Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $78,509
89%  
Woo hoo!! And now less than $9.5k to go and only $700 to the yellow!! We can do this. Thank you all very much!! God bless.

Posts by conservatism_IS_compassion

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • If you could give a card to play in the debates, what would it be?

    08/30/2016 6:15:16 PM PDT · 22 of 22
    conservatism_IS_compassion to stylin19a
    who hired craig livingstone?
    . . . or better yet, “Why did you hire Craig Livingstone?”

    Somebody in the Clinton White House did . . . and nobody - not even Livingstone himself - was called to account for hundreds of counts of a felony, committed in the White House itself. We can’t prove that Hillary herself did it - but she can’t prove she didn’t, either. Get a real shouting match, with her on the defensive with no concrete defensive argument available. What is certain, tho, is that she knows who did hire Livingstone - and it was a scandal that she did not tell us who did. In all likelihood, because it was she herself.

    Think about it, Dear Reader - that was mishandling of classified - proprietary, in this case, but still classified - information. And who is now more notorious than Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information?

    Another possible question along that line would be, “Does the Clinton Foundation pay off Craig Livingstone so he won’t rat out you for hiring him???"

  • If you could give a card to play in the debates, what would it be?

    08/30/2016 6:15:15 PM PDT · 21 of 22
    conservatism_IS_compassion to stylin19a
    who hired craig livingstone?
    . . . or better yet, “Why did you hire Craig Livingstone?”

    Somebody in the Clinton White House did . . . and nobody - not even Livingstone himself - was called to account for hundreds of counts of a felony, committed in the White House itself. We can’t prove that Hillary herself did it - but she can’t prove she didn’t, either. Get a real shouting match, with her on the defensive with no concrete defensive argument available. What is certain, tho, is that she knows who did hire Livingstone - and it was a scandal that she did not tell us who did. In all likelihood, because it was she herself.

    Think about it, Dear Reader - that was mishandling of classified - proprietary, in this case, but still classified - information. And who is now more notorious than Hillary Clinton for mishandling classified information?

    Another possible question along that line would be, “Does the Clinton Foundation pay off Craig Livingstone so he won’t rat out you for hiring him???"

  • Earth Just Narrowly Missed Getting Hit by an Asteroid

    08/30/2016 5:39:13 PM PDT · 24 of 39
    conservatism_IS_compassion to RightGeek; rlmorel

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .

  • FBI Recovers 30 Benghazi Emails Deleted By Hillary

    08/30/2016 1:17:46 PM PDT · 62 of 80
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Mr. Mojo
    don't be surprised to see "the end of Sept" be extended to ...after the election.
    Should she try that, she is just begging for the empty chair treatment.
  • Apple holds Europe to ransom: Tech giant threatens to cut jobs in EU (excerpt)

    08/30/2016 11:01:45 AM PDT · 13 of 16
    conservatism_IS_compassion to pepsionice

    There is a good case to be made that the corporate tax rate should be zero in any event. Certainly a law should be passed making dividends tax-deductible to the corporation - just let the recipient of the dividend pay tax on it. Pass that law, and the repatriation of foreign profits could proceed apace.

  • Rush Limbaugh's Ultimate Betrayal of His Audience

    08/30/2016 10:45:25 AM PDT · 108 of 129
    conservatism_IS_compassion to IronJack
    Rush Limbaugh has never masqueraded as a newsman being objective. He’s a polemicist, an entertainer.

    Meanwhile, scum-organs like the Washington Post and CBS spew their lies and half-truths daily under the mask of “news.” So tell me, who’s betraying their consumers?

    Exactly . . .
    The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
    The reality is that, exactly in the process of turning the debates into hit pieces against Trump, journalism turned the “debates” into reality shows - and Trump is a star of "reality TV.” Journalism has given us a reality TV campaign. Not Rush Limbaugh.

    Rush refused to pick a horse in the Republican race, because (unlike NeverTrumpers like Mark Levin) Rush refused to get into a position where he was on the wrong foot in backing the ultimate Republican Party nominee. Rush did stipulate that Cruz was the most consistent conservative in the race, tho - and that certainly is not any way to con grandma into backing Trump.

  • LA Times Tracking Poll: Trump Captures Six Point Swing, Leads Clinton by Three

    08/30/2016 10:05:06 AM PDT · 65 of 102
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Buckeye McFrog
    [Trump will] have to use antitrust law to bust-up the media monopolies starting with the Associated Press and put an end to it.
  • How Many Ways Do You Say Liar, Hillary?

    08/30/2016 9:51:14 AM PDT · 8 of 9
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin
    Why lying works:
    The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
    “The natural disposition . . . to believe” derives from our innate curiosity - we want to know stuff. All lies tell us stuff we didn’t know before (naturally enough, because they aren’t true).
  • How Can You Love Guns Knowing They Kill So Many People?

    08/30/2016 8:50:29 AM PDT · 40 of 149
    conservatism_IS_compassion to rktman
    The purpose of a gun is not “to kill people.” The purpose of a gun is to convince other people to avoid a fight.

    Even the military at war avoids fights when the odds of winning are not favorable. A criminal who realizes that his mark has significant ability to oppose his imposition will ordinarily not try to impose. Thus, the legal gun owner wins.

  • On Hillary Clinton as a Model for Young Girls

    08/30/2016 8:36:20 AM PDT · 21 of 23
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin
    People on the left think of themselves as worldly, and with regard to national identity, this is largely true. Viewing themselves as world citizens, liberals value national identity far less than conservatives do. That's why on national holidays you will find so many fewer American flags in liberal neighborhoods than in conservative neighborhoods. What the left has done is trade in national identity and solidarity for race, gender and class identity and solidarity.
    “Liberals” certainly are not worldly, in the sense of knowing the ways of the world. Go anywhere else in the world, lose your papers - and see how fast you ask for an American Embassy or consulate!!! Never mind losing you papers; just enter a country and fail to get a visa - and have that fact come to the attention of authorities, for example when showing your passport to board a flight out of the country - and see where that gets you. In their conceit that national borders do not matter, they are utterly naive.

    To the extent that they think of their sex as their identity, they are thinking small - for they are excluding their own sons from their identity.

  • Bill, Hillary and the gift that keeps on grifting

    08/30/2016 8:04:46 AM PDT · 18 of 18
    conservatism_IS_compassion to red-dawg
    Some have called this pay for play which, although not illegal, should certainly be so.
    It certainly is illegal:
    Article 1 Section 9:
    No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
    Democrats used to prattle about “the appearance of impropriety,” which in reality boiled down to the idea that the cartel known as wire service journalism can veto any appointment by a Republican, simply by publishing insinuations about them. That was an overreach.

    But in any instance where the Secretary of State suffers an organization in which she is a principal to accept gifts or payments, the “appearance of impropriety” is impropriety. No law affirmatively allowing it equals no right to do it. According to the Constitution, anyone who is employed by the government or holds a position of trust (such as being the spouse of the Secretary of State?) who wants to accept any substantive payment or position of authority or respect from a foreign government must get prior approval of Congress. Not just a one-time Senate confirmation when such potential foreign government influence is bruited about in the abstract, but an affirmative vote of both bodies of Congress before each occasion of such.

    We the people must understand that, from the top of the Federal government - the POtUS, both branches of Congress, down through the legislatures of all of our states, our officials have failed to enforce this provision of the Constitution. The President should never have allowed such gross impropriety in a cabinet official under his direct supervision. The Congress should have investigated, and found the Secretary of State in contempt for proceeding in such an unseemly way. And our state legislatures should have used their plenary power
    Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector. (Article II Section 1)
    to keep the name of anyone with such a record off the ballot in their states.

    It is all up the the public at this point. We can reject Hillary Clinton’s candidacy out of hand, or we can delegitimate the idea of democratic elections.

  • Manitoba Men Weep After Learning They Were Switched at Birth 41 Years Ago (2nd Same Hospital)

    08/29/2016 1:24:04 PM PDT · 21 of 36
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ProtectOurFreedom
    Some things are better left alone and undiscovered. What good could possibly come from this discovery?
    That you don’t end up marrying your sister?
  • Media Bias II: Hillary’s Health

    08/29/2016 1:02:41 PM PDT · 14 of 18
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin
    The news industry has sold out the American people to further their own progressive agenda using fake narratives, censoring real news and telling lies.
    “The news industry” is an improvement over “the MSM” because on a day-to-day basis journalism is the problem - and you cannot seriously challenge who you cannot even name correctly. Furthermore, “media” is a plural noun - and the problem we oppose is not actually plural. Rather, we routinely see “the media” functioning as a cabal, with all chanting the same talking points.

    In reality “the news industry” is wire service journalism. Primarily the Associated Press. But even tho the AP has some competition, the real scandal is that the First Amendment is supposed to protect free and independent presses, not a single “associated” press. All wire services homogenize journalism, and empower journalists.

    When anyone is empowered, they naturally do exactly what they want to do. Which, in the case of journalists, is to criticize and second-guess. Exactly what socialist politicians do. There is therefore no mystery as to why journalists and “liberal” politicians are so systematically sympatico.

  • Donna Brazile just made a startling admission in her defense of Clinton Foundation

    08/29/2016 11:41:55 AM PDT · 28 of 37
    conservatism_IS_compassion to 2ndDivisionVet
    let’s not forget that the presumption of impropriety was on the table during Mrs. Clinton’s confirmation hearings. That’s why she went out of her way to promise the Obama Administration and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that there would be a fire wall between the Foundation and her office.
    That “presumption of impropriety” is constitutionally mandated:
    Article 1 Section 9:
    No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
    Note that it takes an act of Congress - not just of the Senate - to authorize any person who works for the government to accept anything from any foreign government. It follows that every government employee has the affirmative duty to disclose each and every such relationship to Congress. And that, failing Congressional action, any such relationship which was not disclosed to Congress, and authorized by congressional action, is presumptively corrupt.

    It is a scandal that Hillary did not say “Mother, may I?” to Congress in advance of each and every acceptance by any entity bearing her name and of which she is a principal of anything from a foreign government. It is more than a scandal that a political party has nominated her for POTUS after this behavior. And it is equally a scandal that there are any state governments which have placed her name on the ballot for a slate of presidential electors.

    And if the Electoral College ultimately elects her as POTUS - the scandal might bring on a constitutional crisis.

    The only remedy - inadequate as it would be - would be for a judgement in a lawsuit to require the divestment from the Clinton family of any and all such corrupt “presents, emoluments, offices, or titles"
  • Theodore Roosevelt quote from Paris Sorbonne 1910

    08/28/2016 4:09:58 PM PDT · 24 of 35
    conservatism_IS_compassion to MattinNJ; Slip18; Mrs. Don-o; PGalt
    The whole speech rewards a reading (scroll down a page or so at the link).
  • Why Bernie Sanders would be an exccellent president [ZOT! Feel the bern]

    08/28/2016 4:01:05 PM PDT · 95 of 118
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Toddsterpatriot

    Yes, you’re right. Mea culpa.

  • Newsweek: Why Do People Hate Hillary Clinton?

    08/28/2016 2:22:03 PM PDT · 62 of 116
    conservatism_IS_compassion to drewh
    Society Socialism has created the unrealistic idea that a president should be government is a “magical leader” who never makes mistakes. In practice, no such magical leaders exist, but the expectation that presidents should be magical means that we turn against potential leaders when we discover that they, like all people before them, aren’t magical.
    SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

    Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one: for when we suffer, or are exposed to the same miseries BY A GOVERNMENT, which we might expect in a country WITHOUT GOVERNMENT, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer. Government, like dress, is the badge of lost innocence; the palaces of kings are built upon the ruins of the bowers of paradise. For were the impulses of conscience clear, uniform and irresistibly obeyed, man would need no other lawgiver; but that not being the case, he finds it necessary to surrender up a part of his property to furnish means for the protection of the rest; and this he is induced to do by the same prudence which in every other case advises him, out of two evils to choose the least. Wherefore, security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears most likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

  • Newsweek: Why Do People Hate Hillary Clinton?

    08/28/2016 2:05:00 PM PDT · 36 of 116
    conservatism_IS_compassion to drewh

    Because she’s a lying, cheating, slandering self-centered socialist with a lust for power and - yes - money.

  • Theodore Roosevelt quote from Paris Sorbonne 1910

    08/28/2016 2:00:14 PM PDT · 4 of 35
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Slip18
    From Theodore Roosevelt's 1910 speech at the Sarbonne:
    There is no more unhealthy being, no man less worthy of respect, than he who either really holds, or feigns to hold, an attitude of sneering disbelief toward all that is great and lofty, whether in achievement or in that noble effort which, even if it fails, comes to second achievement. A cynical habit of thought and speech, a readiness to criticise work which the critic himself never tries to perform, an intellectual aloofness which will not accept contact with life's realities - all these are marks, not as the possessor would fain to think, of superiority but of weakness. They mark the men unfit to bear their part painfully in the stern strife of living, who seek, in the affection of contempt for the achievements of others, to hide from others and from themselves in their own weakness. The rôle is easy; there is none easier, save only the rôle of the man who sneers alike at both criticism and performance.

    It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

  • (Vanity): New iPad, iPhone Safari phishing lockup and how to get out of it.

    08/28/2016 1:55:03 PM PDT · 2 of 31
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Swordmaker

    Bookmarked.

  • Why Bernie Sanders would be an exccellent president [ZOT! Feel the bern]

    08/28/2016 1:32:57 PM PDT · 70 of 118
    conservatism_IS_compassion to dp0622
    Did the 50s really have 90 percent tax rate? I thought that was a good economic decade?
    Back then the graduated income tax did indeed have a top rate over - over - 90%. There were a lot of tax brackets in the graduated table. The result of the very high tax bracket rates was full employment for accountants. And people who had very high earnings potential not only using loopholes but ultimately limiting the amount of work they did in a year. Movie stars like Ronald Reagan, and others even more highly paid, just didn’t bother to earn as much as they readily could have.

    The high rates were carried over from the FDR/Truman Administrations. After JFK got elected he declared that “a rising tide lifts all boats” and proposed - and Congress enacted - a tax cut which reduced the top bracket to about 50%, still insane but not quite as delusional.

    With the multitude of tax brackets, inflation had an inherent tendency to raise taxes - and in the Seventies we got inflation, in spades. Along with stagnation. Hence the term, “stagflation,” which was the phenomenon you got when tax rates biting too deeply into economic incentives not just at the top bracket but throughout the income spectrum. The more stagnation, the louder the cry for more tax revenues for more (magical) government spending by Democrats. The more taxation, the more stagnation, the spending the more inflation . . .

    The problem flared up during the Ford Administration, and Ford came out with his own magic nostrum, the “Whip Inflation Now” button. And a call for more taxes. I myself, at that stage, thought that a tax hike might be necessary. Then Jack Kemp stepped up and stated that the emperor had no clothes. That the problem was not that tax rate was too low but that, because of inflation, it had become too high. It was a revelation, but not one which the GOP as a whole leaped to embrace. Kemp proposed an annual 10% cut in all income tax rates for three years, ultimately a 30% cut.

    The Carter malAdministration led us into double digit inflation/interest rates, and double digit unemployment. I held my breath during the Reagan’s announcement of his candidacy in 1980, hoping for him to support the Kemp-Roth tax cut bill. Thanks be to God, he did not disappoint. GHW Bush called it “voodoo economics,” and after winning the WH as the third term of Reagan by promising, “read my lips, no new taxes” he then proceeded to raise taxes.

    Bottom line: FDR did a lot good in WWII, the more I research it. But he had FUBARed the economy in the Thirties, by continuing and exacerbating Hoover’s errors, and making his own. Kemp-Roth economics (“Reaganomics”) was the crying need of America in the Thirties, and we had "Doctor New Deal” instead. That carried over into some bad economic policy during the war, and afterward. After the war, there was Korea to fight, and economic policy was mediocre to bad until JFK.
  • Anti-Trump Republicans To Run Ads Against Trump In Key States

    08/28/2016 5:46:50 AM PDT · 86 of 121
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Innovative

    Reagan bet Jimmy Carter by ten points - 50% to 40% - with ten percent going to Rep. John Anderson (R, IL).

  • ‘No Vacancies’ for Blacks: How Trump Got His Start, and Was First Accused of Bias

    08/27/2016 4:50:29 PM PDT · 35 of 49
    conservatism_IS_compassion to RegulatorCountry
    If only Trump were presently a Democrat, it’d all be forgotten.
    Back then, DJT probably was a Democrat.
  • Horrified by Trump, Democrats getting nostalgic about Romney

    08/27/2016 4:29:46 PM PDT · 43 of 55
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Innovative
    “The rule is, jam to-morrow and jam yesterday—but never jam to-day.”

    “It must come sometimes to ‘jam to-day,’” Alice objected.

    “No, it ca’n’t,” said the Queen.
    “It’s jam every other day: to-day isn’t any other day, you know”
    - Lewis Carroll

  • Anatomy of a Hillary Clinton scandal

    08/27/2016 3:10:14 PM PDT · 6 of 6
    conservatism_IS_compassion to rickmichaels
    “no quid pro quo”

    But there doesn’t have to be one. According to the Constitution, Hillary gave up her right to accept money from a foreign government the day she became a Senator, and did not regain that right until she resigned as SoS. She could have regained that right merely by applying to Congress, which was dominated by Dems when she became SoS. Why didn’t she?

    Simple - she did not want to reveal what she was planning, because it was too clearly out of line - even Democrat Congressmen and Senators would have balked at explaining the decision to OK it to their constituents. She is in violation of the Constitution even if she was actually running a charity, because she never asked for, never got, congressional permission to accept foreign government money.

  • Report: Black men, boys shot most by Chicago police

    08/27/2016 2:30:57 PM PDT · 93 of 125
    conservatism_IS_compassion to E. Pluribus Unum
    "It's easier to believe, because they're black, that an officer was in fear of their life
    . . . and why would that be?
    Black men, boys, shoot more police.
    Oh.
  • Who Should NOT Be a Presidential Debate Moderator?

    08/27/2016 2:19:48 PM PDT · 45 of 81
    conservatism_IS_compassion to conservatism_IS_compassion
  • Who Should NOT Be a Presidential Debate Moderator?

    08/27/2016 2:17:26 PM PDT · 42 of 81
    conservatism_IS_compassion to PJ-Comix
    Nobody should moderate; a chess time should control the air time to make it equal, with the proviso that if no one talks the meter runs on both participants at 1/2 speed.

    The clocks of both participants should be visible to everyone - and there should be no restrictions on visual aids - other than that both sides should disclose the visual aids they plan to use long enough in advance that each knows how to challenge the other.

    No restriction on taking notes, using a laptop, using a prop . . . anything except a teleprompter. All the visual aids should be online and accessible to us a priori.

  • Rare Apple I ‘Celebration’ model fetches $815k in auction, falling short of $1m estimates

    08/27/2016 1:57:59 PM PDT · 34 of 42
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Swordmaker
    As Thomas Sowell would put it, that constitutes a demonstration of actual knowledge that MS was gonna go up. Anyone can say “MS is going up.” Laying down serious money is a different matter.
  • Trump closes in on Clinton

    08/27/2016 12:50:57 PM PDT · 24 of 24
    conservatism_IS_compassion to CptnObvious
    The Mainstream Media has decided to downplay or avoid the leaks because it would help Trump whom they have decided to despise.
    "The Mainstream Media” chuckles every time it is called "The Mainstream Media.” Granted that movies and fictional TV dramas are often problematic, nobody is ever gonna do anything about them because they are just - storytelling. And if you assay to do anything at all to control them you are a loose cannon w/ respect to the First Amendment. The logical target of your complaint - and you do have serous grounds for complaint - is wire service journalism. Attacking journalism, you at least have the basis of accusing it of false advertising as to completeness, veracity and objectivity. Why “wire service” journalism particularly? Because wire services are what unite what you call "The Mainstream Media” into a single entity.

    The Associated Press is the ringleader, but all wire services have the homogenizing effect on journalism of which I complain. That is inherently true because any wire service is a continuous virtual meeting among its member organizations. As Adam Smith put it, 

    People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices. It is impossible indeed to prevent such meetings, by any law which either could be executed, or would be consistent with liberty and justice. But though the law cannot hinder people of the same trade from sometimes assembling together, it ought to do nothing to facilitate such assemblies; much less to render them necessary. - Adam Smith, Wealth of Nations
    By uniting and homogenizing journalism, wire services give journalists (monopoly) power. What do you do when you have power? You do what you wanna. What do journalists want to do? Criticize, second guess, attract attention with sensational stories. How do they do it? By negativity (If it bleeds, it leads) and unrepresentativeness (“Man Bites Dog, not Dog Bites Man”). How do they get people to accept as truth systematically negative reports from people they don’t know? By claiming that “all journalists are objective.” People fall for that claim because
    The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . . The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
    The "natural disposition to believe” derives from curiosity, which inheres in human nature. That is what makes journalism, with its claims of objectivity, so dangerous. But of course, although the attempt at objectivity is laudable, and a claim to be attempting it is respectable, nobody can know that they actually are objective. Or that anyone else is, so joining a mutual admiration society of people who will swear to your objectivity is no defense against hypocrisy in claiming objectivity for yourself.

    The very fact that journalists will admit to “If it bleeds, it leads,” and “Man Bites Dog” bias marks journalists as cynics. Who else but a cynic could claim that systematic negativity was objectivity????

    “It is not the critic who counts . . . the credit belongs to the man . . . in the arena,” T.R. said. “If you have a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,” Elizabeth Warren said. The former assertion is faith, the latter, cynicism about the “credit” called ownership. Socialism is inherently cynical, and journalists are inherently inclined toward cynicism.

    The logical point of attack against wire service journalism, besides pointing out the above, is to charge the wire services with monopoly control of journalism. The wire services were historically “too big to fail” because economizing on the use of expensive bandwidth in the transmission of the news was taken to be vitally important. But in the 21st Century, bandwidth is dirt cheap. Therefore, in principle, wire service journalism should be vulnerable to a Sherman Antitrust Act lawsuit.

  • If Muammar Quaddifi had donated to the Clintons he would be alive today...

    08/27/2016 11:35:45 AM PDT · 11 of 11
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Bulwinkle
    If Mummer Quaddifi Osama bin Laden had donated to the Clintons he would be alive today...
  • Hillary Clinton Vs. Donald Trump Vs. Investors

    08/27/2016 11:19:15 AM PDT · 9 of 9
    conservatism_IS_compassion to sheana
    Don’t think the debates will make a difference. The moderators will be on Hillarys side. It’ll be just like the Republican debates......Mrs Clinton, Trump said blah blah blah. What is your response? Therell be no policy questions. It’ll all be gotcha. Then everyone will yell and scream about how unfair they were and Yada Yada.
    That will be the tendency. However, Trump can point out that the difference between Hillary’s attacks and Trump’s attacks are that nothing she can possibly charge him, a private citizen, with compares to accepting bribes as Secretary of State. And he ain’t just making it up.

    If she plays (continues) the KKK card, Trump can point out that as a New Yorker he never even met anyone who he had any reason to believe belonged to the KKK. Presumably, given his 2A stance, he backs the NRA - which was formed by Union officers to support the right of blacks to have weapons to resist the KKK.

  • Those KKK Republicans

    08/27/2016 10:47:42 AM PDT · 27 of 30
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Afterguard; rktman; Riley; deadrock
    Why is it never mentioned that the Klan was/is a Democrat construct?
    Democrats claim that there was a “great switch” of racists to the Republican party when the Democratic Solid South became the Red State bloc. In his documentary film, Hillary’s America, Dinesh D’Souza addressed that issue. It is true that the white South switched from Democrat to Republican, but D’Souza illustrated graphically that the number of Democrat politicians who switched from D to R was negligible. He said there were, I don’t know, some 2000 plus elected officers in the South, and he showed black-and-white thumbnail pictures of them - all Democrats before the so-called “great switch.”

    In that single frame he then changed from b-w to color the photos of all the ones who switched from Democrat to Republican. It was Strom Thurman and eleven others - a total of twelve, out of thousands. Strom Thurmond switched from the party of the KKK. Robert Byrd - and nearly all of the rest of the Southern Democrat politicians, including Clinton mentor J. William Fulbright - didn't.

    Like most blacks after the Civli War, Martin Luther King, Sr. was a Republican, Negros - as the polite term then was - switched to the Democrat Party reluctantly, but pretty much en blanc for economic reasons before white southerners became majority Republican. As late as 1960 Nixon expected to win the negro vote - and was surprised/disappointed that they went for Kennedy.

    In reality, as you know, the KKK now has no national political party willing to affiliate with it. In reality, the National Rifle Association is the oldest Civil Rights organization still extant in the US. It was founded by Union officers to support the right of blacks to have weapons with which to resist the KKK.

  • HERE IT IS=> Assange Points to ‘Tick Tock’ Email as BIGGEST WIKILEAKS RELEASE YET – We’ve...

    08/27/2016 8:10:10 AM PDT · 30 of 95
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Ditter

    Yes.

  • Clinton Foundation - Protecting On-Going Charitable Activities?

    08/27/2016 8:01:09 AM PDT · 5 of 28
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin
    There seems to be sufficient evidence that anyone contributing substantially to the Clinton Foundation believes or believed that there was a 'pay for play' element to the donation. There seems to be equally sufficient evidence that Donald Trump has admitted that he made his political contributions over decades to insure that he had access to politicians where he was 'paying to play'. A great pair to draw to: alleged payee and alleged payor.
    I have an idea! Instead of talking in code, let’s use English!!
    The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
    In plain English, “pay to play” is bribery. And there’s laws agin' it. Arcane concept, I know . . .
  • Rare Apple I ‘Celebration’ model fetches $815k in auction, falling short of $1m estimates

    08/27/2016 7:48:33 AM PDT · 26 of 42
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Swordmaker
    Per Wikipedia, Microsoft was founded by Paul Allen and Bill Gates on April 4, 1975. Your friend must have kept the money elsewhere between WWII and then.
  • Better Business Bureau - Give.Org: Clinton Foundation - Standards Not Met (Measuring Effectiveness)

    08/26/2016 1:47:40 PM PDT · 13 of 20
    conservatism_IS_compassion to xzins
    Clinton Foundation / aka Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation does not meet the following 3 Standards for Charity Accountability:
    Article 1 Section 9:
    No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
    The Constitution doesn’t say that it’s OK for a Secretary of State to accept money from foreign countries, it says that it in not allowable unless Congress acts to approve it. Hillary started the SoS gig when the Democrats dominated Congress in the time frame when Obamacare was passed. She would have had easy sailing to get this approved, if she made a showing that the foundation was in the public interest.

    Hillary did not submit her plan to Congress for the same reason that she used that infamous private server. She did not want accountability because her plan would stand the light of day.

  • Karma for the Clintons at Last?

    08/26/2016 6:14:33 AM PDT · 52 of 110
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Kaslin
    Bill Clinton flippantly dismissed the suggestion of any quid pro quo, saying there is no evidence that any of the donors received anything for their donations. When asked whether there is at least an appearance of impropriety, he said, "I'm not responsible for anybody else's perception."
    For a private citizen, that would be true. For Hillary - and for Bill, and for every federal official or spouse thereof, the case is different:
    Article 1 Section 9:
    no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the US], shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
    A private citizen does not have to ask Congress whether he can get a job working for the Queen of England, or anyone else. Otherwise, this provision of the Constitution would be entirely superfluous. But if Hillary, on the Federal dime from 2000 through 2012 (and the spouse of Bill who was on the Federal dime, 1993 through 2000), wanted to accept anything from any foreign government she was duty bound to go to Congress and say, “Mother, may I?” She never did.

    Ask yourself: “Why didn’t Hillary, as SoS in 2009 and 2010 with an overwhelming Democrat majority - even a filibuster-proof Senate majority - in Congress, simply tell Congress what money she wanted to accept, from what foreign government, and why she wanted to accept it?” The question answers itself: she did not want to go on record as to what specific benefit it was, to the US in whose employ she was committed full time or even to humanity in general, that she should do something as fishy looking as that. And her Democrat friends in Congress certainly did not want to explain it to their constituents.

    On the face of the Constitution it is plain that when it comes to working for the Federal government, the appearance of impropriety is impropriety.

    The burden of proof isn’t on us, Bill. It is on you. You cannot possibly sustain that burden of proof because the horse is already out of the barn. The time to have explained why the SoS or her spouse was accepting big bucks from foreign governments was before the money was accepted. Now the only thing to do is to divest yourselves, both of you and your relatives as well, of it. All of it.

    It’s a pity, I know; Hillary told us that you all were “dead broke” before this made you billionaires. But, easy come, easy go.

  • Article V For a Republic Worth Keeping

    08/26/2016 4:34:06 AM PDT · 12 of 25
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Jacquerie
    I have an idea for a constitutional amendment! It should say,
    No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
    That’s already in the Constitution? Well, I guess we have to modify it to
    No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person , not even a Democrat, holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
  • Black Voters Question Trump Outreach Delivered to White Audiences

    08/26/2016 4:21:57 AM PDT · 67 of 68
    conservatism_IS_compassion to luvbach1
    ...The NAACP invited him. But accepting is a fool’s errand, because you will certainly be shouted down...
    Even if that were true, and not saying it isn't, I think it still would be a net gain for Trump to show up and deliver a speech detailing to the extent possible what he proposes to help black Americans.
    After Sanders had the mic taken away from him at Sanders’ own even, Trump announced that no one would ever do that to him. Consequently if Trump were to go to a 100% black liberal venue, precisely that would happen. They would create a circus.

    No, there is nothing to be gained by giving the Democrats a new “convention bump” and further isolating/intimidating any blacks who might think of expressing support for him. It is a fool’s errand, nothing else.

    They likely wouldn't like the fact that he didn't out-promise the Dems when it come to freebies.
    . . . and that would be the entire story of the event. Benefits from participating in it? Bupkis.

    Wait until Hillary! goes to speak somewhere at an all-Republican venue first. She won’t even hold a news conference with her journalist allies!

  • FBI Admits Clinton Used Software Designed To "Prevent Recovery" And "Hide Traces Of" Deleted Emails

    08/25/2016 6:31:15 PM PDT · 115 of 151
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ilovesarah2012
    Sounds like that should be a crime.
    It is. Sarbanes-Oxley makes it a crime to delete an email if you even think that doing so will keep you out of trouble. Senator Clinton voted for that law, but . . .
  • Black Voters Question Trump Outreach Delivered to White Audiences

    08/25/2016 6:03:37 PM PDT · 65 of 68
    conservatism_IS_compassion to luvbach1
    Has he been invited to speak before black audiences?
    The NAACP invited him. But accepting is a fool’s errand, because you will certainly be shouted down. Trump would win the national election in a landslide if he got 20% of the black vote, and yet speaking before an 80% hostile audience is always going to be a disaster.

    Hence, no speeches to audiences self-selected to be hostile, even if you do have a program to offer which could attract a significant minority of the group in a secret ballot.

  • APPLE BOOSTS IPHONE SECURITY AFTER MIDEAST SPYWARE DISCOVERY

    08/25/2016 4:55:10 PM PDT · 35 of 51
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Man; Swordmaker
    One thing you don’t seem to have considered: FR is an Internet Web Site. A defining characteristic of such being that you gotta have an Internet connection and a computer (and an iPhone or an iPad is a computer) in order to communicate with it. Right there, you have a commonality of interest. Among all FReepers.

    I switched from a Wintel to a Mac not too long after the advent of OS X. Knowing that OS X was unix based (and now is officially Unix™). And knowing that Unix was an industrial-strength multiuser, multitasking OS. Whereas DOS and Windows, being single-user and initially designed on the assumption that the owner had complete control of what went in his machine, was not industrial grade. The Internet became the killer app, and that was the death knell to the conceit that the user was in complete control of what went into his machine. Thus, viruses. And phishing attacks.

    I personally fell for a phishing attack once, and the experience convinced me that I needed security against viruses. And yet AV software was a royal pain. And not convincingly secure, so I would always be vulnerable to a phishing attack if it claimed that I had a virus. Always, unless I got an industrial strength OS. Enter OS X. Is it impossible that my faith in OS X will lead me astray? Definitely possible. But it is the least naive assumption I know how to make. So I live with it. Swordmaker gets into the weeds with the arcana of this stuff, and his postings here on Apple strike me as a public service.

  • Malpractice: The Journalistic Assassination Of Ryan Lochte

    08/25/2016 3:32:17 PM PDT · 125 of 125
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Jess Kitting
    Lochte lies.
    The point of the article is that he didn’t - corrupt cops in Rio did. The moral of the story is that
    The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing . . . The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments (1759)
    We have come a long way since Samuel Morse’s 1844 demonstration of the telegraph. The best illustration of this is the story of the railroad VP who was traveling, and the train stopped to wait for the passage of an oncoming train. It was standard procedure to wait until that train passed; proceeding onto that single track before then could very easily get you killed. But after a while, the VP got on the telegraph, and inquired as to the status of the train they were awaiting. The reply was that it would be hours before that train would be able to proceed to where the VP was waiting for it.

    On learning this, the VP ordered the engineer to proceed without waiting. The engineer demurred. The VP ordered the engineer to get in the caboose, saying he would run the train. Which he did, without incident. Today we have grown extremely credulous of reports coming to us over long distances, from people we haven’t even met. Because those reports are nearly always right - as long as the person sending the report isn’t selling something.

    And the “something” that gets sold by reporters is the idea that although journalists admittedly are on the lookout only for negative or unusual stories, “all journalists are objective.” Well, news flash - if you think that telling only the bad news, and the news that does not usually happen, is objective then you are a cynic. And a natural socialist.

  • Progressivism kills dolphins. So stop feeding the dolphins!

    08/25/2016 9:52:22 AM PDT · 7 of 17
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ProgressingAmerica
    The distinction between people feeding dolphins and people feeding other people is that people in society feed other people all the time. You can feed a dolphin once, then disappear from the dolphin’s life forever after. You feel no dependence on the dolphin, whereas the waitress who feeds you has something in mind for herself by doing it. Namely, money - ownership of a certificate saying that she has contributed to society by feeding you, in particular. The act of feeding you does not fall into a memory hole, (other members of) society respond to the certificate you have given, and they do something she wants.

    Dolphins are not part of society. Notwithstanding the fact that we could wish otherwise, in the sense that dolphins can be the best possible lifeguards for swimmers.

  • Moral Foundation Theory: The Reasons You Can't Convince Libs Based on Facts

    08/25/2016 9:01:25 AM PDT · 24 of 58
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ChinaGotTheGoodsOnClinton

    “a conservative insight is that order is precious, difficult to achieve and easy to destroy.” (quote approximate)

    American “conservatism” conserves freedom - the ability to change, to do a job other than what your father did, for example. For freedom to be efficacious, there needs to be reward for accomplishment. Society naturally does this. Government, in the “liberal” vision, breaks down that reward system. “You didn’t build that” is equivalent to saying, “I do not recognize your right to own that.”

    In the liberal vision, “somebody else made that happen” - and they are right. “Somebody else” mentored the businessman, “somebody else” built the road the store goes by, and so forth. But it is SOCIETY - not government - which “did that.”

  • "Cajun Navy' Rescuers Eyed by Louisiana State Legislator for Regulation

    08/24/2016 8:27:21 AM PDT · 5 of 67
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Terry L Smith
    SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

    Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil . . . - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

  • "Cajun Navy' Rescuers Eyed by Louisiana State Legislator for Regulation

    08/24/2016 8:27:21 AM PDT · 4 of 67
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Terry L Smith
    SOME writers have so confounded society with government, as to leave little or no distinction between them; whereas they are not only different, but have different origins. Society is produced by our wants, and government by our wickedness; the former promotes our happiness POSITIVELY by uniting our affections, the latter NEGATIVELY by restraining our vices. The one encourages intercourse, the other creates distinctions. The first is a patron, the last a punisher.

    Society in every state is a blessing, but Government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil . . . - Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

  • As police commissioner, Theodore Roosevelt laid out his dreams for benevolent dictatorship

    08/24/2016 8:21:10 AM PDT · 5 of 15
    conservatism_IS_compassion to ProgressingAmerica

    People who identify “government” with “society” leave no room for freedom. Everything is either mandatory or forbidden.

  • "Anecdotal Evidence is Wrong"--or is it?

    08/24/2016 7:24:15 AM PDT · 39 of 39
    conservatism_IS_compassion to Vermont Lt
    What title of nobility did she receive? That is what that clause is about.
    The “title” she received was that of benefactress. Her name is attached to any good works the foundation might putatively do.
    no person holding any office of profit or trust under [the US], shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state
    It doesn’t say “title of nobility” exclusively, it says “title, of any kind whatever. It is a mandate for strict separation of US government from any foreign government. When you say, "of any kind whatever,” you are saying that you know people will try to fandangle, and that if they try to do it they are presumptively guilty of accepting bribery.
    It’s not about getting bags of cash. Even the founders knew they were not going to stop that.
    ”Present or emolument” directly addresses getting bags of cash. Just because they could not even foresee the name “Hillary Clinton” - let alone pass a bill of attainder against her - does not mean that they did not pass a law against what she has done. They did. The intent could scarcely be clearer.