This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

British PM Revealing Clear Thinking

British PM David Cameron needs to be paid attention to. He declares: “A passively tolerant society says to its citizens, as long as you obey the law we will just leave you alone. It stands neutral between different values. But I believe a genuinely liberal country does much more: it believes in certain values and actively promotes them. . .It says to its citizens, this is what defines us as a society. To belong here is to believe in these things.”(emphasis mine)
Enhanced by Zemanta

103 comments:

Blogger said...

This post is what I have been trying to say to Libs. To be an American is to hold set of common values. If one belief is Sharia law, by definition, they can not be an American.

Nobody said...

Blogger,
I agree wholeheartedly with your comment, but unfortunately it will be misinterpreted by certain posters. I'm assuming you are referring to such American Values as Rule of Law, Popular Sovereignty, Consent of the Governed, Limited Government and the various rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights? An advocate of Sharia law would be prevented from accepting equality of women, the right to vote (since they would favor a theocracy), freedom of religion and the freedom that would allow an artist to portray a crucifix in urine OR Muhammad in a political cartoon. Your point is made, now lets wait for Lib to totally miss the point and call us ignorant, racist bigots who hate Irish Catholics.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody and Blogger

"To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

I couldn't agree more but despite efforts on my part, how many times have ANY of you ever agrees on a shared value position I have taken?

Human Rights should be a common value for all of Americans.

Justice should be a common value for all Americans.

Religious Freedom should be a common value for all Americans.

Freedom of the Press should be a common value for all Americans.

Truth in journalism should be a common value for all Americans.

The prosperity should not be concentrated in the top 2% and only shared with the next 18%.

What common values do you see all Americans sharing?

Liberal POV said...

Blogger and Nobody

"If one belief is Sharia law, by definition, they cannot be an American."

Where is this bullshit propaganda coming from?

Some right wing thing tank like the Heritage Foundation must have a staff of researcher and staff writers pumping out this kind of fear silliness.

Lets say some new Muslim family or Mosque tries to continue to practice Sharia law much like the Amish or Mormon communities do.

Part of it will come as freedom of religion but if it hits the US courts they will lose.

This is not a new problem, the fact it Muslim is new.
Mormon, Amish, Snake handling Fundamentalist Christians all run up against America's individual freedom and separation of church and state.

The right wing bullshitter are trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.
Blogger stop buying the fear and stop reselling the fear, it just bullshit.

Wolf's Head said...

Seems we have a couple of lpov's personalities posting on this.

Wonder how many there are.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POVs said:

"how many times have ANY of you ever agrees on a shared value position I have taken?"

Never. Your senseless values seek to undermine the values that made this once great nation great. Values like allowing criminals (illegal aliens) into our country to rob jobs from Americans during a recession is an example. Another is your penchant for taking my hard working money and giving it to someone who doesn't want to work and believes society owes them something. Or it could be your values concerning the 2nd Amendment and the effort by liberals to disarm blacks through racist gun laws. Or values that allow you to blame a class of people for something they had nothing to do with (Tucson Shooting), and then not having the guts to apologize for it.

Yes, if these are the shared values you speak of then I don't agree, ever.

LOL!!! This ought to set the village idiots off!!!!!

Your best ole pal

Johnny Rico

Ray Poslter

Liberal POV said...

Johnny and Wolf

You missed the point. What common values do we share?

Wolf's Head said...

I like Turtle Tracks Ice Cream, how about you?

Liberal POV said...

Blogger and Nobody

"To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

What's the set of common values we Americans share?

How many times have ANY of you ever agreed on a shared value position I have taken?

Human Rights should be a common value for all of Americans.

Justice should be a common value for all Americans.

Religious Freedom should be a common value for all Americans.

Freedom of the Press should be a common value for all Americans.

Truth in journalism should be a common value for all Americans.

The prosperity should not be concentrated in the top 2% and only shared with the next 18%.

The Conservative movement has gone into the woods, creating its own media, its own set of facts, rewritten history, created is own science, re dated the age of the universe to only 6000 years and reduced the constitution to the second amendment. To be conservative means turning the hands of time back to the dark ages or at least to the days of Dickens and raw cruel exploitive capitalism.

What common values do you see all Americans sharing?

guy faulkes said...

It is hard to hold common values with a anti-American, terrorist supporting, anti-Semantic, racist, pedophile traitor such as LiberalProverbs18:2, but maybe I have one. I do not think either of us is a fan of the Patriot Act's invasion of the privacy of the citizens of this country. Of course Liberalproverbs18:2 does not want it to apply o his foreign terrorist heroes either and I do.

Johnny "Parody' Rico said...

I see the village idiot is still unable to answer. LOL!! Skipped right over that one didn't you!!

"Perhaphs if I just ignore her, she will quit asking those confoundly hard questions" JW said to Liberal Lemming POV during a February liberals only retreat.

"Yes, we kicked her off the Watch, and I thought censorship might make her quit, but the patriotic bitch won't quit and is making us look like real idiots" POV opined in a garbled voice.

"Listen Lemming POV, I have a plan", replied JW. "When she nails us to the wall like she has done so many times, just spout off with some emotional babble and hope no one notices that we can't hold a candle to this damned patriot."

"Great idea JW, no wonder you were such a great professor at Appalachian. Did you do that to students who didn't agree with you?". "Damn it you Trogyldyte....uh I mean idiot POV, stay the hell on topic!!!!!" roared JW.

"Sorry, sorry, all that acid I did hurts my concentration and rationalization you know. Uh emm, well good idea JW, and that's what we'll do, never answer except with something unrelated".

"Very good socialist POV" said JW, "now please get out from under my desk and leave as I have a Marx study group session to attend".

The two idiots parted literally, going their separate ways.

LOL!!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS The lives of pathetic liberals is like a horror story and would be entertaining to watch if it weren't so true.


Ben shacklefort

Liberal POV said...

Blogger or Nobody

Why do you not engage?

"To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

What do conservatives believe these values to be?

I posted some of what I consider to be common American values and get no response other than insults from conservatives. Why?

guy faulkes said...

If they are common goals, then why do you feel the need to post them, Liberaalprverbs18"2? Are you finally having a problem with Sharia law?

It is not insulting you to call you what you are. Everything I said can be reinforced by words coming from you own mouth.

Blogger said...

Nobody, as usual, you come through. Thanks.

Blogger said...

The WSJ also had another contribution to this subject. No group should be allowed to field a candidate in any democracy where the obvious plan is to use the right to vote to undermine the right to vote. If that bit of common sense had prevailed, there would not be a Hamas governing Gaza. Also, we would not have to fear the Muslim Brotherhood taking over in a post Mubarak Egypt.

Blogger said...

Nobody, "I'm assuming you are referring to such American Values as Rule of Law, Popular Sovereignty, Consent of the Governed, Limited Government and the various rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights?" Wow! That is a good as it gets. If a reader just stopped reading after your comment, they would have have it all. They could also avoid heartburn. Thanks always.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

This is part od David Cameron's speech I believe applies not only to the Muslim community, but the Mormons and Conservative movement.

"I believe a genuinely liberal country does much more: it believes in certain values and actively promotes them. . .It says to its citizens, this is what defines us as a society. To belong here is to believe in these things.”

"To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

Defending Human Rights is a common value of all of Americans.

Justice for all is a common value of all Americans.

Religious Freedom applies to all Americans reguardless of belief.

Freedom of the Press is a common value for all Americans.

Truth in journalism is the common value for all Americans. Corporate and Government propaganda have no place in American society.

American prosperity should not be concentrated in the top 2% and only shared with the next 18% all Americans need access to the American dream and deserve a living wage for their labor.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

Where the hell do you get some of your terms to call common values?

"Popular Sovereignty" this was the term use for slavery in Kanas

http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h84.html

"American Values as Rule of Law"

Like during the Civil Rights Movement or the American Revolution?

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

"To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

Why are you afraid to engage in this conversation?

Nobody said...

Blogger,
You're welcome -- I try to do my part. And thanks for the kind words. Unfortunately these concepts completely escape Lib's understanding.

Lib,
Thanks for demonstrating that you have no comprehension of American political theory or traditional American values. Seriously, take a course in American government at Caldwell. You said, "Where the hell do you get some of your terms to call common values?" Well, blogger was quoting me. I checked your link. Then I googled popular sovereignty -- the u-s-history.com link hits second. So what you apparently did was google popular sovereignty because you didn't know what it was. Then, you read the first thing you came to and jumped to the conclusion that popular sovereignty is a racist concept, only used to justify slavery before the Civil War. The problem with the internet is that, if you're not careful or an educated researcher, you will not have the ability or background knowledge to question what you're reading -- you'll just accept whatever you come across. For your information, popular sovereignty is the idea that ultimate power in government is derived from the people. It literally means, "the right of the people to rule themselves," normally carried out through representative government and regular elections. I'd give you a link, but I actually went back to my old college political science textbook. Book learnin' is becoming undervalued.

Nobody said...

Lib said, "Blogger or Nobody Why do you not engage?"

I have a job. And contrary to what you apparently believe, it is not to spend all of my time trying to educate you. Digging out my Political Science textbook for my last post was work enough.

Blogger said...

Nobody: "For your information, popular sovereignty is the idea that ultimate power in government is derived from the people. It literally means, "the right of the people to rule themselves," normally carried out through representative government and regular elections."

Damn you are good Nobody!

Sarkazein said...

Pardon me if this has already been posted, but, the French are now admitting to the failure of PC in their country.
POV- I am going to make you find your own source on this one.

Johnny Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep POVs,

I figured my parody would set you idiots off!!! LOL!!! Which part did you like the best?

I am still waiting on my apology over the Tucson shooting. You liberals blamed the shooting on Tea Party Conservatives before the bodies were cold and come to find out it was one of YOU who did the shooting. LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Liberal POV said...

Nobody and Blogger

"So what you apparently did was google popular sovereignty because you didn't know what it was. "

You would be correct and it appears neither did you or Blogger.

Popular Sovereignty is mob rule, what's popular at the moments is the course of action, No protecting minorities rights, human rights, no constitutional rights, no court review just passion of the moment. The current Tea Party Mob is a fine example of Popular Sovereignty.

Remember these peope were by Popular Sovereignty voting to enslave fellow human beings.

The thing I question is why Blogger would use such an uncommon term to define what he calls a set of American common values.

"Origin:
1840–50, Americanism"

"Popular sovereignty was the political doctrine which provided for the settlers of federal territorial lands to decide the status (free or slave) under which they would join the Union.

The concept was aired in the late 1840s, but was widely popularized by Stephen A. Douglas in 1854."

popular sovereignty 
–noun
1.
the doctrine that sovereign power is vested in the people and that those chosen to govern, as trustees of such power, must exercise it in conformity with the general will.
2.
American History . (before the Civil War) a doctrine, held chiefly by the opponents of the abolitionists, that the people living in a territory should be free of federal interference in determining domestic policy, especially with respect to slavery.

"World English Dictionary
popular sovereignty

— n
(in the pre-Civil War US) the doctrine that the inhabitants of a territory should be free from federal interference in determining their own domestic policy, esp in deciding whether or not to allow slavery"

Democracy or Democratic Rule is a much better term for what you describe below and representative government with the three branches of government are not part of the term popular sovereignty.

" It literally means, "the right of the people to rule themselves," normally carried out through representative government and regular elections."

Nobody said...

Lib,
You are an idiot who is incapable of reading the posts and understanding them. Let me try again:

1. You keep saying blogger first posted these terms. He did not. He was quoting me.

2. The concept of popular sovereignty predates its use as justification for the extension of slavery. Just because a concept is used to justify an evil does not, by extension, make the concept evil.

3. In this concept, "popular" does not mean what you think it means (as in, well liked or accepted). It is a word that means, "people."

In the future, please read the posts thoroughly before shooting off and demonstrating how little you know. Objecting to popular sovereignty on this thread means you oppose the right of the people (us) to choose our governmental leaders through elections. Also, read my comments on using the internet. Just because it pops up in a google search doesn't mean that what you first find is the correct description in the context of the current discussion.

Wolf's Head said...

"You are an idiot who is incapable of reading the posts and understanding them." Nobody

I think that the various "lpovs" understand them perfectly.

Either:

A. They are posers as ultra leftist morons who just post here to bait us, or

B. They read and understand the posts but just believe, like little children, that by re-asking questions they get a different answer from the one they don't like.

I vote for "A".

guy faulkes said...

"American Values as Rule of Law"

Like during the Civil Rights Movement or the American Revolution?" - Liberalproverbs18:2

These are very telling statements by our terrorist loving friend.

First of all, we have to wonder which part of the civil rights movement to which the village idiot is referring. Is it to Doctor King that supported non-violent confrontation, being arrested, and letting public opinion take it's course, or is it that of such entities as Bill Ayers and the Black Panthers that blew things up and tried to kill people? If there is consistency to POV's previous postings concerning terrorists, jihad, and pedophilia, it is the latter he supports.

The statement about the American Revolution is even more interesting. We all know that Liberalproverbs18:2 denies the existence of lesser jihad even in the face of history and current events. He is also in favor of supporting illegal aliens flooding the country. Therefore, we have two possible revolutions that he would support as to the overthrow of this country. One is jihad. The other is the Reconquista which is the Hispanic takeover of the Southwest.

None of these scenarios reflect mainstream American values, only those of the lunatic left such as Liberalproverbs18:2.

I am not certain that the dolt even realizes what he said. It is more probable that he was just Chanting La La La la La to hear his head roar because he could not keep up with Blogger and Nobody. Any opinions?

Johnny Rico said...

Fine post Mr. Faulks.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody or Blogger

"To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

The question remains, What are these common set of core values?

I disagree with the term " Popular Sovereignty" as it suggest a mob action and has a history associated with slavery but think Democratic rule is more appropriate.

"American Values as Rule of Law"

Americans expect these laws to be just. The Jim Crow Laws of the South were unjust and we saw Americans gain the courage to challenge these laws with protest and civil disobedience.

Limited Government? Government power should be limited, patriot act, torture, suspending habeas corpus, drug laws all are reduced freedom. The Government should not be limited in providing for the American citizen's general welfare of justice, clean air, clean water, safe food, safe drugs, health care, education, safe streets, safety net for the eldery, mentally challenged, physical disabilites, children and Americans trapped in deep proverty. The general welfare would include collecting necessaruy tax form America rich and powerful to reduce the national debt.

What's the set of common values we Americans share?

How many times have ANY of you ever agreed on a shared value position I have taken?

Human Rights should be a common value for all of Americans.

Justice should be a common value for all Americans.

Religious Freedom should be a common value for all Americans.

Freedom of the Press should be a common value for all Americans.

Truth in journalism should be a common value for all Americans.

The prosperity should not be concentrated in the top 2% and only shared with the next 18%.

The Conservative movement has gone into the woods, creating its own media, its own set of facts, rewritten history, created is own science, re dated the age of the universe to only 6000 years and reduced the constitution to the second amendment. To be conservative means turning the hands of time back to the dark ages or at least to the days of Dickens and raw cruel exploitive capitalism.

What common values do you see all Americans sharing?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

The entire post should be to answer the question of what are our common values?

Why do you and the other conservatives want to fine our greatest differences?

To your charges.

The conservative like you want to keep the out of control borders we have today by not facing reality.

"The other is the Reconquista which is the Hispanic takeover of the Southwest."

Did you find a new word on the extremist right wing blogs?

Peddle that fear and hate Guy. The borders remain uncontrolled and we don't know who's here and won't without reasonable just reform.

Sarkazein said...

Battling ignorance... why?

guy faulkes said...

Controlling the borders is not something any of the Presidents, regrettably even Reagan have done. The Tea Party will change this in 2012. Also the deportations will begin in earnest.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"The Tea Party will change this in 2012. Also the deportations will begin in earnest."

That plan is and will cost how much?

Nobody said...

Lib said, "I disagree with the term " Popular Sovereignty" as it suggest a mob action and has a history associated with slavery but think Democratic rule is more appropriate."

Your post suggests you fail to understand that popular sovereignty is a concept while democracy is a form of government. Anywho, it is pure democracy that is more closely associated with mob rule. Pure democracy would abide by majority rule alone -- if more than half the people want something, it passes. The United States is officially a Republic, with democratic institutions. Let me try to explain with this analogy. If a pure democracy were instituted in Egypt and the majority ruled, what types of laws would likely be created since polls show that 70+% of the Egyptian people favor cutting off the hands of convicted thieves, executing people who convert away from Islam and stoning people who commit adultery? In a pure democracy, laws allowing these punishments would pass. Instead, we have a republic with the principle of limited government to guarantee the rights of individuals from what the founding fathers sometimes described as the "tyranny of the majority." We use democratic practices to choose our rules, but the electoral college shows how we are not a pure democracy (I'm sure you remember the election of 2000, Lib). You know, the more you post, the more you prove that you are not knowledgeable enough on things like this. I also notice that there are no other liberals coming to your defense on this one. I would guess they're embarrassed by your statements.

guy faulkes said...

To close the bordersand deport illegal aliens, build the fence, empower all states to use state and local law enforcement officers to enforce immigration law, require I.C.E. to do its job instead of directing them not to do it as is now the case, do check points at bus stations, on Interstates, or any major thorough fare. Prosecute employers of illegal aliens and fine them heavily. The cost is negligible when compared to t
he cost these illegals are costing in services, education, and the effects they have on our prison systems as well as the drug and other crime problems they sause.

You have been told this along with other method, many times, so I have no doubt your fingers are going in your ears, your eyes are held tightly shut, and you are starting La La La La La yet again.

Sarkazein said...

I say move all illegal aliens in prison or serving jail sentences to an offshore prison facility. This would make it much easier to deport them. There need be no appeals allowed to their sentances... they are illegals.
The offshore facility could even have its own death row for the many illegal alien murderers. Appeals for the death sentence could be handled electronically. It could be similar to GITMO. This would take a huge expense off our counties and states. There would be no trips from the offshore facility back to the US... except for staff of course.

Sarkazein said...

Just to add the above comment, the expense for the offshore facility could be paid for by deducting the prisoner illegal alien's costs from any foreign aid given to the illegal alien's home country. Also any fines associated with his/her convictions and court costs could be deducted from the foreign aid.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

"The United States is officially a Republic, with democratic institutions."

This we agree and I thouht I had made a similar statement of pointing out those democratic institutions below.

"Popular Sovereignty is mob rule, what's popular at the moments is the course of action, No protecting minorities rights, human rights, no constitutional rights, no court review just passion of the moment. The current Tea Party Mob is a fine example of Popular Sovereignty."

I like this comment below and conservatives should remember it when it come to treating the Gay community and other scapegoats fairly.

"Instead, we have a republic with the principle of limited government to guarantee the rights of individuals from what the founding fathers sometimes described as the "tyranny of the majority."

Nobody said...

But do you yet see that popular sovereignty, as it is correctly identified, is an important and basic American value? Do you understand it? You seem to be loathe to admit when you are wrong, as you are here. And when I said that the United States is actually a republic with democratic institutions, I was essentially pointing out that you were wrong (again) to say that the United States is a democracy. And that when you state that you believe that popular sovereignty is akin to mob rule, it is actually democracy that is akin to mob rule. Many of the founding fathers actually believed that a pure democracy is the "tyranny of the majority." This tyranny may be what develops in Egypt if the majority have their way.

Anonymous said...

Nobody

"But do you yet see that popular sovereignty, as it is correctly identified, is an important and basic American value?"

No

" Do you understand it?"

No, my understanding is popular sovereignty, pure demoracy, the tea party and a mob are all the same by different terms.

" And when I said that the United States is actually a republic with democratic institutions, I was essentially pointing out that you were wrong (again) to say that the United States is a democracy."

Lets define a Democracy -" a form of government in which the supreme power is retained by the people, but which is usually exercised indirectly through a system of representation and delegated authority periodically renewed. "

Lets define a Republic -" a representative democracy in which the people's elected deputies (representatives), not the people themselves, vote on legislation."

What would you call recent Republican driven anti gay refrendums?

Okay, I should have made the disstinstion,between a Republic and a Democracy but don't most western Democracies have similar safe guards against pure demoracies or popular sovereignty and hasn't recent American politics moved in the direction of purer a demoracy with all of the polling? Isn't this the reason the system is broken and no problems get sloved?

"And that when you state that you believe that popular sovereignty is akin to mob rule, it is actually democracy that is akin to mob rule."

My understanding the term popular sovereignty actually means a pure demoracy or mob rule.

Show me a definition from any dictionary where the meaning is other wise?

"This tyranny may be what develops in Egypt if the majority have their way."

The protest leaders in Eygpt are well aware of governments of the United States, Canada, France, Germany and Brazil.

They know they want to move from an Oligarchy "- a government in which control is exercised by a small group of individuals whose authority generally is based on wealth or power. " Nor do they want a Theocracy - a form of government in which a Deity is recognized as the supreme civil ruler, but the Deity's laws are interpreted by ecclesiastical authorities (bishops, mullahs, etc.); a government subject to religious authority.


http://www.indexmundi.com/brazil/government_type.html

Liberal POV said...

The above post is Liberal POV

guy faulkes said...

Well, at least the village idiot finally admitted he could not understnad the concept of popular sovereignty. I guess that is progress of a kind.

Nobody said...

"But do you yet see that popular sovereignty, as it is correctly identified, is an important and basic American value?"

No

You poor, poor man. My description of popular sovereignty comes from my college political science textbook, under the section titled, "Basic American Values." With every post you demonstrate your ignorance. I went back and reread my first post on this thread -- thank you for so clearly fulfilling my prediction.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

I google " Basic American Values " and this is a little of what I Get.

Published on Wednesday, April 20, 2005 by CommonDreams.org
American Values
by Guy Reel

What is America? What are the values it has most fought for and admired? A few of the first, and most important, come to mind:
Freedom.

Equality.

Democracy.

Champion of the little guy.

Helper of the oppressed.

Defender against tyranny.

Some of the other values are ingrained in our history and our belief in our future:

Capitalism.

Independence.

Strength.

Rightness and righteousness.

Manifest destiny.

God.

Freedom of religion.

Family.

Wealth.

Faith.

Entertainment and happiness

"Over the last twenty years or so, the most radical members of the right wing have claimed they've owned the core American values that I've just enumerated; moreover, they've claimed that liberals have tried to defeat them. Therefore, they argue, liberals are trying to ruin the American way of life. They claim that liberals are a threat to our very future. For those who question this assumption, they need only to listen to talk radio, Fox news and the Republican leadership who pass for responsible voices in our democracy.

Their methods are not surprising. Because here is their dirty little secret: The far right must gain its identity from imagined enemies. Because without these imagined enemies, the ultra-right wing is not viable. Without the imagined enemies, you just have - America. It is an America struggling with competing interests among its core values. It should try to help the poor while building wealth for us all; it should try to lead the world without exploiting or dominating it; it should not be ashamed of a faith in God but should never discriminate against those of different beliefs; and it should try to figure out balances between those "right and left" policy disputes, such as protection of the environment versus encouraging development.

http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0420-20.htm

I didn't see the words "popular sovereignty" come up with a google of " Basic American Values ".

Nobody said...

And I'll say for the last time, google intelligence isn't real intelligence. Common Dreams isn't a website I would rely upon, just like Fox News isn't a source you would accept. Do me a favor -- travel over to Belk Library on ASU's campus and pull any of the high school civics or college political science textbooks off of the shelf and look up popular sovereignty. Heck, just reread the definitions I posted from Wiki Answers earlier. I'm through with this particular conversation. You ask why none of us have ever agreed with you -- it is because you do not understand even the most basic of concepts. You began this conversation admitting you didn't originally know what popular sovereignty is, but in the span of 3 days you have decided it is NOT a basic American value based on what you were unable to find using Google. I must say, this entire enterprise has destroyed what hope I had that you could carry on any type of intelligent conversation (and there was little hope to begin with). You are too stubborn to admit when you're wrong and too stubborn to learn.

guy faulkes said...

While Liberalproverbs18: is indeed stubborn, that is not the major reason he cannot learn. It is because he is to "stupit" (as he spells it).

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

"Popular Sovereignty"

" Heck, just reread the definitions I posted from Wiki Answers earlier"

This from your Wiki Answers.

"Columbia Encyclopedia:
popular sovereignty

Top
popular sovereignty, in U.S. history, doctrine under which the status of slavery in the territories was to be determined by the settlers themselves. Although the doctrine won wide support as a means of avoiding sectional conflict over the slavery issue, its meaning remained ambiguous, since proponents disagreed as to the stage of territorial development at which the decision should be made. Stephen A. Douglas, principal promoter of the doctrine, wanted the choice made at an early stage of settlement; others felt that it should be made just before each territory achieved statehood. First proposed in 1847 by Vice President George Dallas and popularized by Lewis Cass in his 1848 presidential campaign, the doctrine was incorporated in the Compromise of 1850 and four years later was an important feature of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. Douglas called it "popular sovereignty," but proslavery Southerners, who wanted slavery extended into the territories, contemptuously called it "squatter sovereignty."

This from
"World English Dictionary
popular sovereignty

— n
(in the pre-Civil War US) the doctrine that the inhabitants of a territory should be free from federal interference in determining their own domestic policy, esp in deciding whether or not to allow slavery"

Liberal POV said...

Blogger, and Right wing Nuts

Lets recap, the original comment by Blogger.

"This post is what I have been trying to say to Libs. To be an American is to hold set of common values. "

Nobody then fails to mention the more common shared values of Justice, Freedom, right to vote, opportunity, religious freedom but become obsessed with what must be a new buzz word in the Tea Party Mob with history in the days of slavery " Popular Sovereignty".

Nobody said...

You don't get to frame the debate in terms to your benefit. Allow me to recap:

Blogger mentions a set of common values.

I list those I've studied in high school and college as "traditional American values" -- the same values that can still be found in any standard political science textbook.

Lib seizes on one -- popular sovereignty -- and states that it is definitely NOT an American value, that it's ONLY reference in ALL OF HISTORY, is to justify slavery in Kansas in the 1840's, even though he admits he had NO understanding of the term before I mentioned it on this thread.

I attempt to explain to him, logically and rationally, that the concept of popular sovereignty means, "the right of the people to rule themselves" and that the concept was around BEFORE its use to justify slavery. That it can be traced back to Locke in the 1600's and the idea of popular sovereignty can actually be found in Plato's Republic around the 4th century B.C.

Lib ignores all of that, and claims that popular sovereignty is just a new "buzzword" of the racist tea party movement.

BTW Lib, where's the link to a credible source that names YOUR concepts as traditional American values?

How about everyone else? Care to share which recap is more accurate in summing up this thread? More importantly, is there ANYONE out there, liberal or conservative, who will weigh in on Lib's side of this argument? Bueller? Bueller?

Blogger said...

Nobody, punching Liberal is like punching Brer Rabbit's tarbaby. You just get stuck to him and end up in the brier patch with him.

My approach to Lib is to talk past him to any of his fellow travelers who are listening. Only if there is a message I want them to hear do I write. Anything else is an exercise in futility for me.

Nobody said...

I just find it hard to believe anyone can be this dense. I am confounded that he absolutely refuses to accept that popular sovereignty is a basic American political value just because the first page he found on Google referenced its use to justify slavery in the 1840's. Lib, PLEASE, for your own good, try to read this and understand it:

The concept of popular sovereignty means that government has power over us because we give our consent to that government.

It was the concept partially used to justify allowing settlers in western territories to decide on whether to be a slave or free territory, but this misapplication of the concept should not condemn the entire concept.

If you take the position that popular sovereignty is EVIL, then what you are saying is that government receiving the authority to govern from its own citizens, through elections, is EVIL. You are saying We the People do NOT have the right to choose our leaders. That government has unlimited power to do whatever it wants to us. Is this what you want us to believe is your opinion?

guy faulkes said...

Nobody, Blogger is correct. It does not good to try to engage Liberalproverbs18:2 in a legitimate debate. It cannot be done. He has consumed to much of the Kool Aid. Calling him illegitimate is the kindest thing one can say of him.

Yes the pun is intended.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

"If you take the position that popular sovereignty is EVIL, then what you are saying is that government receiving the authority to govern from its own citizens, through elections, is EVIL. You are saying We the People do NOT have the right to choose our leaders. That government has unlimited power to do whatever it wants to us. Is this what you want us to believe is your opinion?"

I believe the words Democratic rule or Demoaracy to be far more common terms to the American people without the negitive history of popular sovereignty.

What do you have against Democratic rule or Demoaracy?

What would either popular sovereignty, Democratic rule or Demoaracy have to do with multiculturalism?

Sarkazein said...

"What do you have against Democratic rule or Demoaracy?"-POV

We are a Republic.

Jack said...

It seems as though POV’s disconnect comes with attempting to use a very broad concept to describe political realities. Popular Sovereignty is a concept and shouldn’t be used to explain actual events. It is a common value held by democratic nations throughout the world. As Nobody pointed out, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both discussed popular sovereignty hundreds of years ago, so it is hardly a new idea. Think of it as a “philosophy” instead of a “rule”.

Sark, the US is both a Republic and a Representative Democracy. The two are not mutually exclusive (note that China is a Republic, but hardly a democratic nation).

Sarkazein said...

Jack- And yet we are NOT " Democratic rule or Demoaracy". But thanks for the ... correction????

Nobody said...

Jack said, "It is a common value held by democratic nations throughout the world. As Nobody pointed out, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both discussed popular sovereignty hundreds of years ago, so it is hardly a new idea."

Thanks for weighing in Jack. You and I seem to be in agreement. It would seem Lib and I have been arguing over semantics. He absolutely refuses to acknowledge what I have been saying and what you said above -- that popular sovereignty IS a traditional American political value -- and one shared with most representative governments. Try as I might to educate the poor sap, he is completely, wholly and thoroughly uncompromising. This quote of his demonstrates his stubbornness and ignorance:

"Nobody then fails to mention the more common shared values of Justice, Freedom, right to vote, opportunity, religious freedom but become obsessed with what must be a new buzz word in the Tea Party Mob with history in the days of slavery " Popular Sovereignty"."

Lib, I'll ask again and give you the opportunity to correct your earlier response: Do you see that popular sovereignty -- the right of people to rule themselves, exercised through regular elections -- is a traditional American political value?

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

"Thanks for weighing in Jack. You and I seem to be in agreement. It would seem Lib and I have been arguing over semantics."

"Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both discussed popular sovereignty hundreds of years ago, so it is hardly a new idea."

It appears there was controversy over the theory of "popular sovereignty" hundreds of years ago.

As I understand popular sovereignty in theory it's a good thing as today in Egypt, Tunisian or protest marches in the United States. The problem we run into' is in practice". During the Civil Rights movement had "popular sovereignty" been allowed the South would still be segregated. There're times when regional customs or practices of repression or discrimination or lack of discrimination are out of step with the rest of the United States.

During the time of slavery "popular sovereignty" by southerners approved of slavery later approving of segregation and today approving of anti gay restrictions.
For decades San Francisco's lack of discrimation would not have passed a nation wide "popular sovereignty" test.

The Supreme Court ruling to make American schools secular was very unpopular but freedom of religion requires the Government to be neutral on religion. Most Supreme Court ruling would not meet "popular sovereignty".
The election of George W. Bush in 2000 would not have been "popular sovereignty".

My question remains with these controversies how is "popular sovereignty" a common American value?

What does "popular sovereignty" have to do with multiculturalism?

How is being of Islamic faith any different then being of Mormon or Catholic faith? All must respect the Constitution of the United States and the basic values of America listed below.

Freedom of religion

Right to vote

Right to free speech

Justice

Respect for human right

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

" Do you see that popular sovereignty -- the right of people to rule themselves, exercised through regular elections -- is a traditional American political value?"


That is not the definition of Popular Sovereignty as I understand it. Prop 8 in California, the over throw of the government in Egypt would be closer to what I understand Popular Sovereignty to be.

Democratic rule or Democracy"-the right of people to rule themselves, exercised through regular elections -- is a traditional American political value?"

My understanding of the meaning of Popular Sovereignty is it's the will of the people and must be addressed by all ruling governments.

Iran and China control Popular Sovereignty with force. North Korea with massive propaganda and force.

Canada with an informed society, free press and free elections.

In the United States today we have the conservative movement using propaganda of scapegoats, fear, religion and bigotry to create a Popular Sovereignty unrest.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

"Popular Sovereignty "

""Sheriff Joe’ Arpaio Leads in Arizona Poll for Senate Race."


The above is a very good example of a person who disreguards basic human rights to play to popular sovereignty. Hitler used similar bigotry by using Jews, Gypsies and Homosexuals as scapegoats and had great popular sovereignty with the people of Germany in 1938.


""Sheriff Joe’ Arpaio Leads in Arizona Poll for Senate Race."

Sarkazein said...

""Sheriff Joe’ Arpaio Leads in Arizona Poll for Senate Race."

POV wrote- "Hitler used similar bigotry by using Jews, Gypsies and Homosexuals as scapegoats and had great popular sovereignty with the people of Germany in 1938."

Enough said.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

The point is Scapegoating, Bigotry and Fear are easy paths to gaining popular support.

If you remove Fear, Scapegoating and Bigotry what does the Conservative movement have left? The Conservatives have no ideas, no plans, no solutions, no vision and little knowledge of today's problems.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

The point is Scapegoating, Bigotry and Fear are easy paths to gaining popular support.

If you remove Fear, Scapegoating and Bigotry what does the Conservative movement have left? The Conservatives have no ideas, no plans, no solutions, no vision and little knowledge of today's problems.

Liberal POV said...

Sark

I might add the conservative are unable to apply basic math.

The Conservative movement just lobbied and got another tax break for America's wealthiest increasing the deficit by $500 billion dollars and the conservative think they make up the difference by killing Big Bird.

guy faulkes said...

The point is Scapegoating, Bigotry and Fear are easy paths to gaining popular support. - Liberalproverbs18:2

The left really believes this. That is why they use these tactics so often. Fortunately, the right uses research and logic to make their decisions and seldom fall for these leftist tactics.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

Who's pushing the following fear issues?

Sharia law?

http://www.alan.com/2010/10/13/right-wing-fear-machine-sharia-law-coming-to-a-town-near-you/
Criminal Illegal Aliens?
Mosque in New Yory City?

"Republicans were preaching and fanning the fires of hate with Osama’s “paling around with terrorists” and using his last name to insinuate he was not American."

Continue reading on Examiner.com: Right Wing Media Spreading Fear & Hate - Knoxville American Government | Examiner.com http://www.examiner.com/american-government-in-knoxville/right-wing-media-spreading-fear-hate#ixzz1E8SMeTMh

"Fear Machine Redux: Right-Wing Media Use Overseas Turmoil To Stoke Fears Of U.S. Revolution"

http://mediamatters.org/research/201102010023

"The right's primary weapon
The right's primary weapon right now is fear. And they don't care how many people they terrorize mentally, as long as their agenda against Obama goes forward. "

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

"Popular Sovereignty"

Acts of genocide as in the Baltic States, Congo, or early Americas with native Americans can have popular sovereignty support. Acts of repression can have Popular Sovereignty support.

Justice, equality and protection of miniorites are often missing in Popular Sovereignty rule for this reason I do not consider it to be a common America value.

guy faulkes said...

Telling the truth is not spreading fear, Liberalproverbsq8:2. If you could understnad truth instead of Kool Aid, you would realize this.

If everyone watched the Cain video clip, you have seen how Lib's tactics are common to the left.

Lib, you poor dolt, everyone is laughing at you.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Telling the truth is not spreading fear, Liberalproverbsq8:2. If you could understnad truth instead of Kool Aid, you would realize this. "

Where would you go to find truth?

Conservatives have created their own Media, their own math, their own science, redated the universe to 6000 years and make up facts as needed but the still have no plans, no vision, no solutions and no understanding of problems facing working Americans.

Nobody said...

Lib,
You don't have the mental acuity to process more than one thought at a time. You accused me earlier of "obsessing on a new tea party mob buzzword" when it is actually you who obsessed over this one term. Let me quote you:

"Blogger
Where the hell do you get some of your terms to call common values?
"Popular Sovereignty" this was the term use for slavery in Kanas"

This is how this whole, pointless attempt to educate you began. Here is part of my first post on this thread -- the second post overall:

"I'm assuming you are referring to such American Values as Rule of Law, Popular Sovereignty, Consent of the Governed, Limited Government and the various rights guaranteed in the Bill of Rights?"

You are thinking about popular sovereignty in total isolation, unable to think of it as one of several traditional American values which I named -- limited thinking on your part. Here are the other values I named along with popular sovereignty:

Rule of Law - the law applies to everyone, including government, so government cannot deny someone of their life, liberty or property without due process.

Popular Sovereignty and Consent of the Governed -- Government receives the power to rule from the people, who grant power to that government. Built into this scenario is the understanding that the people have the right to take back that power if government becomes abusive.

Limited Government -- the power of government is limited to protect the individual rights of citizens. Pure democracy cannot be allowed to deny the rights of minority groups just because a majority seizes control of government.

The various rights in the Bill of Rights -- essentially a list of things government CANNOT do. Abridge speech, press, assembly, religious exercise, deny gun ownership, search without a warrant and so on.

All of these values together in the American system ARE IMPORTANT, including popular sovereignty, which you just cannot seem to see in any context other than one episode in 19th century American history. Popular sovereignty is one of several "traditional American political values" that are built into our Constitution and a concept present in the Declaration of Independence. If you can't get this now, you have no business attempting to carry on any conversation on any blog regarding government, politics or current issues. The rest of us will constantly remember how you stubbornly refused to acknowledge what we consider to be basic civic knowledge.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody

You have now convinced me you're not advocating mob rule and assured me justice and basic human rights are at least important to you personally.

Now tell me what all of this has to do with who shares American Values and the Sharia Law fear Blogger is selling?

The conservatives fear campaigns shows how little they know about the world beyond their boundaries.

If you travel anywhere in the world you hear America music. They know often more about America then most American.
Most have already adopted American culture or at least what they believe to be American culture.

Johnny "Stinger" Rico said...

Liberal Socialist Sheep Lemming Dolt povs (not lower case),

I knew my parody would set you idiots off!!! LOL!!! Which part did you like the best? Was it the elitest attitude by JW (his students say he was really like that), or the stupidity of POV? LOL!!!!!

I am still waiting on my apology over the Tucson shooting. You liberals blamed the shooting on Tea Party Conservatives before the bodies were cold and come to find out it was one of YOU who did the shooting. LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Skyla

Nobody said...

Because being an American is not being any particular race or ethnicity (the Great Melting Pot, and all), what makes a person an American is there willingness to accept these basic American values, which was blogger's first post. Previous immigrants did this -- came here, learned the language and tried to "blend in." An advocate of sharia law couldn't do this, and so could not be an American. An advocate of Sharia law would not accept popular sovereignty because they believe in an autocratic theocracy, not rule by the people. An advocate of Sharia law would not accept rule of secular law, as we have here. An advocate of Sharia law would reject the 19th Amendment (giving women the right to vote) because they believe women should be excluded from the political sphere and remain subservient to men. An advocate of sharia law would not accept the limitation of government's power to protect the rights of minority groups, as evidenced by treatment of Christians in Muslim theocracies today. Point made?

Liberal POV said...

Nobody and Blogger

The whole fear of Sharia Law hype is pushed by the right wing fear factory.

The same bullshit was said of the pope about Catholics 100 years age.

"An advocate of Sharia law would not accept popular sovereignty because they believe in an autocratic theocracy, not rule by the people."

Are you sure you don't mean Southern Baptist?

Fundamentalist Christians have far more power to bring about theocracy rule.

It is good to hear a conservative recognize the importance of separation of Church and State.

guy fauleks said...

Guys, what is the use of continuing the discussion with the village idiot? He is not able to understand the facts. It flies in the face of his support of terrorists, pedophilia, and the subjugation of women. He does not understand the laws of this country, much less Sharia law. He ignores the Islamic principal of jihad. He actively condones law breaking, particularly immigration law and those against underage prostitution.

You are trying to reason with a fool and a traitor. It will not work.

guy faulkes said...

What I am saying is that Liberalproverbs18:2 does not believe in our set of common values because he is a supporter of criminals and does not share them. Of course he argues against them.

Blogger said...

Nobody, "An advocate of sharia law couldn't do this" Another home run. I can't thank you enough. By now, I hope you are satisfied, hitting the ball over Liberal's head. Perhaps Jack can jump that high. I don't know. Also there are a number of commenters using Anonymous who appear to be able to at least partially follow you.

I am convinced that the future of America depends on people grasping what you wrote. It is that serious.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger or Nobody

"Because being an American is not being any particular race or ethnicity (the Great Melting Pot, and all), what makes a person an American is there willingness to accept these basic American values, which was blogger's first post. Previous immigrants did this -- came here, learned the language and tried to "blend in."

How is this any different today? The whole wold is becoming a melting pot not just America.

Where do you get this silliness of Sharia Law being imposed on Americans Fear bullshit?

Just what is it you're afraid of?

guy faulkes said...

Liberalproverbs18:2

If the whole world is becoming a melting pot, how do you explain Jihad? Possibly because you want the entire wold under the control of your terrorist heroes.

Blogger said...

Lib "Just what is it you're afraid of?"

You and your fellow ostriches.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

"Jihad"

More Conservative Fear Machine hype.

They can't do us real harm without your help.

They have No Army, No Air Force, No government, No tanks, No Navy find some courage and stop spreading fear!

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

"You and your fellow ostriches."

Stop your silly fear mongering.

What is the conservative fear machine's spin on this nonsense? I really don't follow such silliness.

Nobody said...

It has been fun, but Lib's post just after my last one clinches it for me. I've pretty much summed up why blogger and I have contended that a believer in Sharia law could not accept basic American values and become fully integrated into the US. I thought I did so pretty clearly and logically. This is pretty much the point of the thread -- the British PM is warning that, while immigrants are perfectly welcome to maintain their cultural identity, it is dangerous to allow communities to develop within western societies that abide by different legal and political beliefs as Sharia advocates do. They will be dedicated to replacing our system with their own. Lib turns this whole discussion on its ear by asking, "Are you sure you don't mean Southern Baptist?" Show me where there are Southern Baptist theocracies as in Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and perhaps, soon, in Egypt. He is so full of loathing for America, he cannot bring himself to recognize the points I have tried to make so clearly. "Where's the danger?" he asks. Fort Hood? Times Square bomber? "Too small" he would say. Not a REAL danger. Just the right wing fear machine blowing things out of proportion. I'm with Guy, now. There is no need to continue arguing with an idiot. I also agree with Blogger, however, and think the discussion was important, if for no other reason than that there might be some lurkers here who will see the contrast between us and the idiot. And besides, if you don't bust him every once in a while, the poor fool thinks he's winning the debate.

Liberal POV said...

Nobody and Blogger

Explain all of the lies and hype about Obama's religion coming from the religious right.

This is not the part of a desire for a Christian theocracy?
What do people like you lobby for?

Do you want all people Islamic faith deported but still claim you believe in religious freedom?

guy faulkes said...

Liberalproverbs18:2, do you deny the teachings of the Koran that call for jihad? Do you even know what the Koran is?

I do not want any person of Islamic faith deported unless he is a criminal such as an illegal alien. If he is a terrorist, he needs to be imprisoned and punished or executed. In what drug induced dream did you come up with this idea that anyone wants to deport people because of their religion?

I may be naive, but I believe most Muslims, especailly in this country, do not follow the path of lesser jihad. Only your terrorist heroes do so.

If you did not suffer from information retention disorder, you would know what we "lobby for". We have told you enough times.

You are incredible. La La La La La is all you can contribute.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

I ask once more what is Blogger, Nobody or you lobbying for? What action to you want public officials to take?
What the proposed of Blogger's post?

guy faulkes said...

You have been told endlessly, Liberalproverbs18:2. Why do you persist in obscuration? This is your only tactic. It shows you have nothing to offer.

I notice you are now dodging the jihad question as well as the deportation issue.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger or Nobody


What action to you want public officials to take towards people of Islamic faith?
What's the purpose of Blogger's post?

we have between 1 and 7 million Muslims in The United States.

guy faulkes said...

Liberalproverbs18:2, no one is asking anyone to take any action against Muslims because they are Muslims, you dolt. The only people that need to have action taken against them are the criminal terrorists you support and the criminal illegal aliens.

Blogger and Nobody made their point repeatedly to you. You are either to "stupit" to realize what they are talking about or to obtuse to admit you understand it.

You have once again become the poster child for proving the point that Blogger and Nobody made concerning our common goals and ideas. As you do not share them, you cannot comprehend those that do and are intolerant toward them.

How about the jihad question and the deportation issue? Where did you come up with your lunacy? You have heard of the Koran, have you not?

Liberal POV said...

Guy

The minister out in Kansas has found scripture in the Bible he believes justifies protesting the returning dead American soldiers>

Holy Books are often justification for crimes against humanity.

You could pick through the Bible and find justification for a lot of inhumanity most is in the interruption. Most of it comes from people who believe everything literally.

When did you become a scholar of the Koran and an expert on jihad?

Inform me on what you believe the threat to Americans to be and why?

Do you believe the jihad you fear so much to be religious or political?

Fact: you will never be 100% safe from terrorist and still have a free society. What's most important to you and fellow conservatives?

guy faulkes said...

Liberalproverbs18:2, it will do not good, but I will answer your questions. Then you answer mine about jihad and immigration.

When did you become a scholar of the Koran and an expert on jihad? About 40 years ago I took a course about comparative religions. I became interested and read the Koran. I also investigated Shintoism, and several eastern religions. Religion is a fascinating subject.

Inform me on what you believe the threat to Americans to be and why? Because I have read the Koran, listened to your terrorist heroes on the news, and a little incident that happened on 9-11.

Do you believe the jihad you fear so much to be religious or political? Both.

Now I have answered your questions. It is time for you to answer mine about jihad, the Koran, and where you got your insane statements about taking actions against all Muslims.

Liberal POV said...

Guy

You and Blogger still have not said what you want public policy to be? What do you want different from what the Obama Admin is doing?

guy faulkes said...

Sure we have as did Nobody, you just did not listen. You missed out. Too bad for you.

Now answer the questions, liberalproverbs18:2.

Blogger said...

Lib wrote: “Are you sure you don't mean Southern Baptist? Fundamentalist Christians have far more power to bring about theocracy rule.”

As usual, your ignorance screams out. If you knew anything at all about the Baptist, you would know they have always been a major force in the separation of church and state. Some even gave their lives in that cause.

One of their basic written tenets: “Church and state—a free church in a free state. Neither one should control the affairs of the other.” (Biblically based on Jesus command: “Therefore render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” Matt. 22:21) Baptists were influential in the formation of the first civil government based on the separation of church and state in what is now Rhode Island. The Danbury Baptists letter to Thomas Jefferson is often cited as having important import on Thomas Jefferson’s thinking in the matter.

Lib, you owe Baptists and apology.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger

You confuse the Baptist Church I grew up in with the extremist right wing political Southern Baptist of today.

Blogger said...

Lib, you can run, but you can't hide. Baptists are Baptists and whether liberal or conservative, they are at one on separation of church and state. If you took a little time, you could do some research and discover this basic belief of then all.

As Jimmy Swaggart use to say, we grew up in the South where there were more Baptists then there were people.

guy faulkes said...

Are those questions to difficult for you, Liberaproverbs18:2?

Liberal POV said...

Guy and Blogger


You and Blogger still have not said what you want public policy to be? What do you want different from what the Obama Admin is doing?

guy faulkes said...

Yes we have, you dolt. You did not pay attention. Stop dodging or shut up as you have admitted you are wrong.

Liberal POV said...

Blogger and guy


You and Blogger still have not said what you want public policy to be? What do you want different from what the Obama Admin is doing?

guy faulkes said...

Go to Older Posts and read them, you dolt. They go back for years.

guy faulkes said...

Still dodging, Liberalproverbs18:2? You might answer New Guy and Nobody also.