A recent article appearing in the National Review Online shows that Democrats and liberals will go to any length they can to win voters for Barack Obama. In their latest attack ad against Presidential-hopeful Mitt Romney, Michael Moore uses sexual innuendo and what the majority of society considers vulgar language. In the ad, Moore suggests that if Romney ousts Obama, that he will track Romney down so Moore can use his own private parts to physically harm Romney.
In the Democrat ad, it’s difficult to determine if Moore is saying he will burn down the country or Romney if Obama loses the election. It’s obvious that the people who produce ads of this nature are not part of normal society. Many of these individuals are not only hate filled bigots but are also outright anti-Americans who love to use violence to get their point across any chance they can. These people lack the ability to live among civilized Americans.
As an African American who is a single mother, I have become ashamed that I ever voted for Obama in the first place. This is one election where he won’t get my vote. I can no longer associate myself or my children with Obama’s followers and their mob mentality.
GUEST COMMENTARY — Some liberals have recently been chattering on the internet about photos of Paul Ryan and the fact that he has hunted animals before. A few of these liberals seem to be offended at seeing such photographs by stating that Ryan is “insensitive.”
Are these liberals also against abortion? Could abortion and the killing of any other life not be considered the same thing? Of course liberals are not against abortion. They have fought for years to be able to rip an infant out its mother’s womb or stab it with a giant needle and suck out its brain so they can throw its bloody carcass in the trash — this way they have no responsibilities toward bringing a new life into the world. Yet, these same liberals have no problem with chowing down on an expensive steak (better if it’s at the expense of someone else), wearing leather shoes and leather belts and any other use of animal products.
Some liberals might object by saying that Ryan was indulging in “blood sports.” Abortion doctors get paid to participate in “blood sports” every day.
(Guest Commentary submitted by H.Y. Tharpe, Latrobe, PA)
In 1947, a retired public school principal from California named Dr. Ethel Percy Andrus discovered one of her retired teacher colleagues living in a chicken coop, struggling to survive on a meager pension, in poor health, with no means to obtain heath care. The discovery shocked Dr. Andrus to take actions that would serve to improve the lives of all older Americans for decades to follow.
An active leader in her California Retired Teachers Association, Dr. Andrus reached out to the handful of other state retired school employee organizations that then existed, including the Pennsylvania Association of School Retirees (my employer), and united our organizations to form the National Retired Teachers’ Association (NRTA). Collectively, we lobbied our states and the federal government to enact laws to improve the condition of retired public servants, and we combined the buying power of our individual members to entice companies to produce products and services that individuals need during their later years, including health insurance for persons over the age of 65, which did not exist previously.
While everyone needs revenue, only criminals and politicians insist that they have to get it through violence. The criminals, however, do not pretend they’re doing it in order to serve the public, and taxes make politicians public masters rather than public servants.
Certainly, the present size of government at all levels depends on taxation – not only the explicit kind, but the invisible kind that the Federal Reserve System imposes through inflation of the money supply. People probably wouldn’t voluntarily pay to bomb, invade, and occupy other countries, bail out large banks and other corporations, and try to dictate the personal choices of others. Good riddance!
Government-monopolized services such as education and health care could be provided for less than half the cost if they could be returned to the voluntary sector of society with cost-raising regulations abolished and incentives restored. Both mutual aid groups and charitable donations filled gaps prior to the rise of the Welfare State for those in need with an efficiency that is impossible when those in charge of aid get more money and power for themselves the worse the job they perform. We’ll have to take some personal responsibility for our own lives and stop using the excuse Ebenezer Scrooge made that his taxes supported institutions for the poor so he could ignore them.
It is obscene for those claiming to protect life, liberty, and property to obtain their revenue by violating life, liberty, and property. There are plenty of ways to obtain revenue without force: insurance, user fees, advertising, lotteries, and donations are already used by many local and state governments for a good portion of their revenue. Let them be true public servants and live within the means that these sources provide. People might even pay more voluntarily once they’re no longer forced to turn over 1/3 to 1/2 of their wealth to governments.
Ultimately, it is about the type of society we want to have. We can accomplish a lot voluntarily when we mutually respect each other’s lives and property. It begins by respecting the right of people to keep the fruits of their labor. A good start would be the abolition of the personal income tax, which only adds insult to the injury of theft by invading every part of the taxpayer’s privacy as well as making the second week of April a misery instead of a time to enjoy the early spring.
– Libertarian National Chair, Mark Hinkle.
The younger generation’s extensive use of abbreviations to communicate quickly in text messages – LOL (laugh out loud), IDK (I don’t know) or MBF (my best friend) – may be a sign of a major change in the English language, according to observations by the Rev. Wulfstan Clough, O.S.B., professor of English at Saint Vincent College and an expert in the field of philology and linguistics.
“If you study the origins and development of the English language, you will find that a major shift in the English language occurs roughly every 500 years,” Fr. Wulfstan said. “Our language arrived in Great Britain in 449, when it was brought there by the Anglo Saxons. The Norman Conquest in 1066 brought a heavy French influence to English, so that the Old English of Beowulf became the Middle English of Chaucer. Then, in the fifteenth century, the period between Chaucer and Shakespeare, we had the Great Vowel Shift, which turned Middle English into Modern English. The pattern is evident. Now, around the year 2000, I think we are looking at the beginning of another major change in English. I predict that a hundred years from now, English may be so different that we’d have trouble understanding it.”