"When misguided public opinion honors what is despicable and despises what is honorable, punishes virtue and rewards vice, encourages what is harmful and discourages what is useful, applauds falsehood and smothers truth under indifference or insult, a nation turns its back on progress and can be restored only by the terrible lessons of catastrophe." … Frederic Bastiat

Evil talks about tolerance only when it’s weak. When it gains the upper hand, its vanity always requires the destruction of the good and the innocent, because the example of good and innocent lives is an ongoing witness against it. So it always has been. So it always will be. And America has no special immunity to becoming an enemy of its own founding beliefs about human freedom, human dignity, the limited power of the state, and the sovereignty of God. – Archbishop Chaput


Friday, January 18, 2013

Do You Support "Individual Freedoms"?...

Then guess what - according to a study done by a West Point "Think Tank" funded by none else than your own taxpayer money, America needs to be warned against you and those like you! Think I am making this idiocy up? Read the following link:


Yes, instead of studying the tactics of Islamic terrorists or digging deeper into the brilliant strategies of Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, Julius Caesar, Hannibal, etc., what apparently is the now pressing need of US military officers is how to deal with all those folks who actually subscribe to something called "A Bill of Rights"!

My goodness, this very phrase, "Bill of Rights" is terrifyingly dangerous now is it not? It sure as hell closely resembles that dangerous belief cited in the study as "individual freedoms" YIKES!

Here in a nutshell is the conclusion that this nonsensical study has come to... are you ready? Here it comes:

CONSERATIVES              = BAD

It wasn't enough that the left has taken over the schools and institutions of higher learning and used those to spread its political correctness lunacy. One would have thought that at least the military academies would be immune from this. Apparently not.

Wake up folks.... the day appears to be coming sooner than many of us expected where even allegiance to the basic freedoms and rights prescribed in our Founding documents is enough to make you an enemy of the state.

Yes, if you cherish individual liberty, limited self government and a system of Federalism as laid out in the Constitution, you are now included in the same class as those who would advocate a violent overthrow of the US government.


  1. you are really screwed up, dude.

    1. You have forgot to use the words "conspiracy theory" tosupport your great argumentation.

    2. So Allen, Endzeit... are you that blind to what is going on? Wake up "dude's"

  2. individual freedom these days way too much emphasizes freedom to oppress, freedom to loot and freedom to cheat. conservative is washed out term today. what we have today is not conservative but reactionary. if you are conservative, you have to support the increase in funding for food stamp which 50 million american people rely on. if you don't, then you are reactionary. conservative should conserve first of all human lives.

  3. Dan - Thanks for the commentary as well as the always spot-on technical analysis. I bounce around on views (and in fact liberal leaning) and can pretty confidently say that I'd differ on a fair number of issues and yet I find this very enlightening. Keep up the good fight.

    1. MDLGTO;

      Thanks for the feedback... you have to know that my main goal is to convert you over to my side! :o)

      I find it ironic that the classical definition of liberalism was once the same views that those of us who are now labelled as conservative once espoused. In other words, believers in the rights of the individual in opposition to the power of the state. In a classical sense, our Founding Fathers could properly be called liberal.

      The word has now come to mean the exact opposite - the rights of the individual are now diminished or subservient to the power of the state INSOFAR AS THOSE RIGHTS ARE AN IMPEDIMENT TO THEIR GOAL OF CREATING A PROGRESSIVE STATE.

      those who term themselves liberal best be careful however because what comes around can easily go around and should those who are conservative regain the reins of power, these same liberals who extol the virtue of the state, just so long as it is used to further their agenda, will rue the day that they surrendered their individual freedoms to leviathon.

      The state must be kept honest by a system of properly functioning separation of powers and system of checks and balances. As the Founding Father Thomas Jefferson said, "bind them down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution".

    2. Dan: I've been a big fan of your market commentary for years. I trust your analysis completely and, somehow you as a person as much as I can tell these things, which is saying a lot considering how greatly I disagree with your politics as you espouse them here! As billmasi says below, we all must be VERY careful about labels and the behavioral and character traits associated with them. I am a "liberal" and yet very concerned about the trampling of the Constitution, but by BOTH parties. There may be some generalizations that are mostly true, but at the root, the labels are psychological tactics that serve to divide and conquer us. And effectively it seems, given the state we are in. For instance, please tell me how you can slam "liberal spending" and "liberal state expansion" when it was the W administration who ran up the deficit to multiples of what it had been and enacted the Patriot Act and expanded the NSA? Know your enemy! It is not "liberals". And on another related note, for the Christian among us, do you think Jesus would be angry about welfare or healthcare for all? Is caring for the "least among us" really a partisan issue?

  4. Hi Dan,

    Take heart - we live in a state that has a reputation of drawing lines in the sand.

    To others who cherish freedom and independence, listen to Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott who yesterday said "Y'all come to Texas".

    To the rest, think about the words of Davy Crockett....

    "you may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas"

    1. Foam_Ranger -
      In the words of that famous Country Western Song:
      "God Bless Texas" - the land of bluebonnets, Longhorn Cattle and Blue skies.


      Also, the old Tanya Tucker song:
      "When I die, I may not go to Heaven, I don't know if they let cowboys in. If they don't, just let me go to Texas; Texas is as close as I've been"

  5. Hi Dan,

    Thank you so much for your considerable contributions year after year. Your work is awesome and very much appreciated.

    I find it amazing how this particular message doesn't scare the heck out of everyone. People will reflect in a couple of years and wonder how we lost all of our personal freedoms. 9/11 was the first excuse. Now, all of the tragedies are an excuse to take away from the law abiding citizens.

    WAKE UP PEOPLE! Freedom is being taken away from you.

  6. Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. This fear is reminiscent of what we ranted about as college students during the anti Vietnam era( SDS et. al) fearing Nixon's nazis hords jailing and shooting us. Now and then the exaggerated fear is in folks at the same developmental level. Much of it rooted in unresolved childhood issues. The good news most of us from the 60's grew up. I will be accussed of being a shallow liberal in denial , in the 60's those opposing us were accussed of being pigs and old fat white men ( Archie Bunker's). May we all losen up a tad...ah the irony.

    1. I don't care if you guys take your LSD or smoke your dope - not for me but if you must ... knock your lights out.

      However; gay marriage is just wrong!
      Guys shouldn't go around buggering each other!

      Also - there was good reason to be afraid of getting shot back then.... four dead in Ohio (in keeping with the 60's music theme).

  7. Based on the report you link to, you are using seriously flawed arguments to make a case for what I appreciate is your conviction, leaving out reference to those parts which do not suit your argument.

    It's somewhat like arguing that cigarettes are good for you because smoking is a pleasant experience but leaving aside all the qualified studies that tell you they are bad for your health.

    If you're going to cherry pick phrases that may appear to suit your argument, it's probably best to leave out a link to the report you are quoting.

    1. Matthew Brooks ; the report makes no distinction that I can find within it differentiating those of us who believe in a system of federalism, based on that which the Founders gave to us in which the powers of the federal government are few and limited while the powers of the individual states are numerous from those of the violent far right such as the KKK, Aryan Nation or Skinheads.

      It lists factors common to what it terms the violent far right groups and then procedes to list them.

      So, those of us who actually believe in individual freedom, in unalienable individual rights, who cherish the system of federalism and the 9th and 10th amendments, who fear activist courts and who actually remember an America in which cultural traditions, civics, hard work, self-denial and self sacrifice, are now a potential danger because some of these violent groups listed also claim to believe in such things.

      Perhaps you should take the time to read the actual report as I did before spouting your insipid cigarette argument. If you notice, it is not exactly a short read.

      You might find as I did, that there are actually many points that are in it that I would concur with. The problem with the study is that it does not differentiate between those vile groups and those who adhere to similar views without condoning violence. It lumps us all into the same category. That is what is so tragic, and quite frankly alarming, because it might serve to provide some sort of justification at some point down the road to punish those who actually speak out in defense of these principles.

      You tell me if there is not already an atmosphere of political correctness when it comes to speech within this country.

      What is next? The THOUGHT police are already attempting to punish "motives" behind crimes as if they can discern the thoughts and intents of the heart.

  8. I'm sad these days to see "conservatives" drawing a political line between them and "liberals".

    The distinction only serves political people who benefit from keeping the country divided. No kidding.

    I'm a 'way out there on the left thinker. Open to anything including libertarian ideas.

    I'm ALSO a pistol-packin' gun rights advocate and am as concerned about the intrusion of government into our lives as any "conservative".

    Every time a conservative cites a comic-book definition of "liberal", he or she pushes me away from exactly the places where we agree!

    The Constitution is NOT a conservative or liberal issue.

    Believe it or not (you red-neck conservative puppets) as many liberals are worried about where this country is going and how it's getting there as YOU are.

    So think about who you're serving by pushing us over onto the "other" side. We're all in this together!

    1. billmasi;

      Throwing the word "Constitution" around and stating that it not a conservative or liberal issue betrays a gross misunderstanding of the basic issues involved.

      The question is not do liberals believe in the Constitution, it is HOW ONE INTERPRETS that document.

      Those of us on the right believe that the intent of the Founders is best discerned by examining the era in which the document was drafted. That means we DEEPLY study the ratification arguments in the various states, the Federalist papers and the other historic records of the writings of those who were involved in its formation.

      The left views the Constitution as a "living, breathing document" which is to be interpreted with the needs of the times.

      I reject that view.

      The country is already divided. Wishing it were not so is not going to change the current reality.

      Here is a good question for you as a self-identifed liberal: "how many of your unalienable rights are you willing to surrender to the state"? How you answer that will determine where you really fit in.

      Here is another one: "Does the TENTH AMENDMENT" to that same Constitution hold force today? Yes or no? If no, why not? If Yes, why does the federal government, and particularly leftist leaning jurors trample on it so frequently?

      Under what Constitutional authority does the federal government control what kind of light bulbs we can use, what kind of toilets were are required to have, what kind of washing machines that are avaiable, etc.?

      I will tell you the answer - none - but the authority is derived from stretching of various constitutional provisions and clauses to the point of absurdity by the left in order to expand the size and scope of the federal government.

      The other reason is the growth of the Administrative State, a type of unelected, unaccountable FOURTH BRANCH of government.

      That is where the real problems in our nation are rooted if you want to know the truth... consider the EPA, TSA, DHS, BATF, etc... and the list goes on and on and on. Even the CFTC is included in this. Ever heard of the Army Corp of Engineers? Trying dealing with this group and the EPA at the same time and getting TWO COMPLETELY DIFFERENT AND CONTRADICTORY set of guidelines that you are mandated to follow if you are a property developer. I should know, I have a close friend who could tell you horror stories about this. Ask any property owner who has the singular misfortune to have spent his or her life's savings for a piece of land to build a home only to find out what because it has a wet spot somewhere on it that it has been declared a "wetlands" and cannot be built upon.

      In theory Congress should have oversight over these agencies of the executive branch, but in practice there is basically none.

      As far as your 2nd amendment rights go - I can only hope that you do not happen to live in New York State because they were just destroyed by your fellow "liberals" there.

    2. The EPA was created by executive order by Richard Nixon in 1970. W Bush signed into law both the TSA and the DHS. The CFTC was created in 1974 during a Republican presidency. You must see, the expansion of govt and the trampling of freedoms are done by both parties. It would argue that under W (and theoretically in response to 911), more personal freedoms have been trampled that at any other time in our history. The Liberal vs Conservative argument is unproductive.

    3. Dan,

      Thanks for the reply.

      The more you insist on the fundamental difference between conservative and liberal, the less likely you are to enroll liberals in your causes.

      If you took those two words out of your vocabulary and engaged people on the merits of your arguments, you'd see that there are more liberals than you imagine ON YOUR SIDE.


    4. Paige Weber - George Bush was not a conservative according to the defintion of many who hold to my way of viewing the political spectrum. The Federal government ENLARGED under this tenure - it did not shrink seeing that it added the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND program, the PRESCRIPTION MEDICINE program, the bailouts, etc.

      The conservative argument of smaller limited central government and adherence to the system of federalism, with its checks and balances and its separation of power against those of the liberal side who are on the opposite side is indeed the VERY HEART OF THE MATTER.

  9. Funny Epic Girls, Troll Images of Girls, Girls Funny and Loll, Funny Hot Pictures of Girls

  10. Inside the Fed Bank of NY building is a mega-Kinkos machine printing billions of dollars each day. ($4.77 billion just on Friday which by month’s end should total $85 billion.) These dollars are bombarding stock markets with fresh liquidity feeding bulls against all odds and logic.

    Our job is to go with this despite misgivings and all manner of poor news.


  11. Dan (this is a public forum and I speak of, not to, the author) has clearly fallen victim to the corporate funded, right wing, "divide & conquer" (a direct quote on his anti union stance, caught on camera, by the Koch Brother funded Wisconson Governor Scott Walker, to a billionaire doner) strategy. With the Limbaughs, Oreilys, Hannitys, Becks, "et al" leading the charge... all paid off in $millions$ for their invaluable contribution (Dan is clearly being ripped off) to "the cause."

    And, IMHO, the most distastefull element of this 40+ year corporate campaign (exponentially ramped up with the gift of a black Democrat in the White House... isn't the corporate backing of Obama in 2008 "interesting") is the corruption of the religeous right in these deceitful, hateful, and disgusting methods.

    Dan has become a sad, divisive caricature of his former self... Yes, the military expressing concern an element of society has deemed public calls for rebellion against a duly President is surely a sign of a tyrannical dictatorship... in Dan's twisted paranoid world.

    1. SRV - thank you for proving my point that the nation is hopelessly divided and mindless of its history.

      what is really tragic is the dissolution of unalienable rights by an ever increasingly powerful federal government while the ignorant and dumbed-down citizenry applauds and mocks those who attempt to warn them of it.

      I would simply say to you as I have said to many of your fellow leftists - if my views are so offensive to you, what sort of perverse mindset infects you that you keep coming back to this site to read them?

      The answser to that is simple - should I cease to write my comments on the markets you would have no where else to go to obtain free analysis from a professional who charges you nothing for providing such an aid in return for your ungrateful insults.

      Please refrain from reading this site. I cannot demand that you do so but out of self-respect you should. If not, it is merely evidence that your greed outweighs any convictions you have - a sad commentary on your character as an individual that you are willing to sell your soul for pecuniary gain.

  12. Oops... forgot the obvious thank you for your valuable market insights Dan!

  13. Paige - What would Jesus do is not a guide to the Constitution. That being said, the charge to care for the poor by the LORD CHRIST is made to the INDIVIDUAL and the CHURCH, not to the state.

    It is true Christian charity to give out on ONE's OWN POCKET to help those in need. It is not charity to have someone from the STATE TO DIG INTO MY POCKET and then redistribute to those in need.

    Christians obey the Lord rendering to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's.

    The problem with the bloated state is that it wants to declare itself as god and by FORCE exact from us to give to the poor.

    Within a properly functioning church, the needs of the body of Christ are met from those within that church. That the state has increasingly seen itself in the role of provider to the poor means it leaves less in the pockets of individuals with which to obey the commands of the Lord to be generous and ready to share with those who are in need.

    1. Dan, I understand your point, and it is well taken. Unfortunately, it isn't completely honest. Many of us have more we can give, and yet more and more people are going to bed hungry every day. I see welfare, unemployment and social security programs as filling the gap between what individuals give and what is needed. Which came first, the misery or the govt programs? I honestly think Christ would get behind any idea that would save a child or elder from starvation rather than argue ideology.

      I also believe that it is a failure of our economic system (or our govt's failure to properly regulate it) that has created so much poverty. (ie removal of Glass-Steagall, allowing monopolies, etc) At best, it has essentially become an entity trying to protect the people from the giant corporations whose massive financial and political power is no match for the individual. (ie without the EPA, our air quality would be like Beijing's) At worst, because of money in politics, it has become a complicit actor with the corporations. And unfortunately, as of late it has been activist Supreme court judges who have aided the Corporation's rise to even greater supremacy. If you want to look for an Us vs Them paradigm, I would look to the Corporation. The Corporation has essentially taken over the Govt for all intense and purposes and the Fascist state we are living in is wreaking havoc in our lives.

    2. Btw, our Founding Fathers based the Constitution on Moral principles as opposed to religious principles. They sought a more moral form of govt and as such created an entity of God in a sense, but one which was aligned with no particular religion. Thus govt has a role as a moral actor, though not a GOD as you put it. The tricky part is, and the place from where all politics springs, whose morals.

    3. Paige - what do you mean when you state that my comment is "not completely honest"? The commands from Christ to His people to be generous, ready to share, to be mindful of those in need, "that it is more blessed to give than it is to receive" are completely truthful.

      What is also a fact is that in the entirety of the Scriptures the MAXIMUM TAX ever ascribed by God to His people was 10% of their income. It was called a tithe, and its purpose was to provide for the stranger, orphan and widows, as well as the priesthood or ministry in the nation of Israel.

      If 10% of one's income was sufficient for the Almighty then I think it is rather presumptuous that man feels confiscatory tax rates of now over 60% (federal, state and local) are just fine and dandy. See Califorian and New York for starters....

      You have no argument with me on Corporatism. It is an evil that pervades our nations and both political parties are guilty of fostering it to the detriment of the individual.

      I will say this however; the key to helping the poor is not in confiscating an ever increasingly larger share of the income of those who earned it, but rather in creating the conditions for a vibrant, growing economy in which an opportunity for hard work is available. Shrinking economies decrease true opportunity for finanical success.

      One last thing - define the term "poor". You speak as if we have children and elderly people starving in this nation of ours. The "poor" in this nation live light years ahead of those who are truly poor across this globe.

      The ministries that I am involved in provide both funding for food and health care out of the private contributions of Christians who obey their Lord. We do these things because we are obeying Christ not because the STATE COMPELS us.
      I have personally been to Kenya on mission trips and seen what real poverty looks like so please do not lecture me on the "poor" in this nation most of whom possess cell phones, flat panel TV's and apparently some of whom have sufficient wherewithal to attend strip clubs based on a recent widely published report.

      When you see first hand children from an African orphanage rip open a bag of candy gummy bears and devour it in front of your eyes in an almost mob-like fashion, then you can tell me that there are people starving in this nation.

      Now you may think the Christ has no problem with confiscatory tax rates providing an entitlement state but that same Christ commands in His Word, "that a man who does not work, will not eat".
      2Thes 3:10

      When the welfare state becomes a substitute for hard work and for ambition and instead fosters an entitlement mentality and feeds the vice of sloth, then the safety net has become perverted in its true intent.

    4. Dan,

      Thanks for sharing your first hand experience with abject poverty.

      I too have seen that - in another 3rd world country.

      I'm convinced that if these whiny, snotty nosed, smug, know it all liberals that attack you here ever got an eye full of people truly living from one day to the next with only a prayer to keep them trying to stay alive - they would run away in shame and never return except maybe to apologize.

      Same goes if said spineless, pusillanimous, leaches were to ever experience true evil face up..... they would shit their knickers.

      These are the timid soles that Teddy Roosevelt spoke of that don't count.... they don't!

    5. Foam_Ranger;

      It would be beneficial to nearly everyone to get out at least one time in their life to see what abject poverty actually looks like.I agree with you - it might stop some of their tongues from parading through the earth the idiocy that we are forced to endure.

      What this generation no longer is able to comprehend is that our system of government, that was given to us by our Founding Fathers, which unleashed the potential of the human spirit and helped to build the greatest nation that this earth has ever seen.

      If you go around this world and look at some of the countries where poverty is the worst, it is not because the people there are not willing to work; it is oftentimes because of the system of government that crushes their spirit and their ambitions.

      I look at Mexico south of here which has a rich Catholic heritage, a strong family bond and is incredibly resource rich and yet in which so many of its peoples eke out nothing more than subsistence living. It is a tragedy that is completely avoidable were it not for such a system of government that exists there.

  14. Dan, and all

    This is authored by a ARLIE PERLIGER - A never serving, chickenhawk professor from Israel!

    He is not even from this country and these Israeli chickenhawks are body snatching our military and political apparatus.

    Get the word out NOW.

  15. It is and continues to become a Government State continuing to march down a path of invasion into our rights, finances, and beliefs. Rights that the founding REPUBLIC founders knew would be difficult to keep. We approach another time in American History which will once again ring out words heard in the founding of this country. George Washington "the once-happy and peaceful plains of America are either to be drenched in blood or inhabited by slaves. Sad alternative! But can a virtuous man hesitate in his choice". Dan is but like many of us who will choose the former rather than become slowly enslaved.

  16. Data Entry Form Filling Jobs, Online add posting jobs, online copy pasting and much more jobs

  17. World's Most Latest Vehicles and Latest Cars pictures, Most speed and Expensive Cars with hot pictures


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.