[Masthead] Fair ~ 48°F  
Frost Advisory
Thursday, Apr. 17, 2014

Destroying America from within

Posted Friday, September 18, 2009, at 1:49 PM

I just glanced over yet another anti-Obama tirade hot off the fax machine.

As usual, the words "conspiracy" and "treason" are used against the president, who allegedly "acts in contempt with freedom and maliciously tampers with democracy, promoting animosity while...using his position as president against America."

Okay. That's just one side of the story.

Here's another view from a leader of the pro-Obama forces: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

"I wish that we would all, again, curb our enthusiasm in some of the statements that are made," Pelosi said of harsh rhetoric from her opponents. "Some of the people hearing the message are not as balanced as the person making the statement might assume.

"Our country is great because people can say what they think and they believe. But I also think that they have to take responsibility for any incitement that they may cause."

I guess rabid conservatives now interpret "not as balanced" as saying they're insane and "take responsibility for any incitement" as saying they should be jailed. See how wrong meanings can be read into anything?

Enthusiasm is good, though, if it doesn't involve attacking individuals as persons as opposed to individuals' beliefs. I'm not the biggest fan of Pelosi, either.

My point is that disagreement is good within a democracy if it leads to discussion and resolution of issues. Disagreement with the intent of destroying the opponent leads to fracturing the nation as a whole. Then, as both sides tear apart each other, some other force sneaks in unaware and wreaks havoc.

Example: Osama Bin Laden.

The solution: A three-or-more party political system.


Comments
Showing most recent comments first
[Show in chronological order instead]

Miramar Kadafi said "I wish Barack Obama could stay President forever!" The friend of my enemy is MY ENEMY! Something is wrong when the leader of the free world is admired by the leader of one of the most repressive regimes of Islam! Yes, Kadafi is a nut, but, where does that put Obama?

-- Posted by conservativeme on Mon, Sep 28, 2009, at 8:09 AM

Momof3&3step&1gran . . . was it not you who ran around screaming "the sky is falling" when the issue of guns in the park came up. LOL!

-- Posted by jaxspike on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 8:38 AM

Actually jaxspike, being concerned for the safety of children in the park, is no where near the panic paranoia of people claiming the end of their country "Govt. taking over", and that "Criminals will be taking over the parks" now that they wouldn't allow what already was in place of guns being in parks. So in that reference, I believe that would pertain more to you and other gun maniacs/enthuisits. And I am not talking about all gun carry permit citizens, just the extremists.

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran on Wed, Sep 23, 2009, at 11:32 AM

If multi-billion dollar oil companies weren't lining the pockets of Congressmen, we would probably be far more advanced in our quest to be independent.

It ultimately begs the question of, if oil companies had been looking for alternatives at the same time the DOE was, where would we be? Why bother, they got filthy rich by not trying harder.

-- Posted by nascarfanatic on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, at 8:11 PM

Actually I think his point was that the DOE was founded to come up with comprehensive energy policies to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. In that respect he is correct. You are also correct in that is no longer the primary focus of the agency. It is now nearly a purely regulatory agency with a strong research focus.

It begs the question had the agency stayed on it's original mission where would we be now?

-- Posted by Tim Baker on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, at 3:10 PM

The point he was making was that the DOE has 16,000 employees dedicated to lessening our dependence on foreign oil. That is obviously not true. I am not saying that the DOE was not created in response to the oil problems of the 70's. What I am saying is that lessening our dependence on foreign oil is far from its only purpose. The DOE is responsible for some of the most important research that the human race can ever undertake, learning the secrets of the atom and the universe. I would hardly consider it a waste of money.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, at 7:27 AM

The United States Department of Energy (DOE) is a Cabinet-level department of the United States government concerned with the United States' policies regarding energy and safety in handling nuclear material. Its responsibilities include the nation's nuclear weapons program, nuclear reactor production for the United States Navy, energy conservation, energy-related research, radioactive waste disposal, and domestic energy production. DOE also sponsors more basic and applied scientific research than any other US federal agency; most of this is funded through its system of United States Department of Energy National Laboratories.

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, at 7:15 AM

Actually Nathan he's correct. The DOE was formed in response to several oil shortages/embargoes that occurred in the 1970's to formulate a comprehensive energy policy. That included the responsibilities of the old Atomic Energy Commission but that was not the primary focus of the department.

-- Posted by Tim Baker on Tue, Sep 22, 2009, at 4:38 AM

accuracy is not all that important...if you start with a conclusion, then collect your supporting data.

-- Posted by lazarus on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 7:36 PM

The Department of Energy was instituted on 08-04-1977. TO LESSEN OUR DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

-- Posted by herewegoagain;-) on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 6:44 AM

The Department of Energy may not have existed prior to 1977, but the jobs and duties that it performs have been around since the invention of the atom bomb. Lessening our dependence on foreign oil is far from the only responsibility that that DOE has. Please do us all a favor and do a little homework before you pass bad information and allow your confusion to mislead others to be similarly confused. What I am saying is, YOU'RE STATEMENT IS INCORRECT. THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, "WHAT WAS I THINKING?"

-- Posted by nathan.evans on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 4:30 PM

Momof3&3step&1gran . . . was it not you who ran around screaming "the sky is falling" when the issue of guns in the park came up. LOL!

Anyway, People like Pelosi and Bush only embarrass themselves and wonder how they ever got elected and beginning to wonder the same for Obama because he definitely has not fulfilled his campaign promises of transparency and bipartisanship and in fact seems to be going the opposite direction. So far he is just as much a failure as Bush.

-- Posted by jaxspike on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 8:38 AM

Once upon a time the government had a vast scrap yard in the middle of a

desert. Congress said, "Someone may steal from it at night." So they created a

night watchman position and hired a person for the job.

Then Congress said, "How does the watchman do his job without instruction?" So

they created a planning department and hired two people, one person to write

the instructions, and one person to do time studies.

Then Congress said, "How will we know the night watchman is doing the tasks

correctly?" So they created a Quality Control department and hired two people.

One to do the studies and one to write the reports.

Then Congress said, "How are these people going to get paid?" So they created

the following positions, a time keeper, and a payroll officer, then hired two

people.

Then Congress said, "Who will be accountable for all of these people?" So they

created an administrative section and hired three people, an Administrative

Officer, Assistant Administrative Officer, and a Legal Secretary.

Then Congress said, "We have had this command in operation for one Year and we

are $18,000 over budget, we must cutback overall cost."

So they laid off the night watchman.

NOW slowly let it sink in. Quietly, we go like sheep to slaughter.

Does anybody remember the reason given for the establishment of the DEPARTMENT

OF ENERGY....During the Carter Administration?

Anybody?

Anything?

No?

Didn't think so!

Bottom line. We've spent several hundred billion dollars in support of an

agency ... the reason for which not one person who reads this can remember!

Ready?? It was very simple ... and, at the time, everybody thought it very

appropriate.

The Department of Energy was instituted on 08-04-1977. TO LESSEN OUR

DEPENDENCE ON FOREIGN OIL.

That was 32 years ago........

Hey, pretty efficient, huh???

AND, NOW, ITS 2009 -- 32 YEARS LATER -- AND THE BUDGET FOR THIS "NECESSARY"

DEPARTMENT IS AT $24.2 BILLION A YEAR. THEY HAVE 16,000 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES AND

APPROXIMATELY 100,000 CONTRACT EMPLOYEES; AND, LOOK AT THE JOB THEY HAVE DONE!

THIS IS WHERE YOU SLAP YOUR FOREHEAD AND SAY, "WHAT WAS I THINKING?"

Ah, yes -- good ole bureaucracy.

And we are turning the banking system, the insurance industry, the auto

industry, and now HEALTH CARE over to the same government????

-- Posted by herewegoagain;-) on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 6:44 AM

Chicken Little, "The Sky is Falling"!!!!!!!!!

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran

When did the discussion turn to algore?

-- Posted by quietmike on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 2:19 AM

Chicken Little, "The Sky is Falling"!!!!!!!!!

-- Posted by Momof3&3step&1gran on Mon, Sep 21, 2009, at 1:59 AM

All that is required for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. I'm not sure who made that chilling and prophetic statement, but it accurately describes what is happening to our country. Voter apathy has delivered us our possible appocolypse.

-- Posted by Tim Lokey on Sun, Sep 20, 2009, at 11:27 PM

garhawk...I'm an instant fan. You nailed it right on the head. There has never been a better explanation of liberals and their agenda for political correctness.

-- Posted by Tim Lokey on Sun, Sep 20, 2009, at 12:11 AM

garhawk that was too funny but very very true.

-- Posted by bellbuckletn on Sat, Sep 19, 2009, at 9:25 AM

"Political Correctness is a doctrine fostered by a delusional illogical liberal minority & rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous liberal press which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

-- Posted by garhawk on Sat, Sep 19, 2009, at 8:55 AM

This is another way the country is being destroyed from within, and our president is catering to them, he brushed off the National Day of Ptayer, but is hosting a Ramadan celebration, go figure:

http://www.raptureready.com/rr-islam.htm...

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Defaul...

-- Posted by michaelbell on Sat, Sep 19, 2009, at 7:20 AM

David,

Our country was not founded as a democracy, the founder's intent was a republic. The problem is the elected officials are ignoring the will of the people, whose voice they are to heed!

-- Posted by dmcg on Sat, Sep 19, 2009, at 6:44 AM

chs61,

Instead of brainwashing most folks call it civics, something you might look into studying. Unfortunately, civics is no longer alive and well, it has largely been replaced by victimhood and dependency.

-- Posted by quietmike on Sat, Sep 19, 2009, at 2:52 AM

I am glad Quietmike is not running for office or in office. I have to believe brainwashing is alive and well in Bedford County. Thank God we live in a country where you can't be arrested for comments like his.

-- Posted by chs61 on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 11:58 PM

I was watching a news program this week and they had a clip of Miss. Pelosi speaking to a group of people, when she was interrupted by someone yelling in the audience. One of the people on the dais told the person voicing their opinion rather loudly to sit down. Miss Pelosi her self said "no let them speak their mind I love it when people feel the need to rebel, because I'm a rebel myself". I am paraphrasing because I cannot remember the exact quote. Never-the-less she was ok with the outburst because it was aimed at her opposition. So we now have an issue where it is ok to stomp and scream as long as it is for what she believes in, if not she goes on national television looking like a person with a stalker on her trail, to the point she looks almost paranoid, condemning the same action she condoned in the video. I apologize for not having a link to the video at this time. I will post it as soon as I can dig it up.

-- Posted by docudrama on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 11:45 PM

"I guess rabid conservatives now interpret "not as balanced" as saying they're insane and "take responsibility for any incitement" as saying they should be jailed. See how wrong meanings can be read into anything?"

Actually, David, I'm more offended by your "rabid conservatives" comment than Nancy Pelosi's inane rambling . Although "not as balanced" literally means UNBALANCED and there's absolutely no interpretation in today's society other than insane...unless you think maybe she's concerned about our equilibrium which, I suppose, is always a possibility...or maybe she's concerned about the state of our bank accounts. I know that can't be the case since she's determined to take as much of our earnings as possible.

The vast majority of the complaints that we "rabid conservatives" have are based on ideals that we disagree with that are being forced on us by the "rabid liberals" and the "rabid liberals in the media".

-- Posted by Thom on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 10:18 PM

Maybe my memory is cluttered to say the least, but wasn't some of Obama's campaign promises; transparency, no special interest, no earmarks and he would expose those that abused his promises? Also, didn't we want to bring the nation together and quit this partisan political landscape he blamed the previous administration for creating?

Results speak volumes about a man and his promises. Now, we have a worsening political situation, bills with 9000 earmarks, and a country more separated than ever. Things "changed", that's for sure. Not what "we" voted for and that is why there is such dissension amongst American voters, not a "black" issue.

-- Posted by dsm810 on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 9:06 PM

The last time I checked, our country was founded upon the principle of "Of the people, By the people and for the people." The politicians in Washington no longer listen to the people. Instead their votes are sold to the special interest groups and bought by those with money and influence. Politicians who insist upon government run health care in spite of overwhelming dissaproval of such is NOT about those in government being interested in the health care of it's people, it is a demonstration of their outright lust for power and even more control over every aspect of our lives. The need for a third political party whose priority will be a return to the principles upon which this country was founded has never been more apparent.

-- Posted by Tim Lokey on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 7:36 PM

Disagreement with the intent of destroying the opponent leads to fracturing the nation as a whole.

-----------------------------------

What if the "opponent" is already fracturing the nation?

obama and company have run roughshod over the constitution in a way that would make FDR ashamed.

Someone who has no respect whatsoever of the principles on which America was founded is an enemy and should be treated as such.

-- Posted by quietmike on Fri, Sep 18, 2009, at 2:03 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


David Melson is a copy editor and staff writer for the Times-Gazette.