1 - 10 Next
Over the years much damage has been done to the Constitution. The most damage was done in 1913 with the 16th and 17th Amendments and the Federal reserve act. The 16th made it possible for discrimination in taxation: Something prohibited originally. The 17th took away states rights by Senators being elected instead of appointed by the states to protect states rights which was an important factor in bringing sovereign states on board. The Federal Reserve Act was passed through subterfuge and lead to the fiat money being circulated to day. For more detail go here: http://www.meetup.com/westend912project/messages/boards/thread/8036303
In response to:

Immigration Is American

Roc1929 Wrote: 12 hours ago (10:54 AM)
No society can survive without a common culture. A culture is the protocols, the language and public behaviors shared by a people. This makes for predictable interactions resulting in a comfortable environment. Some cultures promote subjectivity and dependence and other cultures promote liberty and independence. To suggest that all cultures are worthy of equal respect is nonsense. Should we respect the barbaric cultures that exist in much of the world? If you are brought up in one culture and transfer to a totally alien culture you experience stress known as culture shock. You are then faced with two choices: You can cleave to your old culture by living in a ghetto with others of your old culture in order to resist the difficulty of adapting to the new culture in which you find yourself, or you can work to acquire the language and protocols of your new society. The sophistry promoting multiculturalism is responsible for much of the turmoil in the world. It is responsible for the destructive divisions that exists in America today. Some European countries (the Netherlands for example) are waking up to this reality and are rejecting multiculturalism. Stossel and others keep making reference to previous mass immigrations and their benefit to America. Pure sophistry. Those previous immigrations were highly restrictive. They were not wide open as is being suggested. President Theodore Roosevelt said it best: "In the first place we should insist that the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equity with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming an American and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."
In response to:

Late-Talking Children

Roc1929 Wrote: Sep 16, 2014 8:19 AM
" Above all, he warns them not to park their common sense at the door when they seek either diagnosis or treatment for their child. Too much is at stake to put blind faith in anyone." This is a great piece of advice that should be applied to everything. It is just as foolish to accept scientific evidence without question as it is to reject empirical evidence out of hand.
In response to:

Cheap Politicians

Roc1929 Wrote: Sep 11, 2014 3:39 PM
Dr. Sowell I’m a big fan but I have to disagree. Just throwing money at a problem never solves it. Increasing the pay of our elected officials will only attract more scoundrels. People of character do not take on responsibility for the money. They do it because it is the right thing to do. Such people lead successful lives and don’t need the money. We used to have a class of men known as dollar a year men. I’m 84, I haven’t heard that term in 60 years. George Washington took no salary as President. What we need is to elect men of character. Unfortunately The power hungry drive off such men with attack ads and slander. Ben Franklin thought that our public servants should not be compensated: “Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. place before the eyes of such men a post of honour that shall at the same time be a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it.” --Ben Franklin, At the Constitutional Convention I believe that he was right. Instead we have created a political class of elected officials who have never contributed to our economy but have been in politics feeding at the public trough all of their lives.
In response to:

Speed Kills Racial Profiling Study

Roc1929 Wrote: Sep 05, 2014 8:53 AM
In response to:

Excitement Deprives Children of Happiness

Roc1929 Wrote: Sep 03, 2014 9:24 PM
When my children were small I never told them of an upcoming day out or trip. When the time came I just told them to get in the car and away we would go. They'd find out when we got there. The reason was that I didn't want them to get excited. The reason for that was that too often excitement leads to misbehavior and that would result having to cancel the trip as punishment. When we were going to the store I would tell them that I might be picking something up for them or I might not. But if they asked for anything they would get nothing. I never had the problem so many parents have with out of control kids when shopping. Helping them develop self discipline by these and other such rules served them well in school and in their careers.
Whether or not someone is offended is a choice. Whether or not someone should be offended is dependent on intent. To choose to be offended where no offense is intended is an aggressive act. There is no liberty where we submit to aggression.
In response to:

Whatever Happened to the Chevy Volt?

Roc1929 Wrote: Aug 31, 2014 10:40 AM
Didn’t Cost a Tax Payer Dime (And I don't mean the Volt.) After WWII Studebaker brought out some very futuristic looking cars. They didn’t sell and Studebaker changed course. Didn’t cost the taxpayer a dime Liberty Ship tycoon, Henry Kaiser, decided to enter the car market with models called the Kaiser, the Frazer and the Henry J. They had some revolutionary features. They didn’t sell and the Kaiser/ Frazer car company went out of business. Didn’t cost the tax payer a dime. Chrysler tried to develop a gas turbine powered automobile. They could not overcome the safety problems and the project died. It didn’t cost the taxpayer a dime. Mazda thought that Wankel had a good idea when he developed his rotary engine and put it in some of their automobiles. Too many problems, Mazda abandoned the Wankel. Didn’t cost the taxpayer a dime. Ford decided to market a car named after Henry’s son, Edsel, It didn’t sell and was discontinued. Didn’t cost the tax payer a dime. Obama decides that the time has come for an all electric car and makes GM produce the Volt. It doesn’t sell. It has safety problems. It costs the taxpayer billions of dollars. The government invests billions of taxpayer dollars on wind power, solar power and ethanol from corn which has no significant improvement in our energy supply. This is why Crony Capitalism (which is a euphemism for Fascism) Doesn’t work. This is why no top down, collective society has ever produced a successful economy. Why is a market economy important? Without market cost constraints, managers in the old Soviet Union would order more resources, materiel and labor, than were actually needed while not ordering enough of what was needed because no one at the top knew exactly what the requirements were. The result was a waste of resources. To make one ton of copper in the USSR used 1,000 kilowatt hours of electrical energy. In West Germany, only 300 kilowatt hours. To produce one ton of cement, the USSR used twice the energy as Japan. Central planning doesn’t work either for governments or Business. Once the home office of a business gets too big, economies of scale decline.
Rod T: While I don't disagree with the argument that you make I believe that the Progressives set the stage in 1913 under Woodrow Wilson. I quote from a paper titled Governments Consume: "Then in 1913 the Republic was turned into a Democracy, a form of government that our Founding Fathers considered suicidal. • Equal taxation died with the 16th Amendment allowing an income tax. When first proposed, we were told that only the incomes of the wealthiest 1% would be taxed and that the rate would be from 1% to 7%. It has been as high as 90%. • The 17th Amendment attacked State sovereignty by changing senators from appointment by State Legislatures to election by popular vote. This led to more power being concentrated in Washington. • And, finally, the Federal Reserve Act was passed which, with other changes, allowed the printing of fiat money. As we print more money, the dollar loses its credibility. In time, like the Soviet ruble, it will have no exchange rate and no value on international money markets. For the entire piece, go here: http://www.meetup.com/westend912project/messages/boards/thread/8036303
In the introduction to the so called "Jefferson Bible" is a letter to Dr. Benjamin Rush in which he says in part: "Dear Sir: In some of the delightful conversations with you, In the evenings of 1798-99, and which served as an anodyne to the afflictions of the crisis through which our country was then laboring, the Christian religion was sometimes our topic; and I then promised you that one day or other, I would give you my views of it. They are the result of a life of inquiry and reflection, and very different from that Anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions, To the corruptions of Christianity I am Indeed opposed; but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be; sincerely attached to his doctrines, in preference to all others; ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other." And in a letter to Mr. Charles Thompson: "I, too, have made a wee-little book from the same materials (The Gospels) which I call the Philosophy of Jesus. It is a paradigma of his doctrines, made by cutting the texts out of the book and arranging them on the pages of a blank book, in a certain order of time or subject a more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen. It is a document in proof that I am a REAL CHRISTIAN, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines or Jesus, very different from the Platonists, who call ME infidel and THEMSELVES Christians and preachers of the Gospel, while they draw all their characteristic dogmas from what its author never said nor saw."
1 - 10 Next