people like you help keep them in business.

    1. You are much too kind in your closing response to Reality Hurts. It is the people of his ilk that will destroy conservatism, both social and economic. Signs of self destruction are already evident and growing.

      Oy vey,

  17. As for the killing of Eric Garner by officer Daniel Pantaleo - that homicide was ON TAPE and still there has not been any indictment. Could it be that the Grand jury got it right? I believe the Black community had NO reason to be angry - and I support the police. . And I also view any idiot protestor such as the dimwit St. Louis Rams players who ran onto the field and did the "hands up, don't shoot" pose to be a part of the problem. And should be thrown off the team just like the other HOODLUMS and THUGS who are known as “Football Players” these days.

  18. And in regards to the mentally ill individual who killed two INNOCENT New York City Police Officers cops in "retaliation" for the stupid THUGS that we killed resisting arrest ... or that matter anyone propagating violence and rioting to be a part of the problem. If the protestors are opposed to needless killings, then protest in an orderly manner. Don’t give us that BS about unarmed Black males, or Gentle Giant Unarmed Teens. . Yes, people have a right to protest and I think those who are trying to pin this on the peaceful protesters. But not like these a-holes did.
    Yes, only a few idiots chanted about wanting dead cops But a few is to many! Those idiots are out of line and should be arrested as well. . In fact, Eric Garner's widow said (in regards to the officer shootings) "I know what they're going through to lose a loved one right before the holidays, and everything is so sad, and I would ask that everyone that is protesting with us, please protest in a nonviolent way. My husband was not a violent man so we don't want any violence connected to his name". Yeah Right. He was a 400 pound 6 foot 4 inch thug.

  19. White Lives:

    I agree with almost everything you said. It comes down to personal responsibility.

    The Garner death was a tragic chain of events started by the state of New York, which imposes draconian tax policies then sends the cops out to collar lawbreakers selling loosies.

    Yes, Garner was breaking the law, and he was resisting, but Pantaleo pulled a stupid, poorly executed maneuver, as he admitted to the grand jury.

    Jujitsu books are full of better, simpler techniques that what Pantaleo tried to pull off.

    We should support the police, but in return, they need to earn that support and respect by training to do the job properly ann executing their duties with a professionalism a notch or two above an armed street gang.

  20. As we already know, Liberals like to claim that ALL hate speech comes from the rightwing Republicans or as they call us Tbagers or GOPers, and every other stupid name that they can think of. . This is worse than laughable, if it wasn’t so serious.. As a matter of fact there is a leftist site that who’s name I won’t even give the name of because I’d rather not give them the publicity, so that they could get a few more readers than they already have, as their readership seems to be very limited at the time. This blogger is a Obama worshiper and can never see anything wrong with her Messiah the “Great” Barack Hussein Obama. The truth is that the radical leftist perpetrator of the blog site seems to have changed direction into an adoration of another dictator Adolph Hitler. Needless to say that I tattily DISAGREE with Ms. Progressive the Holier than Thou Lib. As we already know, most leftist blogs are just politically correct colleges for old dirty hippies. A place for them to gather and bash conservatives, or go to other conservative blogs and disrupt them..
    Liberals like to claim that they are intellectuals and supporters of abortion.
    Stop and think about this for moment. What happens when Sharia law becomes the accepted norm for use in America..
    If the Muslims take over the U.S. (as they are starting to do in Europe), one of the first things they will do will be to round up and kill all the homosexuals, Gays, Lesbians, Transgenereds, Bisexuals, and execute them. Then, just like the Nazis, they will go after the Jews, Catholics, and Intellectuals next. Yet, Liberals think we should encourage the Muslims to build their propaganda centers on ground zero, and throughout the country, and allow them to use Shariah law to govern their own affairs while living in our country! You decide!


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