Mr. Tyrrell, has someone declared martial law? If not, justification for the suspension of constitutional rights is a bit hard to justify in the interest of safety. A declaration of martial law allowed Lincoln to suspend habeas corpus, but he could never have done that otherwise. Our right to not be subjected to unreasonable search and seizure (recall we are innocent until proven guilty as well) is not negotiable just because we choose to travel, at least not as far as the government is concerned. A private security firm would have a better chance of withstanding the scrutiny since it is not accountable to the Constitution, which enumerates the rights of the people and establishes limits on the powers of government. One that is a...

Absolutely Goldwater's policies would have been preferable to Johnson's. Not that he was the perfect candidate, but he was the more perfect candidate in that election. Johnson was so catastrophic that he chose not to run in 1968. Even he knew how much of a screw up he was, apparently. At least with respect to Vietnam. His domestic policies represented a huge transfer of power to the fed and over time we've seen federal spending on education, welfare, and other programs that were kick-started by the Great Society escalate. Regardless of one's position on homosexuality, I'd say that it's best to let those who want to serve do so but sexual preference from both gays and straights should not be a normal topic of discussion. How about we...

Absolutely not true. As a Christian I strive to live by the tenants of the teachings of Jesus Christ. My first and foremost responsibility is my own life, which needs to be in order before I can even begin to look at another person's life. Matthew 7:5 says, "[y]ou hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." Sounds like Jesus telling me to tend to my own affairs before I dare suggest to anyone else how he should live. Now would I prefer that all people live lives of holiness? Absolutely. Do I defend my Christian world view? Without a doubt. I will stand against anything I believe to be an abomination in God's site, but I cannot find where Jesus sought...

"There will be zero tolerance for this type of misinformation and unjustified rate increases." While I agree with you that she is not a member of Congress and that she is primarily demonstrating that the government should have the final say in exactly how much insurance premiums should be, note that she said (quoted above) "zero tolerance for this type of misinformation" within her statement. She is classifying something another entity says as misinformation and stating that it will not be tolerated. It is a logical conclusion that she intends to intimidate Ignagni and others in the insurance industry into not saying anything that the government does not agree with. This can be construed as an attempted abridgement of free speech. For...