It's not just "about the future of conservatism"--it's about the future of this country. The demographic shift has already begun and a bill such as this is certain to accelerate the process. How many ditch diggers and 50 yo bus boys do we need?

I guess we should just allow Wikipedia to take over all intelligence gathering and get rid of the NSC, NSA, CIA, etc? Like their version is the result of sworn testimony with cross? It's laughable. Did you run by Snopes?

It's not so much the attack itself-we're not saying that the regime should have had intel to prevent it-but it is their response, deliberate orders to do NOTHING to help, and the dis-ingeniousness of the regime in attributing the attack to Al Qaeda affiliates despite having the knowledge. The other embassy and consulate attacks you cite are besides the point and irrelevant to the discussion. They are different in kind. I'll wager that most of the people killed in the attacks you cite were terrorists and non-Americans. They were sudden attacks with no opportunity to engage other assets; not a developing attack over several hours with assets available. They were also not related to another regime gun-running scheme, either.

If Darwinian Evolution is true, or approximates reality, it must surely apply to economics. Perhaps there will evolve a better system for production and distribution or goods, services, and wealth, but we haven't seen it yet. Socialism, Communism, Marxism, etc are all unsuccessful branches of the economics tree. These are adaptations that have reached a dead end. The evolution of species produces far more failures than successes and "socialistic tendencies" will be relegated to the ash heap of history.

Of course liberty permits freedom of thought and experimentation. The underlying assumed principle is that humans and all other sentient organisms are motivated according to their perceived self-interest. This defines free markets. Therefore, we can understand "socialistic tendencies" some men exhibit as satisfying a self-interest being tied to the general well being of mankind. So far, this experiment has always failed because to effect the common good requires conscious manipulation of production and consumption that cannot surpass the unconscious actions of the "market" (the invisible hand).

" It's pretty funny that some of the worst people I've ever met also happened to be the most vocal about being a Christian." That remark may say more about you than any Christian you may know.

I was going to respond, but Ken's statements are so wrong it's of no use. He obviously has no idea about the constitution or the actual nature of liberty in a Republican form of govt. BTW, McVeigh attacked a Federal building, not the "general population".

Truly, the volume of a given quantity of water as ice is greater than that of liquid water.

"...(D)evout Episcopalian.": an oxymoron?

What facts? There really is nothing relevant regarding further gun control to discuss. The issue is violent mentally ill persons, not gun control. The facts are quite clear: increased implementation of must-issue concealed carry laws reduces violent crime. Shall we move on to the real issue? Violently mentally ill persons.