Questions we need answers to: open comments

EDITORIAL UPDATE: I seriously want to delete this post (something I have never done on this site). It is copied from a comment on a separate post. Since it has been linked at WRSA, I will add some context. This is an example of what our founding fathers warned us concerning domestic enemies destroying us from within. These questions DO NOT need to be answered: they need to be recognized as a means of distraction. If you want to sit at your keyboard and give yourself a reason not to stand up, remember Sam Adams’ admonition:

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains setlightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.”

Focus on what is important: securing our children’s Liberty. Everything else will be discerned by moral men and women.

David DeGerolamo


We have a commenter in our midst who asks important questions, questions that need answers. Let’s hear your thoughts people…..

Having an ideology is the first step to a win. You have to want power for a purpose, good or ill in order to take it. 

We do not live in the America of 1776 demographically, culturally or technologically and need to deal with that and with the new realities 

The kind of Night Watchman/ Federalism idea our Founding Fathers espoused simply isn’t going to work today and that leaves a sour taste in a lot of mouths. It is what it is 

Let me ask a few outright policy questions here in order to prime the pump 

Will you regulate porn in order to prevent degeneracy keeping in mind its virtual 

What weapons will you allow , will you ban germ warfare at home or nukes or allow States to do it ? 

How will you ensure that food is safe to eat given the incentives are to cheat

Same with water and air and land pollution

Will you allow immigration if so how much 

How will you make sure we don’t have epidemics if you don’t want national health care and can’t build a system that lets you trust vaccine companies 

If companies refuse to sell medicine to your new state in order to force it out , will you use the government to make sure that there is medicine 

Will you ban abortion or most abortion knowing this will have negative effect on crime and demography 

Will you ban the pill 

Will you control the teaching of communism at Universities 

Will you control the content of media to prevent perversions and subversion 

I’ll note the Left has answers for all of them, some are stupid, quick, glib or malicious but that is still better than the Right can manage . 100% of nothing is nothing

The questions are a distraction to a degree but if you can’t answer basic questions no one will fight with you. Every facet of the Left can do this. Why can’t the Right?

Feel free to pick your own questions if these seem pointless but anyone signing up wants to know in reasonable detail what the are fighting for . 

Its my life you are asking for after all and we aren’t leftists, we need a dialectic answer 

And note “The Constitution” is not an answer. That is a slogan. 

What are your policies? If your movement can’t answer that, might as well let the Reds win because they will.Before I help anyone take power I need to know why me and mine benefit and how the problems of reality will get solved so things don’t get worse 

You can’t do this? I don’t want you near power. You are less fit than the Reds who occasionally solve problems 

And if you want to know what motivates men, look to the anti abortion movement. They’ve fought, killed, died and gone to jail for specific goal, to save the lives of the unborn 

That motivates people , leave me alone does not. 

Stand for something tangible or fail before you start

Plugin by: PHP Freelancer
This entry was posted in Editorial. Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Questions we need answers to: open comments

  1. Hans says:

    Consider your answers in the context of the following:

    “How much of what you want government to do is based on your emotions? On your feelings about what you wish other people would do or believe they should do, and your willingness to use government violence to make it happen?

    If it’s more than “none” it’s too much.


  2. Pingback: Someone Wants To Know How Much Socialism Will Be Retained If FreeFor Wins The Upcoming Extermination War | Western Rifle Shooters Association

  3. Matt Bracken says:

    After a protracted and bitter civil war, it’s unlikely that there will be 50 states in a union under the current constitution. Regions well may have very different outcomes. Where socialism is vanquished, it’s possible or likely that social welfare parasitism will be blamed for the catastrophic situation leading to the CW. I would expect very harsh laws against any form of government welfare. Charity will be confined to voluntary private organizations.

    • pyrrhus says:

      Indeed. Welfare will be confined to the traditional charity within a community, which will depend on whether the person involved is viewed as a useful part of the community.

      • Matt Bracken says:

        Post CW, there will not be a socialist-leaning SCOTUS to declare that vagrancy laws are unconstitutional. Local sheriffs will be free to escort parasites to their jurisdictional border. And so will the next sheriff, until the last parasites find themselves in any remaining socialist territory. The total lack of govt welfare programs will then work like a tonic to encourage hard work, thrift etc.

        • ensitue says:

          Post CW ‘we’ will discover that all those college Profs were Trumpsters, to the core, “It’s the TRUTH, I swear”

    • A.B. Prosper says:

      I agree with the US is no more idea though this should be equated as a hard loss not a victory. It won’t be pleasant to live in a rump state surrounded by enemies either and you may have no ability except to trade internally . Fun times.

      As far as blaming welfare, probably not. Most welfare spending in the US is social security and medical for old people. Its not pay as you go like people claim of course but its a widely popular program among all groups outside of Libertarians and the Militia Right here

      If I did the math right actual welfare other than that is 1/5 of the budget. At those figures its roughly 4% of the GDP , I’m guessing double this if you count corporate welfare

      That isn’t going to be a huge savings of any kind. Assuming you went to a minimal state with a ten percent flat tax as vs the current Federal system at 60K you’ll get a measly 10% increase in your income if that

      This doesn’t mean such a system won’t be perceived as fairer or more moral mind you but no one who can do math will blame welfare.

  4. David says:

    Context to the original comment posted in response to the above:

    David: Questions designed to be distractions are 100% of nothing. Focus on what needs to be done to accomplish the goal.

    AB: The questions are a distraction to a degree but if you can’t answer basic questions no one will fight with you. Every facet of the Left can do this. Why can’t the Right?

    Feel free to pick your own questions if these seem pointless but anyone signing up wants to know in reasonable detail what the are fighting for .

    Its my life you are asking for after all and we aren’t leftists, we need a dialectic answer

    And note “The Constitution” is not an answer. That is a slogan.

    What are your policies? If your movement can’t answer that, might as well let the Reds win because they will.Before I help anyone take power I need to know why me and mine benefit and how the problems of reality will get solved so things don’t get worse

    You can’t do this? I don’t want you near power. You are less fit than the Reds who occasionally solve problems

    And if you want to know what motivates men, look to the anti abortion movement. They’ve fought, killed, died and gone to jail for specific goal, to save the lives of the unborn

    That motivates people , leave me alone does not.

    Stand for something tangible or fail before you start

    David: I am not asking anyone to fight with me. I believe we understand what is at stake and what the consequences of failure will be. I have already stated that we need to focus on common goals. My stated goal is simple: ensure that our children will have Liberty. So let’s see how this simplifies my life.

    1. Does abortion ensure Liberty for our children?
    2. Will poisoning the food supply allow our children a healthy life?
    3. Will poisoning the water and land allow our children a healthy life?

    Any of us can see the answers to the questions you posed earlier when placed in proper context by moral men and women. Since this is the ageless struggle between good and evil, questions of morality such as the pornography issue you wanted answered, again are simplified. I am not so naive to believe that ignoring an issue will solve the issue. I also understand distractions are a means to divide us from within.

    • Ned2 says:

      Good analogy, and why we’re preparing for the worst.

    • F. Themintheye says:

      The saying Easy does it but do it comes to mind.

    • swimologist says:

      Social security, Medicaid, Medicare aren’t socialism. I’ve been funding it through payroll taxes since I was 16. If somebody (the gov’t) mismanaged those taxes over the years,
      that’s not my fault.

      • Butch says:

        All three are socialism. You may have paid for part of your “benefits”, but much of the money (or medical services) you receive were paid by others. All three were set up like a pyramid scheme where others behind you pay for your care. Through the fedgov.

  5. mobiuswolf says:

    What problems have they solved? They are the reason we can’t go back to high trust/ rule of law, in the first place.

  6. Bongo says:

    Still cogitatin’ — but a couple of for-sures: NO MORE USURY… period, no more dual citizenship, absolutely no more lobbyists, donations, staffers — honestly, Bill Buppert has converted me to a hardcore Lysander Spooner devotee and I really don’t give a shit about the constitution any longer — again, still cogitatin’ -- great questions to ponder regardless

  7. drdog09 says:

    You would be surprised how well ‘Leave me the hell alone!’ covers a great many of the questions you pose. Fact there is one eloquent scream of ‘Leave me the hell alone’ written — Declaration of Independence. It mobilized 10% of the population to engage in one the longer conflicts ever on this country.

  8. lastmanstanding says:

    Me KIS…eliminate porn. Weapons, whatever you feel you need and/or can afford.

    No cheating on our food. We grow/source it local and preserve it in numerous ways. Have our own water source and backup plans. No corpco chems used to control land issues.

    Abortion is a choice in my mind. Wife is against.

    We do naturopathic nearly all the way. If we need a major HC service, we make a deal and pay for it…or not. It has not come to “or not” yet. We shunt illness by heading it off in advance. Food selection, pt, healthy environment, limited friendships with like minded. Local, local, local most of the time. A life of the land and our community.

    I don’t really see need for current mass media or for 90% of university. Engineering, some science and common-sense medicine.

    Quite a broad spectrum question…hope this helps.

    • Butch says:

      Abortion can remain. With one condition. When the woman comes back for abortion number two she gets her tubes tied as well.

      Agriculturally, we need to bring back DDT, clorodane and some of the older herbicides that worked good but weren’t as nasty as Roundup.

      I read that we can’t bring the 50’s and 60’s back, maybe not, but there were lots of great cultural ideas that kept society rolling along. Any good thing from the past should be recreated.

      Water rights need to be redistributed. Power centers have stolen water rights all over our land and most of you probably don’t have a clue. Those power senters need to be destroyed.

  9. Deter Naturalist says:

    The future will not arrive amidst a deliberative, reasoned and logical “discussion.” People can be reasoned and logical individually, but that is not ever the case when a group of people is involved.

    Humanity’s historical sine-wave is driven by what amounts to fad and fashion. Go back 150 years and note how different were widespread “everyone knows” beliefs from today’s. The Left’s dogma now is different even from its ancestors’ beliefs just a few decades ago, while true Rightist belief (which is tantamount to aristocracy/meritocracy) is still in Rip Van Winkle mode.

    Nature will not, however, be denied. At most, the fabulous successes and accumulated innovations of (most Western) man these past couple centuries led people to gift to the world’s peoples a means to hold back Nature’s bloody culling processes (mostly famine) for a time, but that’s all. At a time when people are most visibly concerned about climate and oil they ignore the very measurable depletion of fresh water and the unavoidable collapse in food production that water reservoir depletion promises (North America will have no trouble feeding itself, but gone will be feeding anyone else.) The biggest problem we may face could be the deleterious genes piling up in our extended families as our kids and grandkids who Nature would have culled in prior centuries go on to have more children, propagating our heritable weakness. It’s a paradox, that our times of ease and plenty are making us weaker and weaker and weaker. Our “politics” alone are evidence that a specific mental/cognitive disability is piling up, which is an aptitude for believing ever-more-impossible, self-destructive and stupid notions about life. Nothing will literally cull our populations faster than the full application of all the collective stupidity that is now politically popular.

    It is a mistake to believe any of us is immune to a verdict of “does not meet requirements” once Nature’s selection, blunt and inaccurate as it is, resumes full force.

    FWIW, my preference would be for thousands and thousands of small socio-political “city-states” to arise as large political structures dissolve into ever-smaller units. Each of these places should have explicit rules (for example, residents would agree to refrain from accessing porn, using prostitutes, gambling, drinking alcohol outside of the home, consuming other recreational drugs, playing loud music at night, aborting kids, etc., etc.) and those who could not or refused to abide by the community’s rules would simply be “invited” to go elsewhere, to a place where the rules allowed members to engage in that behavior they couldn’t give up. No prisons. Capital punishment for commission of any infraction for which compensation was impossible (definitions might differ, place to place.) Otherwise, you follow the rules or GO ELSEWHERE.

    Of course, I’m not holding my breath.

  10. dangero says:

    Will you allow animals to be hunted to extinction as they ALWAYS are without oversight or will you have game wardens running around fining or arresting violators of game limits?
    Will you allow violent felons once released from their jail term to vote and buy firearms again?
    Will you have a national or state hospice program to allow terminally ill to die in comfort even if their family can not provide this service out of their pocket?

    • Replies, in order:


      Violent felons will have been executed. There will be very few crimes after the war, and the penalties will be draconian. Self-help between the parties will be encouraged.

      Why is one family’s tragedy anyone else’s problem? That issue aside, there will need to be blackpills available to end the suffering of radiation victims, the psychiatric triage cases, and others. Fam can choose to use or not.

  11. Mary says:

    I am of the ‘Keep it Simple’ mindset. So here would be my first thought on rules, though I may circle back and add to it.

    1. No systemic Usury -- which is equivalent to no big banks. Local Cooperative Owned Credit Unions are probably OK with limits. I would rather see person to person loans and limitations to big purchases -- homes, farms, cars and trucks, machinery for production. No credit cards. No credit for retail goods.

    2. Elective abortion in 1st trimester, medical based abortions in second trimester (to mimic Mother Nature’s natural culling), no abortion in the third trimester except under extreme medical circumstances (I can only think of a couple of circumstances. No infanticide, but the mother can elect for no heroic life preservation techniques to be applied. The doctor or the community can decide on the level of heroics to be applied if the baby would thereafter be a burden on the community.

    3. No state imposed tax to provide welfare. Communities can decide on what welfare they will provide and collectively decide to contribute to it. In other words, welfare is not prohibited, but it is not a state matter. No social wealth redistribution.

    4. Free speech is protected by the 1st amendment -- but the definition of ‘speech’ is narrowed. Pornography of any sort is not protected speech. Violent video games are not protected speech. Violent fiction is not protected speech. Violent historical movies are protected speech to the extent they are historically accurate and the violence is no more graphical than necessary to convey the historical narrative.

    5. Sexual identity and preferences are one’s own business. The personal services one chooses to provide are also one’s own business. Tolerance, so long as there is no victim. Children to age 17 are protected. Tampering with children should be considered justification for expulsion from the state.

    6. Regenerative (no till) agriculture should be the norm.

    7. Capital punishment for capital crimes. Restitution for other crimes -- depending on the crime, expulsion from the state should be considered after the restitution is complete. Forced labour should not automatically be considered a cruel or unusual punishment.

    • Vince says:

      Awful lot of detail for ‘simple rules’. And we know who dwells within the details.
      For instance -- no violent video games. Who defines violent? I happen to get a good laugh out of the first half of ‘Full Metal Jacket’. I’ve known a few who are horrified by it.
      Are video games the real culprit? Are there even going to be video games?

  12. Alphabilly says:

    It’s actually very telling…

    Somehow the left unites with as much disparity as “transgender feminist” all the way to “Muslim extremist” under the same banner. The right wants to not associate with each other over “which camo pattern is better?” Until everyone stops being divided over menial crap, this discussion is nothing more…

    • A.B. Prosper says:

      This was kind of my point. No common ideology and no ability to work together means a loss. Hoping for “the collapse” is futile as the old saying goes, the economy can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent or breathing.

    • Swrichmond says:

      Agree vigorously. The purity testing has to stop.

  13. lawless says:

    David, I know how you feel about this exercise, I understand and agree with your position. Calling attention to these things will in the end however, be a help.

    Those who have many “buts” and no will, are easier to spot when weaseling around.

    • David says:

      Exercises are good. What do pointless scenarios and questions designed to divide us accomplish? I suppose letting the keyboard warriors vent allows them to feel good. The future consequences of this type of exercise may be minimal. The future consequences of not training, preparing or learning will not be minimal. Truly disappointed that people so easily fall for these diversions.

    • Hans says:

      @ lawless … I concur with David that this is a pointless exercise.

      All you have succeeded in doing is extracting a sense of how much naked Statism this particular audience is willing to tolerate or wants to wield against their neighbors.

      This exercise does nothing to move the group as a whole towards Rightful Liberty where the coercive actions of some cannot encroach upon the natural liberties of others.

      • lawless says:

        Dear Hans, I have done more than that. I have caused these folks to think, really think, about where we are vs. where we need to be.

        The question “what will I be fighting for” is a valid one, and if all we can say is “for freedom” with no more detail than that, we have already lost.

        Once each man determines what is valuable to him, it can be condensed under one banner and each may fight for his vision. Until then, we are whisps of smoke.

        TL knew this. Perhaps it is already fated. Perhaps there is the smallest of chances. We will not know the answers until the moment arrives.

        Local is the answer to the how.

        • Hans says:

          … I have done more than that.”

          No, actually, you haven’t.

          If you had caused these folks to really think about the meaning of Liberty vs Statism, the respondents claiming to advocate for Liberty would have posted radically different answers.

          All you did is clarify the fact that the majority of your audience continues to advocate for some level of government coercion.

          • lawless says:

            You think that these dozen or so commenters will completely change their outlook in one moment, one post?

  14. greek01 says:

    I mentioned on WRSA at one point: Village, town, city, county, state, nation. Each level/area sets their own rules. Think of a pyramid. The base is the largest level starting with the villages. as you move up with nation at the top, the rules become fewer. The only purpose of a national “government” would be to host the tea-and-crumpets get-together of interested parties with a common issue or purpose -- such as interstate commerce or international relations or a hootenanny. Decisions will not be relayed from the top down, or from any level for that matter.

    If you don’t like it a certain place or vice versa, everyone will find their niche. Problem is what if you don’t want to leave where you’re currently at? Perhaps after the dust settles, that won’t be much of a problem. Otherwise you will find the door or you will be shown the way to go.

    Yes, thats a lot of migration along the lines of the partition of India in 1947 -- with resultant problems that still exist today.

    However, admittedly, this is very simplistic and not very practical in application, although I do see it as a thought-exercise. Think along the lines of the Native American nations, or Yugoslavia before the fracturing (with US meddling) or Czechoslovakia splitting into the Czech Republic and Slovakia.

    Eventually, I do see something along the lines of “The Nine Nations of North America” by Joel Garreau.

    Even then I see conflicts between these nation-states, however I foresee the most degenerate areas will burn themselves out.

    Eventually all the questions provided will be addressed and solved in time. We cannot determine the answers based on our current condition, but out of necessity IF we were to get to this form of self/local determination, what works will be preserved and improved and what is crap will be used as fertilizer or burned.

    • Hans says:

      From your link:

      “…a true citizen would subordinate their self-interest to the greater good.”

      This is the philosophic shaming of the collectivist mentality.

      Rational self interest under Rightful Liberty is never in conflict with “good”.

      • lawless says:

        Let’s take the whole quote:

        Power is the ultimate determinant of the dominant morality. Most people will take the path of least resistance, and thus if the power structure is predicated on an America for Americans, then acquiescence in the general public is a given. Liberalism is exactly wrong: it is in the collective that the individual finds strength purpose, and meaning. I speak of the collective not as a hive-mind, but as the natio (nation). One need not sacrifice their individuality to the group, but rather a true citizen would subordinate their self-interest to the greater good. These values are inherent in the natural aristocracy of our race, who—if enough remain—must seize the mantle of power and supplant the alien culture that has been poisoning our people with Mammonism, degeneracy, and self-hatred.

        The “natural rights” of liberalism rely on negative obligations, which is to say the obligation to not interfere in the lives of others. Superficially this seems like a fine idea, particularly with respect to others’ privacy, but when you place the health and well-being of the populace above the self-gratifying impulses or destructive behavior of the one, the cancerous free radical must be dealt with or it will multiply. Freedoms all too often manifest themselves as freedom from obligation, and an emphasis on individuality for its own sake, rather than on individuals who may exercise their free will but are nevertheless bound to their people and their families (in short, their obligations), produces selfish and self-interested persons who are no more than the sum of their base instincts and their shopping history. They are not individuals at all, but rather cogs in the machine. We emphasize people over products, people over soulless corporations, and nature and well-being over profit. There is far more respect for the individual in this frame-work than in any neo-liberal conception of the “market” or the “consumer.”

        In a word, tribalism, nationalism, family.

        We are nothing as lone wolf individuals.

        The author is not advocating communism, but loyalty and sacrifice for his nation.

        • Hans says:

          I did indeed read the whole passage.

          I am an individualist, not a collectivist. I reject altruism in all forms … that peculiar belief that self-sacrifice is a moral ideal.

          “Sacrifice” is the surrender of a greater value for the sake of a lesser one or of a non-value. It is a self-destructive urge.

          To claim “…when you place the health and well-being of the populace above the self-gratifying impulses or destructive behavior of the one, the cancerous free radical must be dealt with or it will multiply.” is pure Orwellian oligarchic collectivism.

          Well, sir, I am one of the “free radicals” you seem to consider destructive or cancerous. You have two options … use the agency of the State to suppress my Liberty, or learn to tolerate me as a good neighbor who has no interest in encroaching on your property or infringing your liberties.

          Have fun … I’m done with this post.

          • lawless says:

            So, you wouldn’t put ass to line for your family, tribe, community or nation (nation being your people)? Radical indeed.

            Loving something enough to give yourself for it isn’t altruism, it’s believing in something bigger than you. It’s what used to be called love of your people.

  15. james says:

    I agree with your comment “Focus on what is important: securing our children’s Liberty. Everything else will be discerned by moral men and women.”

    I know what I don’t want, everything the socialists/communists/progressives are selling. That is enough right now.

  16. Michael Gladius says:

    Porn will be banned, and classified alongside human trafficking.

    Small arms will be legal for all, and all males who turn 18 each year will be taught squad tactics in both police/SWAT and trench warfare. Heavy weapons will be reserved to the national guard units under state control, and WMDs will be kept by the navy

    Agrarianism will be revived. No more factory farms, nor property taxes. Families can be taught permaculture in order to produce sustenance crops on tiny plots of land, while bigger plots can be reserved for cash crops

    Immigration will only be possible via marriage. Only someone who is married to one of our people may become a member of our community.

    A guild system for all professions will be viable for medical services. Keep it personal, not mass-produced. Monasteries will be revived en masse, and these will also care for the locals who cannot afford a doctor.

    Unlike unions or corporations, guilds cannot branch. One guild, one location. So antitrust legislation will keep anybody from having a monopoly and/or the ability to cut all others off from a supply. There will always be somebody else we can turn to, without the state’s intervention.

    Abortion will be totally illegal. A woman who procures an abortion will become a felon, and abortionists will be publicly executed.

    The pill will be banned

    An agrarian society of yeomanry will not send many kids to college after a civil war. Further down the road, education will be conducted largely at public libraries, using certification tests and online tutorials to supplement tutors (who will be library employees).

    There will be no mass media, nor mass democracy, nor mass culture. Local, local, local is the motto. Nuclear families will be the basis of society, and fathers will protect their own children from filth and lies when they are no longer required to spend so much time away from them for work.

  17. Vince says:

    Maybe somebody covered this above.
    Why the problem with trusting clean foods and meds, etc. Lack of trust has eroded because when food is adulterated NO ONE IS MADE TO PAY. The company pays a fine to .gov and the plebs must run to the courts. That needs to change. The head of the corporation down to the tech/worker who let it ride pay fines and spend jail time.
    As for ‘what to regulate’. Pretty much nothing. However, very swift and stiff penalties if you run afoul of your neighbors natural rights. You want to be a meth head? I’ll counsel you otherwise but have at it if you must. DO NOT go committing crimes in your pursuit.
    The only thing that immediately comes to mind that I would most vehemently argue must be banned and never allowed to be present and fester is islam. There is one goal in the koran and it is antithetical to freedom.

  18. A.B. Prosper says:

    Micheal, fair answers. That is an ideology , not one I’d fight for but in fact one I’d fight against it tooth and nail but its honest. It would be interesting in the train wreck at Chernobyl sense to see Patriotville try some of your proposals though they won’t fly even in the Midwest

    Also you do realize that most porn is produced by some slooty girl or couple with a camera or just a phone not in sleazy backrooms. Technology has moved and and democratized the spread of information. 95% of people like porn and while its not my cuppa, it is almost everyone else’s

    I suspect many patriots even enjoy a trip to Porn Tube now and again maybe with the wife

    You porn laws I am afraid are up there is dumbth with arresting kids on pedo charges for sexting each other and your proposals are equally absurd. Its Yemen in North America wiht less organization

    Upside at least its an ideology and it notes the corporate threat to freedom which puts you heads and tales above most everyone else

  19. David Leflar says:

    The inherent problem with the presented questions is that it presupposes that govt should/does take care of these things when in fact, it does nothing but make a mess of things. Gov’t must be infinitesimal and stay out of the market and people’s lives. Do away with the welfare state and you damn near handle the entire immigration issue. The FDA should not exist (All the drugs that are recalled are drugs that the FDA previously claimed were safe and effective.). We don’t need govt food inspectors, DEA, ATF, NSA, CIA, etc. In my mind, when we ask/expect govt to regulate something we are saying that we aren’t willing to do that ourselves and so the problem begins as it in the very nature of govt to grow and to do so through fear. “The constitution” may be a slogan but it is a foundation. We just have get ready for some personal responsibility again. That learning curve is a steep bitch for some.

  20. a follower says:

    Can you imagine a humbling of so much significance that no one can truly ‘Plan’ for the outcome?
    What if that is what we are all facing?
    Are you prepared?
    What kind of catastrophe would bring everyone to the table in meekness, in humility?

  21. The Old Guide says:

    When Donald Trump makes a mistake, I just remember; Hillary Clinton is not president and somewhere inside a walled compound in California there is a Mister Pelosi.

Comments are closed.