Comments on: Update II: Coulter’s Message To Tea Party

By: M O'Neal

M O'Neal — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 01:00:39 +0000

“IT’S ALL ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS, Ms. Coulter, not fetuses or matrimonial vows.”

Yea, I guess, unless you happen to be a fetus.

Maybe some freedom loving type can tell me why this simple post was deleted?

[It has? That’s news to me; comments take time to post, b/c, guess what? I do all web maintenance.–IM]

By: robert

robert — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 03:47:00 +0000

Mr. Brady,
I agree with you about the references to “conservative fetishes.” They might be fetishes as used today by idiots like Hannity, Coulter and the other water bearers for duoploy. As local and state issues, however, they form part of the fabric of our culture and represent the traditions that have formed us as communities and as a people. As used by Coulter and other political manipulators they are fetsishes turned into federal issues as an effective and useful smoke screen for the ever encroaching duopoly. I am not a tea partier but I admire their courage and would support Ron Paul if he were to run to represent them. At least we might enjoy a real and viable debate, something our national elections haven’t experienced in decades.

By: Frank Brady

Frank Brady — Mon, 01 Mar 2010 02:16:53 +0000

With respect, I happen to believe that homosexuality is a personal vice (a behavior, not a status) that has potentially lethal consequences for its adherants, viz. the incredible mortality/morbidity rate among its practioners. That said, it is or ought to be absolutely none of the federal government’s business. If its devotees engage in serial promiscuity that endangers public health, I suppose that might be a legitimate state or local concern–if it endangers others who are unaware of their risk.

With respect to the abortion question, a fetus is a “little one” (a person). However, murder (which I sincerely believe abortion to be) is and ought to be a state issue (not a federal one). And so it was until the Supreme Coourt in an insane and completely unjustifiable ruling perceived something in the Constitution’s “penumbra” that screwed us up royally.

By: Roy Bleckert

Roy Bleckert — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:00:08 +0000

“IT’S ALL ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS, Ms. Coulter, not fetuses or matrimonial vows.”

A concept the Neo-cons & Libtards just can not grasp

By: John Danforth

John Danforth — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 06:24:05 +0000

By passing along this link, I do not necessarily endorse everything this man says. On this subject though, he is spot on.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3X5CtdVNeM

The Tea Party is an amorphous blob consisting of Americans awakening from their deep slumber. People who work for a living don’t have time to take off work to go out and stand on a corner with a sign. These are the people who pay for everything government does. When they get angry enough to take vacation time to go and demonstrate, the statists are on very shaky ground. FOX helped light the brush fire hoping to gain ratings and credibility for their gang, but the authoritarians on both sides of the scrimmage line are in deep trouble, and everything is spinning out of their control. It appears things are likely to get very interesting from here on out.

By: Jack Slater

Jack Slater — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 00:49:14 +0000

Your 2/27 update quote is well worthy of remembrance. I am reminded of a piece from The Discourse of Voluntary Servitude by Étienne de La Boétie:

All this havoc, this misfortune, this ruin, descends upon you not from alien foes, but from the one enemy whom you yourselves render as powerful as he is, for whom you go bravely to war, for whose greatness you do not refuse to offer your own bodies unto death….How does he have any power over you except through you? How would he dare assail you if he had no cooperation from you? What could he do to you if you yourselves did not connive with the thief who plunders you, if you were not accomplices of the murderer who kills you, if you were not traitors to yourselves… you bring up your children in order that he may confer upon them the greatest privilege he knows— to be led into his battles, to be delivered to butchery, to be made the servants of his greed and the instruments of his vengeance; you yield your bodies unto hard labor in order that he may indulge in his delights and wallow in his filthy pleasures; you weaken yourselves in order to make him the stronger and the mightier to hold you in check.

By: Robert Glisson

Robert Glisson — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 20:06:17 +0000

That’s “Senator Bill Brady” for all us know-nothings; and that’s the Republican platform he’s touting; another professional Politician. Under his ‘leadership’ the schools, public and universities would receive state funding (read- unlimited funding) but I don’t see any commitment to improve the curriculum. Cut taxes and increase spending. At least Obama said he was going to increase the science teachers before he hired more school counselors instead. I wonder what Bill’s record in Congress is like?
American politics has become an affiliate of the NFL, with its own cheerleaders like Ann and co. Red and Blue, who can achieve victory and win office; it’s how well you run for office rather than what you do in office after you win. Tea parties are the ones that are interested in what the team is going to do off season when everyone else has gone home. Miss. Ann is focused on the team, not the spectators.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 20:02:28 +0000

I would be very content to completely overthrow the word CONSERVATIVE. I do not want to conserve the 3.8 Trillion dollar welfare-warfare state. I identify with traditional classical LIBERALISM, not with the state worship of the time of King George III. And religious traditions, while admirable, are for individuals to decide, not for politicians. And the uber-patriotism flag worship “and to THE REPUBLIC” for which it stands” – was composed by a socialist who did not recognize that each American state is also a sovereign republic. So, frankly, CONSERVATISM is a rather empty shell on which to hang any principles on. It is more a cultural zeitgeist of the Coulters and the Huckabees rather than a coherent philosophy of governance.

By: Steve Bernier

Steve Bernier — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:52:08 +0000

It seems like the Republican party wants to co-opt the tea party movement, because their brand of “statism” is supposed to be “better” than the Democrat party “statism”. From my perspective, the tea party came about precisely because of the over-reaching of our “federal” government. If it gets co-opted by either party, then it will cease to have an affect on local,state or national politics, and will only “throw the bums out”(paraphrased from Dr. Carroll Quigley’s book Tragedy and Hope) without have any substantial change in the policies that are shoved down our throats.

By: Barbara Grant

Barbara Grant — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 16:40:15 +0000

There is a lot in a name, and Myron may be on to something with the term, ‘religious “conservative” statist.’ I suggest we eliminate “conservative” and refer to Brady and his ilk as “religious statists.” “Statist,” is, after all, the best bottom line for what he and Huckabee, etc., are.