PostHeaderIcon Proposed Constitutional Amendment #3

(As promised (threatened?) in a previous article, I intend to submit a number of proposed amendments to our Constitution that, in my own judgment, would help restore a Constitutional Republic in our nation. Some of these are my own, some are based on Mark Levin’s The Liberty Amendments and some have been suggested by others).

Repeal of the 14th Amendment

The 14th amendment the the United States Constitution is hereby repealed. All legislation and regulation implemented under the authority of the 14th amendment is likewise rendered null and void.

The 14th amendment was implemented to address the treatment of newly freed slaves and well as those persons held to have been engaged in insurrection against the United States (that is, those who fought on the side of the late Confederacy).

The conditions intended to be addressed by the 14th amendment have long ceased to exist yet some of its provisions are used to this day to the disadvantage of the Republic and contrary to its original intent.

Please offer constructive comments as you see fit.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon Proposed Constitutional Amendment #2

(As promised (threatened?) in a previous article, I intend to submit a number of proposed amendments to our Constitution that, in my own judgment, would help restore a Constitutional Republic in our nation. Some of these are my own, some are based on Mark Levin’s The Liberty Amendments and some have been suggested by others).

Repeal of the 17th Amendment

The 17th amendment the the United States Constitution is hereby repealed. Future election of Senators will be made by the Legislatures of the several States as prescribed by the original Constitution. Senators serving at the time this amendment is ratified may complete the current terms to which they were elected.

Any Senate seats vacated by resignation, recall, death or other means will be filled by an election of the applicable State Legislature, or, by the Chief Executive of the applicable State should the State Legislature not be in session.

The Framers intended the Senate to be representative of the governments of the several States. This amendment reinstates that original intent.

This is also one of the amendments suggested by Mark Levin in The Liberty Amendments

Please offer constructive comments as you see fit.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon Proposed Constitutional Amendment #1

(As promised (threatened?) in a previous article, I intend to submit a number of proposed amendments to our Constitution that, in my own judgment, would help restore a Constitutional Republic in our nation. Some of these are my own, some are based on Mark Levin’s The Liberty Amendments and some have been suggested by others).

The Equal Protection Amendment

All Laws, Rules or Regulations promulgated by the Federal Government of the United States of America, or by any agency or branch thereof, shall apply equally to all Citizens of the United States of America, including all members of government whether elected, appointed or employed to whatever position they may occupy.

I sincerely believe that this is the most important amendment needed to our Constitution. While apparently simple at first reading, it would serve to stop much of the misuse and misapplication of power that currently plagues our Republic. Not only would it block government intrusion into may areas where the federal government has no business intruding, it would also stop any and all use of laws and regulations to pander, cater or otherwise favor one person or group of persons over another.

Please offer constructive comments as you see fit.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon Full Liberty is Anarchy

I may be missing something by never watching TV for entertainment. A truly profound observation:

“Anarchism . . . stands for liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from shackles and restraint of government. It stands for social order based on the free grouping of individuals.” The father’s voice returns: “The concept was pure, simple, true. It inspired me, lit a rebellious fire. But ultimately I learned the lesson that Goldman, Proudhon, and the others learned: that true freedom requires sacrifice and pain. Most human beings only think they want freedom. In truth, they yearn for the bondage of social order, rigid laws, materialism. The only freedom man really wants is the freedom to become comfortable.”

Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Text View

For we news and politics junkies, much of our web surfing is in pursuit of interesting articles to read. We are interested in the text itself, not all the distracting animated graphics, advertisements, photo albums, and other inducements to keep one clicking up advertising revenue for the site. I do have sympathy for their motive, and understand why they tend to break up longer articles into several page views; but I just don’t have time for game.

One of the reasons I came to prefer my iPad for news and commentary surfing, was the availability of popular apps that allowed one to create a reading list for later viewing offline, and a ‘text’ mode, which combined multiple page articles into just one continuous single column text file, without any extraneous graphics (although some can be configured to include inline pictures, graphs, and videos that were part of the article itself). The colors, font type and size, the margins to establish column width, and day/night mode, etc. are configurable. I couldn’t live without them.

The two most popular were ‘Read-It-Later’ (now called ‘Pocket’) and ‘Instapaper.’ I have both; but generally settled on Pocket, because it had a add-in for Firefox on my Windows machines, which is kept in sync with my iPad by their server. I can trash the article after reading it, or save it in my archives. These utilities are so popular, that a native reading list and text view are now part of mobile Safari and some other iPad browser apps.

When on the first page of an article, all one need do is tap the ‘text’ button, and the rest of the site disappears, leaving only the complete text of the article in an easily scanned, newspaper-like, column down the middle. This, of course, could be zoomed to full screen width for tired old eyes, by simply double tapping on it. Marvelous! For those articles I wanted to read right away, and doubted that I would wish to archive, this became my standard procedure. I have been spoiled by Safari having it, and wish Firefox did too.
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Natural Born Citizen

Note that I would have submitted this as a comment to Dave’s article on but, for reasons that are beyond my understanding, that site does not seem to accept comments from me (perhaps this is a case of technological wisdom in action?).

Our Constitution uses the term Natural Born Citizen in regard to presidential qualifications but neglects to clearly define the term – one of the few cases where that nearly perfect document falls short. A bit of research on the Web did turn up some guidance though.

At: I find this:

The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. A 2011 Congressional Research Service report stated that:
The weight of legal and historical authority indicates that the term “natural born” citizen would mean a person who is entitled to U.S. citizenship “by birth” or “at birth”, either by being born “in” the United States and under its jurisdiction, even those born to alien parents; by being born abroad to U.S. citizen-parents; or by being born in other situations meeting legal requirements for U.S. citizenship “at birth”. Such term, however, would not include a person who was not a U.S. citizen by birth or at birth, and who was thus born an “alien” required to go through the legal process of “naturalization” to become a U.S. Citizen.

This definition would seem to grant presidential qualification to all but naturalized citizens.
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon The Wisdom Of A Constitutional Convention

NOTE: Much of what I have to say here was inspired by Mark Levin’s latest book: The Liberty Amendments which I highly recommend (along with everything he has previously written).

Article V of our Constitution provides two official ways by which it may be modified. To that end, here is Article V in its entirety (with emphasis added by me):

Article. V.
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the Senate.

Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Thinking in Gold

I have long thought about prices, wages, and values in terms of gold, as in my post on Money. Trying to track down an article Troy suggested we read in a comment, I stumbled across a useful website,, which has various financial charts plotted in grams of gold, rather than U.S. Dollars. This takes the currency inflation and manipulative volatility out of the picture, allowing real long-term values to emerge. It is remarkable how relatively stable prices remain when measured in gold, instead of a depreciating fiat currency. The site is a very useful resource. If one thinks in ounces, instead of grams, just multiply oz. by 31, or vice versa, to convert.

It prodded me to think again about how it is only wages that have not kept pace with the deliberate inflation, which the oligarchs (bankers and lawyers/politicians) use to steadily steal our wealth. I have thought of a couple more examples to add to my part time job in high school, which I offered in the Money post. When I was discharged from the Army in 1966, my final pay scale as an E-5 over 2 years of service, was $246 per month, plus room and board, full medical and dental coverage with zero co-pay, cheap discounted prices in the PX, 30 days of paid leave a year, the GI Bill for post-secondary education (usually college, but I used mine for a pilot’s license), and a very lucrative fully funded pension plan, if one wished to make a 20 year investment in an Army career. I was in a critical MOS, so they offered me E-7 stripes and an $8K reenlistment bonus, if I would re-up. Since a brand new car averaged $2,400, and a gallon of gas averaged 32 cents, that was a lot of money; but I knew I could do better in a civilian job, and took a pass.

Now, let’s convert those numbers into gold. At $35 an oz. at the time, setting aside all of the valuable benefits, my paltry pay scale was almost precisely 7 oz. of gold a month. At the current price of gold ($1,340) that is the equivalent of a monthly salary today of $9,380. Yet, an E-5 with two years of active duty today, is only paid $2,304; ten time what I earned in dollars, but nowhere near what I earned in gold. The $8K reenlistment bonus, would have bought 228.5 oz. of gold at the time, which equates to $306,286 today. I wonder how much they are offering these days? Yet the car at 68.5 oz. of gold, is not that far off from what one would have to pay for a full-sized full-featured American car today, when converted back to $92K at the current price of gold. Similarly, a gallon of gas at 32 cents, equates to 109 gal. per oz. of gold, which at today’s gold price would be over $12 per gal. So, the cost of producing automobiles and gasoline has actually gone down. If wages were keeping up with inflation, and everyone was making at least a lowly sergeant’s pay of $9k+ a month, perhaps we could all notice that. Then, perhaps folks would be appreciative of ‘Big Oil,’ for their efficiencies at reducing prices on a necessary commodity. :)
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon When Are We “Officially” A Dictatorship?

It seems that the evidence of our essential rights being trampled by our own government is turning from a trickle to a flood. Please read this article as a for-instance:

Clearly, our beloved Constitution is now nothing more than a historical document – a fragment describing what once was but which is no more.

And, as if it could not get any worse, we now see the lame-stream media already starting a campaign to ensure Hillary Clinton becomes our next president, assuming the Obamanation actually steps down at the end of his current term, an event I am by no means certain will occur.

Imagine this… our once free press already clamoring for the “election” of a person who long since should have been executed for her manifold crimes against the American people!
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Reason Cruise

I want to remind you all that the next Reason Cruise — sponsored by the Reason Foundation and the staff of Reason Magazine — will depart Ft. Lauderdale on February 9, 2014 for a week in the western Caribbean. Jeannine and I have attended both previous cruises and found them to be a real treat as the time at sea is taken up with very interesting seminars as well as the group (including the Reason folk) dining together each evening and usually adjourning together to a nook in a shipboard bar for further discussion and imbibing.

Should any of you decide to participate (and I sincerely hope you will), please mention my name when you make your reservations which will gain me a shipboard credit which I will share with you at the bar. Among other advantages, your participation will allow you to meet Jeannine and I. That alone should be incentive enough.

Details at:


PostHeaderIcon Rethinking Anarchy

The longer I contemplate it, the more I find myself inclined to agree with much of the anarchist wing of libertarian thought. The notion that coercive government is a necessary evil for civilization to flourish simply isn't accurate, and the history of the world is replete with anecdotal evidence to the contrary. One such example, is our own history of the 'lawless' Frontier, as we settled the West. If one strips away the revisionist rhetoric, and particularly the sensationalized Hollywood characterizations, one finds a remarkably cooperative, productive, and yes relatively peaceful libertarian society of rugged individualists.

I just read an awesome essay on, which is very thought-provoking. Entitled, “The American West: A Heritage of Peace,” it is not short; but it is profound and well worth the read. I guarantee it will rearrange what you think you know about that period of our history, and the implications for libertarianism found in the unvarnished truth. Please do invest the time, it won't be wasted. ◄Dave►


PostHeaderIcon Is History Repeating Itself (Again)?

As I have opined in other articles, I take a dim view of altruism – the notion that one should do for others with no thought toward one’s own needs, and with no thought of a reward for one’s altruistic actions. In a word, none of us is truly our brother’s keeper.

However, this does not mean that it is wise for one person to live their life without any regard for their fellows, for often, concern for others is actually very much in our own self interest. In a word, each of us is truly our brother’s brother and we would do well to remember that.

To this end, I submit two quotes from the recent past that should help illustrate this point…

First, a quote that, to some degree, helps us understand how the Nazis were able to dominate an otherwise enlightened culture…

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

And this from Ayn Rand, reminding us of the supremacy of the individual (versus any form of collective)…

The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.

Why am I bringing this up? Because history seems to be repeating itself (again).
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Why Promote Racism?

While I realize there is no end of opinion being offered regarding the Martin – Zimmerman fiasco, I cannot help but offer my own two dollars worth…

Despite there having been no real evidence of a racial angle to this tragedy, still there seems to be an outcry to make this a racial issue. My question is why?

I expect as much from the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton because they (and others like them) are professional racists. That is to say, their prosperity, fame and influence are all based on the continuation of racial divisiveness.

But, how does one explain the media’s obvious wish to stir up unnecessary racial discord over this? Or that of the “Hollywood airheads”? Worse yet, why is the president of our nation doing the same thing? Do they not understand that the “low information” segment of our society reacts to such misinformation emotionally rather than rationally, and that, to most of them, perception is reality, regardless of the pertinent facts (or lack of same).

I confess to have no idea what was going through the minds of George Zimmerman or Trayvon Martin during that unfortunate encounter. However, my impression, from what evidence we have been offered, is that this was the tragic result of a chance collision between two people, both lacking in good judgment.

Goodness knows that there is enough legitimate racial misconduct among all races without attempting to find a racial problem where none seemed to exist.

Precisely what do the race-baiters wish to come of this? Other than the professional racists named above, why would any sane person want to foment unrest that will intimately harm us all?

There is another angle to this that puzzles me. Assume that the professional racists, the media, the Hollywood airheads and even the president are all totally sincere in their concern that a young black male may have been intentionally stalked and killed by a part Hispanic, part black man with a Jewish name? If the killing of young black males is so high on their collective horror list, where is the like concern for the thousands of young black males that are routinely slaughtered by other black males in our inner cities? Are the lives of those young black males of no account? Is the killing of a young black male only wrong when perpetuated by a killer who is less than totally black?

As I have opined before in this blog, I originally hoped that the election of the first self-identified “black” president would be, if not the end of racism in America, at least the beginning of the end. Instead, we have elected the most racist administration in the history of the Republic.

Perhaps those currently in power see this as some manner of “getting even”? I simply cannot imagine any other explanation for intentionally causing division and discord in the nation they were chosen to lead. But this I do know – whatever their motivation, what they are doing can only turn out very badly for all of us, no matter our individual blend of ancestral ethnicity.

The future of our Republic is in sufficient doubt without this.

Taking this latest fiasco together with all else that has happened in recent years, one would be justified in concluding that those privileged to lead this nation are determined to destroy it. I simply cannot come up with any other rational explanation.

It is our choice whether we allow them to succeed.

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon Considering Patriotism

This being the holiday when we (should) celebrate our national independence, it seems a reasonable time to reflect on the notion of Patriotism and of the Patriot. To some extent, this article is in response to the blog post at: and to the many comments it prompted (and for which I thank all of you).

To start things off, I offer definitions of the two words, taken from

devoted love, support, and defense of one’s country; national loyalty.

1. a person who loves, supports, and defends his or her country and its interests with devotion.
2. a person who regards himself or herself as a defender, especially of individual rights, against presumed interference by the federal government.

While I do not argue with these definitions, I nevertheless find them lacking. For instance, “patriotism” is defined as being about one’s country and national loyalty. Fine, but exactly what does this mean? Is the “country” the physical land? Is it the citizenry? Is it the nation – and, by extension, the government? Common sense suggests to me that it is a combination of these. Again, fine, so far as it goes.

Next, when we consider the definition of “patriot”, we get another “spin” on things. Again is repeated the devotion to country, but, added is the notion that a “patriot” also defends the rights of the individual citizen against governmental interference. And, herein lies the rub.
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Deconstructing The Nature Of WAR

The United States of America has reached that sad (and terminal) condition where we are in a constant state of War.

As a people, we have been conditioned to accept War as a necessary thing. After all, was our very freedom as a nation not born in War?

The error in all this is that War, as a term of language, has become so general as to mean almost anything, good, bad or indifferent. We-the-sheeple seem to accept that all Wars are in our interest without stopping to examine each so-called “War” on its own merits (or lack of same). As a result, a condition (War) that we generally accept as always in our interest is increasingly used against us. Yet another example where ignorance is the true enemy – an enemy against which we are not waging any form of “War”. Let us examine a few of the attributes of this thing we call “War”.

Basically, War is a method by which something is intended to be “defeated’. Simple enough on the surface but, are we always sure we know exactly what is intended to be defeated and why? I submit that the answer is a definite “NO”.
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Does The Truth REALLY Make Us Free?

(It seems I have something to say after all…)

According to the Christian bible, if one knows the truth, that truth will make one free. Will it really? Better still, do most of us even want to know the truth?

In this diatribe, I refer to the various documents provided to WikiLeaks by Bradley Manning followed by the more recent disclosures of government spying on its citizens by Edward Snowden.

It is true that, in both cases, the “leakers”, aka “whistle blowers” violated numerous security laws and rules by making their disclosures. This prompts me to ask whether laws and rules that have the effect of covering up (or hiding) wrongdoing on the part of government can, indeed, ever be accepted as valid laws and rules?

I see this as akin to the principle regarding a soldier’s obligation to follow orders – excepting in those cases where such orders would result in illegal or improper actions (for instance, an order to kill innocent civilians).

Such notions are, in fact, almost impossible to “cleanly” implement because they depend on the interpretation of the situation by the individuals involved as well as the fact that the “rules” of the game are often totally inconsistent.

Referring back to my previous example – most of us can agree that an order for an infantry squad to invade a peaceful village and kill innocent non-combatants is morally wrong. Then, what do we say about the order to drop bombs or fire missiles into areas that contain equally innocent non-combatants whose only “crime” was to be too near some area thought to have legitimate military value? It seems to me the only way out of this morass is to judge the actions of those who violate the rules by the evident morality of their intentions. That is, were the violations in question obviously intended for personal gain or were they done at obvious personal risk to the violator and driven by moral considerations?

Back to the original notion – that of “leakers” who violate security laws and rules to disclose information that they honestly and morally believe should be known by the citizenry at large…

My own opinion, for whatever it is worth, is that what we know to be morally correct always trumps laws and rules established by government. If that is not true, then government automatically becomes all powerful because its ability to manipulate and deceive will be unlimited.

Given this opinion, three thoughts emerge: First, that both Manning and Snowden deserve the same consideration and protection extended to whistle blowers whose revelations did not involve “national security”. Second, that what we allow to be called “national security” is more often a smoke screen intentionally devised to hide the crimes of those who govern us. Third, that any and all members of government who demand that the likes of Manning and Snowden be severely punished, even executed, are themselves highly suspect and most probably have wrongdoing to hide.

The plain truth is that our government, especially the current regime, is corrupt to the point where all our rights and liberties are at severe risk. If we sit by and allow those who would expose this corruption to be silenced and punished, then we are nothing more than accessories to that corruption.

Think about it.

Troy L Robinson

PostHeaderIcon What More Can Be Said?

Some time ago, in this blog, I opined that one way to tell that tyrants are becoming secure in their position is that they cease trying to cover up their lies and their misdeeds.

It that not exactly the situation in these United States today?

Today, we are seeing evidence of activities on the part of out-of-control government that, in past days, would have caused people to take to the streets in anger and disgust. Yet, various members of the regime, whether before legislative committees, before what passes for “the press” and in other public venues, give responses to legitimate questions that range from blatant lies to wise-guy responses that are the verbal equivalent of raising the middle finger in the questioner’s face. And there is virtually no meaningful response. Especially from we-the-sheeple.

Consider the testimony of then IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman when asked why he had been cleared to visit the White House 157 times. His response, to a committee of Congress, was that he was taking his kids to the Easter Egg Roll. (Translation – up yours!)

Then we have IRS official Lois Lerner who comes before this same committee, makes a speech proclaiming her innocence of any and all wrongdoing, then invokes her 5th amendment right against self incrimination rather than answer any questions from the committee. (Translation – up yours!)

And, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, angrily responding what difference does it make when asked about the persistent lie that the Benghazi attack, which killed 4 Americans including our Ambassador to Libya, was incited by a YouTube video rather than having been a well planned terrorist attack. (Translation – up yours!)

Meanwhile, the both the Obamanation and his Attorney general lie with impunity to virtually every question then are asked – and are pretty much allowed to get by with it. (Translation – up yours!)
Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Sons of Liberty

I find myself weary of trying to awaken sheeple, to the perils facing our nation. Most don't want to hear it. I am bored with reading about and commenting on the latest outrageous corruption and scandals emanating from Sodom by the Potomac. They are now coming so 'fast and furious' that it is impossible to keep up with them in any depth anyway.

Yet, I find it impossible to just give up and let the Pro Retrogressives win a total and final victory, which would bind our posterity in the ancient chains of serfdom, in the land our forefathers fought and died to keep free. I think we need a positive project to focus our energy on, which would at least attempt to save our country for our grandchildren.

It is they, the children, who are the future of America. Yet, presently they are ever increasingly and deliberately being dumbed down. They are indoctrinated in our public schools, to be ashamed of America's past, and view a Marxist utopia as its inevitable future. If we really want to save America, first and foremost this trend must be reversed. Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Please Understand Me

Getting back to the subject of your “Unable to Cope” post, Troy, another thought it engendered was the problem of expecting others to think like we do. Remember when we got tangled up with that freethinker forum, where we first met? Expecting it to be a place where ideas were freely discussed, we were somewhat taken aback to find it dominated by ACLU type atheist activists, who were as rigidly dogmatic as the Christian fundamentalists about which they obsessed.

To your credit, you were the first to flee those stultifying groupthink environs in horror. Several more of us soon followed, and we created a new forum, which we called 'Reasonable Rationals' (as opposed to 'Atheist Activists'), where we thoroughly enjoyed daily kicking around interesting ideas for over a year.

As an exercise in comity, early on we explored David Keirsey's work on innate temperament differences, derived from Jungian personality types, identified by Meyers-Briggs type personality tests. He describes the four basic temperaments, out of the 16 possible Jungian combinations, which are not evenly distributed in the population. He briefly explains them here, and then elaborates a bit on each:

'SJ' Guardians 40 – 45%

'SP' Artisans 30 – 35%

'NF' Idealists 15 – 20%

'NT' Rationals 5 – 10%

Read the rest of this entry »

PostHeaderIcon Stop Apologizing!

From FOX News:

Paula Broadwell apologizes for Petraeus affair
The biographer whose extramarital affair with then-CIA director David Petraeus triggered his resignation says she regrets the relationship.

What is with all this apologizing? The Obamanation has apologized to almost everyone on Earth for America’s very existence. A steady stream of celebrities are constantly apologizing for DUI and abusive behavior (which most then go on to repeat over and over). Criminals apologize for heinous crimes as if that will make some difference to their victims. And so on until I could vomit.

Certainly there is a time and place for a sincere apology for certain acts. For instance, Petraeus and Broadwell may well owe some form of apology to their families or to others who were directly affected by whatever they did. However, whatever intimate relations they may have had with each other were not my business, did not involve me and, in a sane world, did not affect me one way or the other. So, how can I possibly be due an apology from either of them? I just don’t get it.

As for the celebrities, most of what they apologize for were criminal acts that would result in serious punishment if done by you or me. And, in most cases the obvious insincerity of the apologies make them more like insults.

Whether your average criminal’s apologies make any difference to the victims and their families, I simply do not know. I have no doubt that most of them are genuinely sorry but I suspect this sorrow is more from getting caught that from whatever illegal act they were caught at.

Then there is that repeated Obamanation world apology tour. Yes, we use a large percentage of the world’s energy resources. Yes, in the past we lived better than much of the world. We have also expended endless blood and treasure fighting on behalf of others and are almost always first on the scene with assistance when tragedy strikes other nations. We are what we are and most of us are proud of it. If the Obamanation is not, he should move to one of those third world crap pots he seems so enamored of. Or at least quit insulting the people who have bestowed the highest position in the world upon him (for reasons that escape me).

I feel so much better having said all this. If, in the process of venting, I have managed to offend any of you, rest assured that I offer you no apology whatever.

Thank you.

Troy L Robinson

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Political Spectrum
Political Circle

Think Up/Down not Left/Right

Internal Links
Other Sandboxes

Please also join us here. ◄Dave►