Dangerous Ground And The Accident Of Birth

We enter dangerous ground. The charges of racism grow each and every day with the recent spree apparently coordinated amongst Democratic leaders. These are charges directed at broad swaths of the American Public. This is dangerous ground, this is not some Podunk politician looking for a headline with broad charges of racism; it’s the President and the Attorney General and the Minority leader of the House of Representatives and the head of the House campaign organization, to name a few. If you’re a Republican, you’re a racist, if you’re a Conservative you’re a racist, at least most of you.

Van Jones says Libertarians are racists, Rep. Steve Israel says “to a significant extent the Republican base is animated by racism”. Nancy Pelosi hopped on the racism bandwagon. The President attends Rev. Sharpton’s event with Mr. Holder and they both allude to being faced with racism in Congress. MSNBC lives and breathes racism; seeing it in every shadow and under every bed.

Political disagreement is now almost automatically met with charges of racism, there is no sense of comity for honest disagreement, there has to be deeper motivation than intellectual disagreement; racism. This trend has been, if not led by the President and those closest to him, they have provided all of the necessary winks and nods required.

General Holder early in this administration leveled the acquisition that we did not have the courage to engage in an honest discussion about race. Now that I’ve been repeatedly labeled as a racist for any number of reasons, by people I don’t know, I’m not so interested in the discussion anymore, courageous or not. To some in the Black intelligencia the random occurrence of being born white makes you a racist, Professor Dyson and Toure have long beat that drum. The logic, as it so often does, leaves me unsatisfied. If I’m a racist because I was ‘born this way’ why the need for constant reminders; isn’t that a waste of time, flogging the horse that you have already pronounced as dead. While we’re on the subject, is not the attribution of stereotypical thinking and behaviors along with the assumption of superiority at the heart of racism. If it is, I would say to Professor Dyson, Mr. Holder, Toure, the President, Ms. Pelosi and Representative Israel and the entire side show; you’re a bunch of racists.

How’s that for having a courageous conversation?

All over the country there are two groups being empowered by the constant drum beat of racism. The first sees racism as a means to an end and don’t want it to end. It is the ultimate justification for leadership failure; it relegates a discussion of societal failure to a protected place where only certain people are allowed to engage the issues of the black family, single parent households, teen pregnancy, crappy schools and violence. The other group is people of good intent who have had enough of the charges; they will tune out and stop trying to find their better angels. When real racist outrages occur, they will be already gone.

Under these conditions, with this absence of leadership there is nothing that will stimulate constructive engagement. We’ll have lots more victims, lots more excuses but progress will be absent. This is the dangerous ground, this is the ground where justifications for aberrant behavior flourish, where there are no innocents, no societal limits; there is just the accident of birth.

  • Bob

    I have learnt that it is useless to argue with certain people because they don’t want “an open discussion” as Attorney General Holder suggest is needed. They have an opinion and weather it be because of an ideology or simply pure stubborness they won’t give an inch.

    In a recent column by Charles Krauthammer entitled “Thought Police On Patrol” he states that the demagoguery of the left is to shut down any opposition of not only race but climate change, War on women, re-distribution of wealth or immigration by claiming the “DISCUSSION CLOSED”.”Oppose the current consensus and you’re a denier, bigot, homophobe and an enemy of the people.” This is a dangerous precedent to set for a nation built on Freedom of speech.

    http://patriotpost.us/opinion/24782

  • http://www.twitter.com/@C0nservativeGal Conservative Gal

    The discussion now turns to, are “whites” a victim of reverse discrimination? I do believe so. Therefore I demand retribution apologies start flying around like Christmas bunt cakes. Yeah I said it ;-)

  • Bob

    The establishment wing of the republican party have worked hard to avoid being associated with anything that even hints of being accused of extremism by the left in addition to assisting the left in their attempts to divide and conquer the party.This however hasn’t slowed down the attacks from the left.

    Hating the right is what keeps the left going by giving them an identity. It derives that identity from things that it is against and what support group of theirs it instigates. They need not promise anything simply jump from issue to issue with manufactured outrage and bizarre interpretation of conservative comments the left feeds these constituents the fear and envy to believe in a vast right wing conspiracy. For them there is no progress in progressivism only re-distribution. Their view is everything is in a finite amount and supply and they alone should determine who gets what and how much.

    The republican establishment wing foolishly believes they can compromise with the left but I DARE THEM TO SHOW ME ONE MODERATE DEMOCRAT WHO WILL COMPROMISE?

  • http://johnnyangel10.wordpress.com JohnyAngel Advocacy Group

    Communists in government do not like other views, so this should come as no surprise. What is surprising is that those people against this form of governing are not using the C-word and calling it what it is COMMUNISM !!

  • Bill Hedges
  • Bill Hedges
    • http://www.youdecidepolitics.com Nate

      Bill, the part of the picture you’re missing is that people like Harry Reid and Barack Obama DO NOT compromise.

      What does compromise mean? It should mean both sides give a little and produce an end piece that is satisfactory.

      What we’ve seen is the President demand that we raise the debt ceiling, no questions asked. He passed Obamacare, no questions asked. Everything he demands is his way or no way. That isn’t compromise or leadership, it’s a preschooler attitude.

      The Tea Party was born to tell Republicans (and Democrats) to stop caving on every single thing since there was no compromise taking place. What we saw and still see is proposals from Democrats which Republicans have to either agree with entirely or shut up.

      You aren’t getting that part of it, my friend.

      Tell me, what has Barack Obama and Harry Reid compromised on and given in to Republican requests? Be specific.

  • Bill Hedges

    Nate

    As my previous comments say, call “Cruz and Rand Paul among others” TINO’S. TEA in name only.

    Jeb Bush pretty much agrees with the TINO’S.
    __

    Was pretty much talking to bob because of his constantly degrading “establishment” & “RINOs” over their working on immigration.

    Surprise. Surprise. 4 Tea possible Presidential candidates ARE FOR immigration reform. In fact Rand complains about Republicans not stepping up to THE PLATE I believe about a year ago.

    Compromise or ownership of Senate is required to slow the flow of illegals. A commendable GOAL. FOR the TINOs.

    As you now say:

    “You aren’t getting that part of it, my friend.”

    I quoted you, from the past, on being against immigration reform. Name calling terms “establishment” & “RINO” said ON-SITE for those who wish to reform immigration.

    The jest of my comments is ON THIS & the fact that 4 leading Tea leaders ARE FOR immigration reform. I coined “TINO” to the best of my knowledge.

    NATE, “You aren’t getting that part of it, my friend.” NOT A word on this in your comment.
    __

    I WILL answer your comment. Point by POINT:

    1. “What does compromise mean? It should mean both sides give a little and produce an end piece that is Be specific..”

    Like when buma wanted to extend Bush Tax cuts BUT only for lower brackets. Compromise WAS REACHED and ALL LEVELS of Bush’s tax cuts was extended.

    Compromise.

    Nate adds “satisfactory”
    to definition of compromise. When you compromise BE satisfied, ELSE don’t compromise. That’s wearing LONG PANTS.

    2. “What we’ve seen is the President demand that we raise the debt ceiling, no questions asked”

    WHAT !!! WHAT ???

    Defense spending, among other spending areas, was up for AUTOMATIC budgetary cuts.

    A article, on this site, discussed it and I ALONE (agreeing with Ron Paul), believed CUTS COULD BE MADE without National SECURITY HARM to military budget.

    Do I need to go further into that. Agreement to automatic CUTS if Congress COULD NOT agree ON CUTS by a specific date.

    Since WHEN did “raise the debt ceiling, no questions asked” HOLD WATER ???

    We can get into the Ted Cruz INVOLVEMENT in this, if you like. After THE POSSIBLE default, Gallup poll bottomed out STILL FURTURE for TEA. ((( A direct correlation ))). Just say your piece & I will respond.

    3. “He passed Obamacare, no questions asked.”

    WHAT !!! WHAT ???

    At that time, rushing a congressman back from a funeral, he had the (D) votes without OUR HELP. Except:

    A. PORK by a fleet of super tankers full of hams & chops TO BUY (D)votes.

    B. Group of (D) conservatives INSISTED no government revenue for abortion. Thus a meaningless Executive order was done to that effect.

    C. We were breaking EAR DRUMS opposing bumcare that wasn’t even completed in written when voted on. Over 32 + times EVERY SINGLE REPUBLICAN voted against bumcare. Must be some sort of record.

    4. “Everything he demands is his way or no way.

    Since we believe in following the Constitution, we DON’T have the votes to overturn a veto… YOU ARE CORRECT.

    HOWEVER, buma CAN NOT GET anything that requires approval of House (we own). Unless a compromise had be reached. If House passes then Senate changes… You know the drill.

    5. “That isn’t compromise or leadership, it’s a preschooler attitude.”

    A. TO ARMS against THE CONSTITUTION ???

    B. Change to MINORITY RULES ???

    That’s “preschooler attitude.” We have a set of rules we must follow.

    buma DOES compromise and will find examples in this comment.

    6. “The Tea Party was born to tell Republicans (and Democrats) to stop caving on every single thing since there was no compromise taking place. What we saw and still see is proposals from Democrats which Republicans have to either agree with entirely or shut up.”

    We don’t “shut up”. Examples in my comment.

    I guess the reason for Tea rising is multifaceted. bob has said it begun because of Bush’s debt & big government. Which I have explained away. Watching my stocks on tv I heard Tea began because all of us are suppose to pay our neighbor’s house payment.

    Now it’s compromise. In another recent article I quoted you on “compromise”. Guess you read.

    Have pretty much answered this previously:

    A. tax cuts for rich compromise

    B. Automatic budget cuts compromise

    C. Pour the tea into Boston Harbor & start another Revolution, gain ownership of Senate in Nov., else move into a cave like D. E. Landreaux did awhile back _ met·a·phor·i·cal·ly_.

    7. “You aren’t getting that part of it, my friend.”

    YES. I have.

    I abide by the Constitution.

    Without ownership of Congress & WH, compromise must be reached UNLESS Congress can overturn veto. If neither can not be done NO LAW.

    If you are dissatisfied, Constitution allows for AMENDMENT. Courts.

    8. “Tell me, what has Barack Obama and Harry Reid compromised on and given in to Republican requests? Be specific.”

    Previously done.

    Now, how about answering TINOs. Arguments on site has chastised “establishment” & “RINOs” over attempting compromise on immigration. You have read my recent comments on this ???

    Your reply. Rand Paul & Ted Cruz advocate immigration reform ??? Why are they NOT “TINOs”. As you say “Be specific”…

  • Bill Hedges

    An error was made quoting Nate. Sorry. Should be:

    1. “What does compromise mean? It should mean both sides give a little and produce an end piece that is satisfactory”

    I hope no other misquotes was made and will check for others.

    Again __ SORRY…

  • Bob

    As I have said and has been acknowledged by others I have yet to find a candidate who I feel has the “Gravitas” needed for the office of President. I’ve always felt it was a mistake for the Tea Party movement to align or actively support any specific candidate.They should and basically have stayed true to this and focused mainly on Conservative principle and the policy of Constitutional limited governmenton a state and local basis since 2010.The political candidates
    themselves and the MSM have caused the public perception that they are aligned with the Tea Party.Both have gone out of their way seeking the mantel of Tea Party candidate for fund raising and image purposes both positive and negative.

    You see the Tea Party is a “GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT’ not a political party.Therefore the four mentioned 2016 candidates while agreeing with the Tea Party agenda are NOT TEA PARTY BUT REPUBLICAN ELECTED OFFICIALS. The Tea Party has no convention,no primaries nor platform to nominate a candidate on.

    NOW WITH THAT SAID the public has to determine for themselves what issues are important to them and which ones take a back burner just as they have to do with establishment republican or democrat candidates.Possibly immigration is more important than abortion. Sen. Rubio has experienced the heat and thus lost Tea Party support because of his membership in the “Gang of 8″ immigration bill and it doesn’t mean others can’t also.But this is an individuals determination and isn’t made through some party apparatus. We already are aware where the establishment stand and how much or little character and principles they exhibited. And finally there is nothing illegal nor ill moral about third parties. They are on the ballot for a reason. Anyone who tells you that you are “wasting your vote” is simply attempting to intimidate you into their view point just as the left uses the tactic of calling people racist to intimidate.

  • Bill Hedges

    bob writes:

    “As I have said and has been acknowledged by others I have yet to find a candidate who I feel has the “Gravitas” needed for the office of President.”

    Well I am “acknowledged by others” (MY name must be UNTOUCHABLE, as in the class system of India. CUTE. Have struck a nerve of bob ???). I pulled bob quote from Nate’s other site. Will put in CONTEXT why was done:

    Bill Hedges 2014/04/09 at 7:24 pm My ‘act of love’ for America: opposing Jeb Bush

    bob wrote:

    “He may not have run for office in 7 years but he is politically astute enough to know not to say anything that will cause donors to think twice about giving or make a remark that will come back and bite you on the rump.”

    Will be zero in on bob’s:

    “… politically astute enough to know not to say anything that will cause donors to think twice ”

    I gave my reasons, along with:

    There are numerous reasons why someone DOESN’T early on STATE they are running. They may wish to READ THE STARS a little, do they have a chance of inning against those that seek the same office ?

    I’ll quote another:

    Bob April 5, 2014 at 11:22 am

    “As I said earlier I have yet to see any candidates FROM EITHER PARTY that I feel has the “Gravitas” for the position. And as Sam said “It is far to early for us to get into details for or against any candidate”. To much can happen between now and then.”

    http://www.uspresidentialelectionnews.com/2014/04/do-republicans-need-a-woman-to-battle-hillary-clinton/#f8uQ86ulG3qOQVxc.99
    __

    I conclude:

    bob has a term used OFTEN___ “RINO”…

    At what point does a politician CROSS THAT threshold ??? Is it a CERTAIN issue ???

    Perhaps bob feels Ronald Reagan IS A “RINO”:

    “Yep. Reagan did the A-word”

    “In 1986, Reagan signed an immigration reform bill, the first in 20 years, that legalized the status for 1.7-million people.”

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/jan/06/rudy-giuliani/yep-reagan-did-the-a-word/
    __

    WHY ALL THIS ???:

    bob 2014/04/09 at 6:23 pm My ‘act of love’ for America: opposing Jeb Bush

    “While reading numerous articles concerning illegal immigrants and the response to Gov. Bush’s remarks I have come across the phrase “Many of the illegal immigrants that find themselves in our country…….”. My question is just HOW DID THESE PEOPLE “FIND THEMSELVES”IN OUR COUNTRY? It makes it sound like they were drugged,kidnapped and dragged across the border without their consent. In reality this is simply another tactic by the left media to trivialize that laws were broken.”

    Those “establishment” & “Rino” caught bob’s commendation when supporting IMMIGRATION.

    Is bob going to FOLLOW THROUGH, CALLING Ron Paul & Ted Cruz “Rinos” or “TINOs”.

    bob doesn’t seem to want to admit those two are associated to Tea ((( now ))). Being FAVORED SONS:

    “I’ve always felt it was a mistake for the Tea Party movement to align or actively support any specific candidate.”

    LIKE Akins of MO. who feels rapped women CAN NOT get pregnant ?

    This is A FIRST TIME I’ve head bob SAY THIS !!!

    WELL Tea DOES support candidates. bob uses “establishment” & “Rinos” NOT in a flattering MANNER. bob speaks of equal opportunity condemning for candidates actions. OK. We have Rand & Ted and immigration. TWO “TINOs”, “establishment”, or “RINOs” ON THIS ISSUE ???

  • Bill Hedges

    Twice Nate PASSES OVER
    Rand & Ted:

    Now, how about answering TINOs. Arguments on site has chastised “establishment” & “RINOs” over attempting compromise on immigration. You have read my recent comments on this ???

    bob _ dis·a·vow·al _ Rand and Ted from Tea Party ???:

    “I’ve always felt it was a mistake for the Tea Party movement to align or actively support any specific candidate.They should and basically have stayed true to this and focused…”

    KEY WORD:

    “basically”.

    End of his life ON EARTH, Jesus said his closest followers WOULD deny him… One 3 times.

    All BUT I, PRAISE these two continuiously. With this recent revelation, Nate is MUTE twice. bob DENIES once. 3 times by two individuals…

  • Bill Hedges

    Here I thought I meet Nate at the TEA PARTY CONVENTION to nominate our Presidential candidate. THANKS bob for clearing up that mistaken belief.

    bob wrote:

    “You see the Tea Party is a “GRASSROOTS MOVEMENT’ not a political party.Therefore the four mentioned 2016 candidates while agreeing with the Tea Party agenda are NOT TEA PARTY BUT REPUBLICAN ELECTED OFFICIALS. The Tea Party has no convention,no primaries nor platform to nominate a candidate on.”

    According to bob__ One of the 4, Ted Cruz, IS ” NOT TEA PARTY BUT REPUBLICAN ELECTED OFFICIALS.”

    NOT EXACTLY bob. A thimble of truth with Iris malarkey icing covering the faulty logic.

    Nate wrote “Take Ted Cruz for example, a huge Tea Party victory.”

    bob & Nate call congress members, among other things; “establishment”, “RINO”, or Tea.

    Nate calls Cruz “Tea Party”.

    Perhaps you recall what Nate has said. I DO. FOUND his quote for you:

    Nate Political Physics 2014/03/19 at 9:37 am

    “I also think that a good enough amount of conservatives are ready to take back the Senate and accept that we won’t get a Ted Cruz or Rand Paul in every Senate seat. It’s not possible given how scarce these types of leaders are”

    “I think that Ted Cruz et al. can get more done with more R’s behind them than the freak show running the Senate right now. I’m ill over the thought of Senate Majority Leader McConnell but less ill than I am over Harry Reid, the senile old crank from a cave in Nevada”

    “The bottom line… it’s time. The Tea Party has become more effective as it learns to pick battles more precisely. Take Ted Cruz for example, a huge Tea Party victory. In other states, not so much. It takes a combination of candidate + charisma to defeat the establishment and win the general”
    __

    Now both Rand & Ted bring up illegals REFORM…

  • Bill Hedges

    Make that_ met…

  • Bill Hedges

    My previous full comment quoted Nate from the past:

    “I’m ill over the thought of Senate Majority Leader McConnell but less ill than I am over Harry Reid, the senile old crank from a cave in Nevada”

    Your good buddy Rand Paul on McConnell:

    “Rand Paul vs. Ted Cruz: Who’s winning tea party voters? (+video)”

    “While Rand Paul, who is currently leading in polls of GOP voters, backs fellow Kentuckian Mitch McConnell against a tea party opponent, Ted Cruz openly defies establishment Republican leaders.”

    February 18, 2014

    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/DC-Decoder/Decoder-Buzz/2014/0218/Rand-Paul-vs.-Ted-Cruz-Who-s-winning-tea-party-voters-video

  • Bill Hedges

    Why bob strayed onto following statement, have no idea. bob says tea candidates are Republican. Here it is:

    “And finally there is nothing illegal nor ill moral about third parties. They are on the ballot for a reason. Anyone who tells you that you are “wasting your vote” is simply attempting to intimidate you into their view point just as the left uses the tactic of calling people racist to intimidate”

    If one went FAR ENOUGH back, would we find a third Party President ?

    “Every U.S. president elected to office since 1852 has belonged to one of two political parties: Republicans and Democrats.”

    http://people.howstuffworks.com/10-third-party-presidential-candidates.htm

    Frankly if it did happen before 1852, I DON’T CARE.

    On the scaled down State & local levels, DEPENDS on circumstances. Helping the Democrat candidate SEEMS most _plau·si·ble _
    statistically…

  • Bill Hedges

    A unusual, fascinating election involving MORE THAN 2 SEEKING same seat:

    “Joe Miller (Alaska politician)”

    “Joseph Wayne “Joe” Miller (born May 10, 1967) is an American attorney who was the Republican Party nominee and the Tea Party favorite in the 2010 U.S. Senate election in Alaska. He faced Democrat Scott McAdams and incumbent Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski, who after losing the primary to Miller, mounted a large and well-funded campaign as a write-in candidate in the general election.”

    “Miller then received the second largest number of votes, (35 percent), in the November 2 general election; write-ins came in first (at 41 percent). Election officials hand counted the write-ins using a voter intent standard which allowed ballots with misspellings of Lisa Murkowski’s name[2] to count for Murkowski, which gave her a lead of over 10,000 votes. Miller’s campaign challenged 8,000 of the write in ballots, contending that state law required exact spelling, last name before first, no cross-outs and no additional words such as “Republican”. He filed two state court and one federal lawsuit and later one state supreme court appeal, claiming constitutional violations of equal protection, the election clause of the U.S. constitution, and voter fraud as well as violations of the state election statute. The cases were dismissed by the courts because even if Miller had been correct about the law, he would still have lost to Murkowski by at least 2,000 votes. Miller conceded defeat on December 31, and claimed that his battle had been to ensure voter confidence in the election process and transparency.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Miller_(Alaska_politician)

  • Bill Hedges

    If you don’t believe in majority rule you don’t believe in American life style.

    A Party without sufficient members IN AGREEMENT ON THAT ISSUE must form a _ con·sor·tium _ to pass a law. If VETOED more votes required.

    Tea Party is NOT immune from THE PROCESS. SETTING tea as THE STANDARD to judge all others, well, how is that working Nate ???

    They say history repeats itself, that we should LEARN from past:

    During the BLACK DEALTH, among other things, Jews were blamed for this unknown CURSE. Need I tell you what Country came to the forefront on this in Europe ???

    They needed someone to blame in their frustration. Can blame another OR pick your self UP. Awhile back my foe said appease tea first rather than bring to our flock others such as minorities. I reminded him Italian citizens crossed over to vote for Reagan.

    Realistically, tea is TOO HARD to pamper in their present form. “Principle” ABOVE all else (Ah Paul & Cruz for immigration reform). Without majority, without all having same “Principles”, THERE IS NO pleasing tea. For compromise is LESS THAN “principles” Nate. Shall we draw a line and say, below this line, our “Principles” can be discarded. Does THAT LINE GET lowered OR does the list chance, TO FIT our ___ folly. Perhaps save tea BEST CHANCE at presidency. Paul supports the dreaded “establishment”Mitch McConnell & against a tea. Both Paul & Cruz favor a immigration reform. Cruz kicks “establish butt”. Paul KISSES. For THESE TWO we bend our “Principles”, but NOT FOR Sen. Rubio ??? Was NOT YESTERDAY that Paul & Cruz came out of the closet ON THIS ISSUE. These two ARE MARKED for SAFE PASSSAGE ??? Above TEA LAW ??? RIGHTFULLY so, come judgment day of Republican Presidential debate THIS WILL be asked. Will Nate “have so shame” ??? Or STAND ON “PRINCIPLES”??? HEAVEN forbid you re-evaluate & change your mind becoming a “RINO” under certain conditions. Sinking of a few ships led us, a peace loving nation, into war ???!!!???

    Jimmy Carter tried (32+ years ago). Democrats have tried to pass national health similar to bumcare a LONG TIME. It took control of Congress TO GET IT DONE. YOU THINK they will easily GIVE THAT away ???

    Other areas, compromise is a daily occurrence MORE or LESS:

    “Signed Legislation”

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/signed-legislation

    Here in lies MORE proof bob. You can locate the specific “ONE MODERATE DEMOCRAT” yourself. If I pick a “MODERATE DEMOCRAT” there is a high probability I would be met with resistance in my choice:

    “The republican establishment wing foolishly believes they can compromise with the left but I DARE THEM TO SHOW ME ONE MODERATE DEMOCRAT WHO WILL COMPROMISE?”

    Foolish comment bob.

    In general terms, nearly EVERYTHING must be compromised, ELSE little is accomplished.

    Tea’s hard, cold, facts of POLITICS:

    “United States Presidents and control of Congress”

    “The degree to which the President of the United States’s political party has control over the House of Representatives and Senate often determines his or her political strength – such as the ability to pass sponsored legislation, ratify treaties, and have Cabinet members and judges approved”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Presidents_and_control_of_Congress

  • Bill Hedges

    bob wrote:

    Bob Libertarian candidate accepts only Bitcoin and precious metals April 23, 2014 at 2:22 pm

    “it sort of paints the Libertarian Party as the party wearing tin foil hats doesn’t it?”

    “Tin foil hats” adds color or spice to the _ mun·dane _.

    BUT, but, but…

    When it comes to colorful expression BY ME. bob whistles a different tune:

    Bob Victory Dance? Really? 2014/04/06 at 3:52 pm

    “REALLY NOW ! “Cat’s Meow” and Cloth to a fevered brow”?????? where did you dig this up from an ol’e William Jennings Bryan, Clarence Darrow speech?”

    English class could use this to teach concept of ___ DOUBLE STARDARD.

    This MEAN spirited, unnecessary PUT DOWN was second paragraph of his comment. Here was his first:

    “P.S. If I ignored anything you wrote it was due to the fact that we either covered it a thousand times in the past or it is so minor in importance and stated so confusing by you I can’t waste my time on it”

    Another bombarding Confederate Script. Worthless sentiment. Just as formable & full of commonsense as his second paragraph ___ WASN’T…

    Litmus test of bob’s comment___ Embodiment of Helter Skelter without merit.

    bugs bunny laughable,orchestrated _ es·ca·pade _…