" The 4th of July, however, is a good time to lay
off some of the complaining, and appreciate what
we've got."

Albert, you ignorant slut.

Currently, we have more of our OWN in U.S.
jails and penitentiaries as "political prisoners"
(or perhaps P.O.W.s-W.o.D) because of the
U.S. Fed-mommy's absolute lack of regard for
the HUMANS "beneath" their boot.

Worse, the United States has more humans
in prison right now than ANY nation has ever
had, in the history of the world, making it the
GREATEST POLICE STATE that ever existed.

The FedGov seems pretty happy with that.
The individual states have been shown time and
again JUST who's running this show, by the Fed's
total disregard of the 10th Amendment, and
criminal disregard of individual State's over-turning
of Draconian morality-crap laws, among other, more
heinous U.S. government terrorism.

Blatant disregard of citizen's rights will only result
in the eventual revolt of John Q, standing on his
hind-legs to throw off the shackles, and slap his
bastard "masters" with the chains.

The Fourth of July should represent an ongoing
assertion of our FREEDOM, not pay lip-service
to those who went before us in the Revolutionary
War to originally secure our dwindling liberties.

"Independence Day" is as big a joke as the
would-be PC "monument" being considered to
fill the area of the World Trade Center in New York.
The celebration of "Once Upon A Time" seems
more important than to actually HAVE the rights
and liberties defined in those "founding documents"
you speak of.

Just ink on ancient paper, these documents no
longer carry the weight their authors so deeply
felt, and wagered their lives upon. Anyone in any
position of "authority" seems to be able to disregard
even the most important of these tenets without the
least concern for any "penalty" for having done so.

No-knock warrants are one such aspect. The
incredible continuation of the "War on people who
use Drugs" is another. "Sobriety" checkpoints,
Federal BANS on assault rifles, and the "enforced
personal confinement of adults in their own auto's"
all count as greater or lesser points in the same
"bigger picture". You KNOW this.

Why then, sir, would YOU (with the tatoo of Tommy
Jefferson on the back of your neck) EVER apparantly
advocate even a SHORT cease-fire with the son's of
bitches that are murdering your own people on a
daily basis?

" a good time to lay off some of the complaining"
is AFTER the blood-sucking bastards lay off some
of the policing of things that aren't any of their damn
business in the FIRST place! Another good time to
lay off would be AFTER the leeches REMOVE
some of the worst of their wounds on our national
constitution. ("Penumbras' my shadowy ASS)

A REALLY great time to lay off some of the complaining
would be when the leaders of our nation turns BACK to
the people, without pointing a gun in their faces. WE ARE
AMERICANS, but the Fed recognizes NO friends, and
answers to NO one.

I'll lay off when Mr. Jefferson re-takes his office.

D.Tansy
Indianapolis, IN
http://members.tripod.com/~viewfromrubyridge/VFFR_Index.htm

Nice rebuttal!

"I'll lay off when Mr. Jefferson re-takes office"?

Will Mr. Jefferson be bringing his cache of household slaves with him? Will his slave children get the run of the White House like his other children? Will he be calling upon the French to send in covert aid to help topple Alexander Hamiltion and the Federalists? Do please advise.

Oh, this made my day! On last night's "Saturday Night Live" rerun, guest host Robert DeNiro played a Thomas "Call Me T.J." Jefferson on the prowl for Sally Hemings. "What time do you get off from work?" he asks. She replies, "Never."

The skit reminded me once more that Thomas Jefferson indeed had some great ideas. He was a fine writer. And he had the courage to stand up to Fat George. The slave thing, however, makes it impossible for me to find him honorable. The bastard never even freed his own kids until after his death! And let's not forget how his still-living descendants -- the melanin-challenged ones -- are treated by their own societally-approved kinfolk. Grrr.

As Frederick Douglass said, "This fourth of July is yours, not mine."

GO HERE to see Miss Natalie's anti-American 4th of July post, similar in theme to Mr. Tansy.

Great Al, thanks. I checked it out and thought Natalie was spot on. Appreciate the tip!

Obviously I'm taking rather the opposite point from Miss Natalie, but someone needs to take up the other side of the argument.

OH,
But I am unhappy with YOU, Mr. Barger!
"see Miss Natalie's anti-American 4th of July post"

I don't see her post as ANTI, because she sees a
"less than currently pc acceptable" version of TJ's Birthday,
towit;

" I can't and won't celebrate American freedom
and equality, however, until they actually exist for
all, as is stated in that declaration released 227
years ago today."

Why is that ANTI - American?
Some of us have always been "more equal" than others.
(At least in their own minds) How much more clearly
could she have defined and clarified my own thoughts?

Truly, our illustrious Thomas Jefferson owned slaves.
Regardless, that was LEGAL at the time, no laws existed
concerning even the care of one's property, or an ASPCS
would've made owners crazy. (Insert "slaves" where "animals"
should go) No mention was ever made of his mistreatment
of any of his livestock, which is exactly how they were
counted. Beyond that, hypocrisy has always been SOP
for the office, and government in general.

Miss Natalie (IMHO) only goes a bit overboard in the use
of the sentiment, " whatever oppressed group you wish
in place of the word "slave" or "negro." Although, not
being IN her shoes, (whether Gucci or Keds) perhaps
I am presumptuous of her experiences.

Still, in it's entirety, her article isn't ANTI-American. It seems
to me, she just scraped the top layer of crap off the glasses
she looks at the U.S. government with.

If that's Anti - American, pencil me in!

Mr. Tansy: Barefoot, presently. Usually an old no-name, ripped-up brand of sneakers I've had for about eight years (which I borrowed from Spousal Unit when the soles of the last pair I purchased disintegrated).

I do not see where I went overboard. But otherwise, thanks for your support. :)

It's nice to see Miss Natalie and Monsieur Tansy making pals, but you're both still intent on whining and ingratitude. You talk as if we're all slaves. We are not. We are (mostly) free individuals.

Again, I do not say that everything is hunky dory or that we should be satisfied or complacent. Still, we have to look at our country as part of the real world rather than comparing it to some fantasy version of how we think it OUGHT to be.

We do in fact pretty much have "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" in the US. The government fairly much does what the mostest part of the people want.

The problem is that sometimes the people want stupid things, and different things from one another. A big part of the public supports most of the drug laws- even as many of those supporters personally break the prohibitions they believe in for everyone else.

Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence. That ought to count for something in his corner. He held slaves, however, and that certainly is a strike against him. It was hypocrisy on his part, and he damn well knew it. Still, in the bigger scheme of things, a few personal slaves on his plantation rates as a much smaller sin to me than, say, FDR's wholesale internment of Japanese-Americans.

We're freer overall than probably we've ever been, or pretty close to it. There ARE hundreds of thousands of non-violent people in prison over stupid drug offenses. But there are millions of black folks who are no longer slaves, and no longer subject to Jim Crow.

Homosexuals have a very good situation in the US now, much better than at any time in history. There are still legal issues that you might reasonably bitch about, granted. But gays have something near 100% legal tolerance in this country now.

A lot of people in the rest of the world wish they were as "oppressed" as we are.

With all due respect, darling Al, "we" don't have to do anything. You may. I can not.

A lot of this comes down to temperament - symbolics events like holidays are for celebrating ideals. Surely the ideals of our founding are worth celebrating. We, being human, are imperfect and have not (and will not) ever live up to these ideals. To toss it all away because we don't live up to our ideals is nihilistic. We should always seek to improve, always strive to live up to our ideals, always criticize that which is incompatible with our ideals, but it is niggardly to not salute those ideals on a periodic basis.

With all due respect, one can salute those ideals without having to join the citizenship bandwagon or celebrating on the day you tell us we ought to do so. I think the activist work I do is a terrific way to stand for equality and justice. I don't need to be part of your country's parades just because you or anyone else insists I must. Kinda flies in the face of ideals such as freedom and self-determination. I'll light up a bunch of fireworks when I am equal under law.

Sorry, I am sick to death of people telling me what they think I ought to do, especially when obeying these human -- rather than following my own conscience and principle -- would be a gorss betrayal of something valuable for something that is not. You want to celebrate the fourth? Feel free. But you're wrong to tell me that I must follow your lead when our beliefs are so very different.

I didn't say anything about joining parades, I said "celebrate on a periodic basis," which I do not see as incompatible with anyone's beliefs or chosen mode of celebration.

If I see no need to celebrate, it would be stupid for me to do so. As I said, when it is appropriate to do so, I will. That time has not come and does not appear to be coming in the visible future.

By the way, your charge of nihilism is specious at best. Your country's traditions and stated (though not practiced, not toward all, as your nation claims) values are not the only choice. I choose otherwise. Which, whether your law recognizes it or not, is my right.

Eric, I love you, but you're wrong about this. Again, if YOU want to celebrate, feel free. Leave me to my work.

My WORSTEST attitude is at the presumption that
I am UN-American, or ANTI-American because I have
something to say about the lying, theiving butchers
who, "following orders," have no compunction about
using "WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION" in
MY everyday AMERICA, on our own PEOPLE.

Personally, I am ANTI U.S. Federal Stormtrooper,
regardless what letters make up the "office" these
lice come out of. (FBI, ATF, M-O-U-S-E) That tends
to include the MAIN louse at the top, since it's beyond
belief the President doesn't KNOW when some of his
EMPLOYERS are being murdered via his own hand.

First and best is the Waco Massacre. That show set
the precedent for the shit coming down the pike.
There's HOW much difference between, say, Bill "Slick
Willie" Clinton, and Timothy McVeigh? Only that McVeigh
didn't have an office through which to order his "cleaning".
But the results remained the same, right?

I believe that, given an OUNCE less accountability, our
"Shrubby" would make Saddam look like a choir boy.
Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts ABSOLUTELY.
It irritates me beyond measure to be labeled UnAmerican,
when I bitch about the morality-crap laws enacted and
ENFORCED at gun-point, for MY "benefit", and/or on MY
behalf, because the majority of U.S. citizens just lay
down and accept whatever crap falls out of the mouths
of the bitches WE VOTED INTO OFFICE.

"Land of the Free" (To-Do-As-We-Are-TOLD)

Also, Albert, you're INCORRECT. Ours has become a
government OF the lawyer, BY the lawyer, FOR the
lawyer. The PEOPLE spoke in California on Proposition
214. Their combined voices were IGNORED, so, voting
by "legitimate" means amounts to SHIT.

Yet, if I were to propose "voting" from the rooftops, the
FedMommy would call ME a badguy.

But, they damn well wouldn't ignore THAT!

Those of you responding to D. Tansy should take a quick look at his site and read this before feeding the troll any further. Nothing Natalie has written anywhere is "similar in theme to Mr. Tansy," and Al, I think you owe her an apology for implying as much.

Nevertheless, there are legitimate reasons to take issue with mawkish "let's all gaze at the Constitution" rhetoric, and to treat with contempt those who would dismiss raising those issues as "ingratitude" or "anti-Americanism." This is a genuinely serious time for democracy in America, and people who are genuinely interested in all the things they enjoy as Americans need to get interested. (I myself am interested because once a stupid and destructive thing is tried and fails in America, it's usually not too long before some crank in Canada wants to imitate it.)

By "troll" Doc Slack apparently means someone with whom he disagrees, and finds disagreeable. Personally, I consider Doc Slack to be a commie troll. It's all good. Hey, Doc, keep on trollin'.

"By troll Doc Slack apparently means someone" [BargerSnark snipped]

Like this. (Definition 1. I don't think Tansy is imitating a small mischievous figure of Scandinavian legend.)

Al, I'll be disappointed in you if, as a corollary of your kneejerk reaction to Thing Librul, it now strikes you as Awfully Clever to make like you're too stupid to tell the difference between this and this. But keep up the routine if it makes you happy...

"Troll... the practice of trying to lure
other Internet users into sending responses
to carefully-designed incorrect statements
or similar "bait."

Hmmmmm,

With great regard to every word I wrote, I
reviewed my post, and re-reviewed, and yet
find NO statement blatantly incorrect.
Personally, I don't give a DAMN what name
or names any halfwit decides to attempt to
label me with, your opinion would have to
MEAN something to me in order for your
derogatory to have any effect.

What I'm wondering is, what part of my
statement hit home with YOU, "Doctor Slack"?
What part of my statement was even MINUTELY
incorrect? The basic similarities between
Slick Willie and McVeigh? The "WEAPONS OF
MASS DESTRUCTION" used ON Americans BY
Americans? Perhaps the California voters
being DEFIED by their pompous would-be KING
in DC?

Perhaps you'd like documentation? I have that
in SPADES. PLEASE feel free to show me my error,
OR the basis for your misinterpretation of my
opinion.

I look forward to waxing your arrogant BUTT.

Mr. Tansy, you should apologize to Doc Slack. As a good liberal, by definition he CARES more than you. That deep empathy counts more than any petty "facts" or "logic" that you may produce.

Al, read the links, man. You're making a serious fool of yourself.

In what way, exactly, am I making a fool of myself, Doc? Just by not presumptively denouncing Tansy on general principles? What's your beef here?

"Just by not presumptively denouncing Tansy on general principles?"

In my first post, I told you to read his site and then read a linked article that talks about a certain form of conspiracy theory. Did you do either of those things? If you didn't, then either

1) do so and stop wasting both of our time with non sequiturs, or

2) admit that you refuse to do so and stop wasting both of our time with non sequiturs.

If you do 1 (and it's in your interests) I really shouldn't need to connect the dots for you beyond that.

Doc, my people are from Kentucky, so maybe I'm a little slow on the uptake here. Yes, you do need to connect the dots.

Tansy has a website. That website has links to other websites, including some "conspiracy" sites suggesting murderous skullduggery by government officials.

Now, is your point supposed to be that such ideas are not only incorrect but so disreputable that I am opening myself to ridicule even by simple friendly association with someone who would have a link to such a website on their website?

That would be not just guilt by association, but guilt by three degrees of association. Surely that can't be what you mean.

Dumb it down for a Kentuckian, if you could please.

From the ADL link:

"More than any other issue, though, the deadly standoffs at Ruby Ridge, Idaho, in 1992 and Waco, Texas, in 1993 ignited widespread passion [in the anti-government right]. . .

"The final element forming the militia movement was a vast fascination with conspiracies. Conspiracies were easy to accept for people who believed that the federal government deliberately murdered people at Ruby Ridge and Waco and that door-to-door gun confiscation could begin any day. But the militia movement not only accepted the traditional conspiracy theories, it created a host of new ones; combined, they described a shadowy movement intent on creating a one-world socialist government no matter what the cost. This "New World Order," using the United Nations as its primary tool, had already taken over most of the planet."

From Tansy's site:

"Since that time when urinalysis was first introduced in the NFL, Fascism has not just grown, but flowered, and in a scant ten or fifteen years fascism in America has spread like a wild weed . . . The whole story goes on and on and involves the United nations, The Federal Reserve Banking System, The Vatican, and others, but suffice it to say that the first workers in America to kowtow to the overlords who own and run us were the football players of the NFL."

Another little tidbit:

"the decimation of the Fred P. Murrah
Federal Building in Oklahoma on exactly the same date 2 years later was and is not "Terrorism", but a simple retaliation in kind. An act of WAR. The only difference between the two is that McVeigh and his masters didn't GAS the children before they killed them."

Now Al, I'm betting you're just trying, reflexively, to adopt a Devil's Advocate pose. While I think that's enormously silly of you in this case, I don't think you really truly need the ins and outs of conspiracy theory, and its general track record for reliability, explained to you from scratch. If you do need it explained to you, though, just go read this primer. For a fun hands-on illustration, go here.

I am absolutely convinced that the US Federal
Government outright murdered more than 80
men, women, and children in Waco Texas,
April 19, 1993. ATF records place them at the
scene.

Don't give a damn whether there was a "conspiracy"
to do so, just the fax, man, just the fax.

"Theory" is defined as "a hypothesis assumed for
the sake of argument", and it just doesn't stand up
here. Theory didn't burn the Davidian church, gas
the inhabitants, or attempt to bulldoze the crime
scene into oblivion. It is my profound belief that
the pictures alone define the absolute truth. (Not
to mention 53 days of televised FedGov terrorism)

"Non sequitur". What, specifically, does not follow?
That McVeigh, believing himself a "true patriot", did
NOT, in fact, carry out his part of the destruction of
the Fred P. Murrah building in retaliation for the Waco
atrocities? That it WAS retaliation? That's what his mouth
said.

That I doubt he was alone in his stupidity, THAT
is a conspiracy "theory", due to the lack of FAX available
concerning cronies. That there were unexploded
bomb(s) removed from the interior of the building is FACT,
but their placement by unseen hands doesn't necessarily
"prove" those hands as other than McVeigh, himself. Any
other statement would be conjecture, hypothesis, or your
favorite word, THEORY. I didn't go there.

It appears you didn't like the article on the NFL's adoption
of urinalysis as the key, the cornerstone to the FedMommy's
actual "hands-on" approach to reining-in American citizen's
rights, freedoms, and liberties. I didn't write it, I merely
adopted it. Either way, it explains itself very well. What's up,
comrade?

I make NO mention of " militia" anywhere in any of my
articles, because I just don't GIVE a shit about 'em.
Adding your own spin to what I say doesn't change what
I said, except to the weak-minded or ADD impaired.
Tossing in links to pages that have not a thing to do with my
statement have not a thing to do with reality, either. Really
poor attempt at distraction, you're no prestidigitator, dude.
(Practice with small items first, maybe cards or coins)

Personally, I don't believe the FedMommy will ever attempt
to go door-to-door collecting American's guns, because
they pretty well KNOW they'll get NOT guns, but uncased
BULLETS. American's are currently over-weight and LAZY,
but still FAR from stupid. But I didn't bring that one to the
table, either.

Last, " a simple retaliation in kind" is exactly correct. Hit
me, and I WILL hit back. Myself, I try to hit
where it hurts MOST, in order to stop the stupidity.
It was, somehow, "okay" to burn the Davidian children, they
were the spawn of Demons or some such shit. It was NOT
okay to kill the children in the Fred P. Murrah building, they
were the children of our lords and masters.

More than anything else, THAT is a thorn in my ass, and
a WICKED bloodspot on MY America. Just the fax.

Ideology aside, we are a country of laws, we do not allow mercenaries to randomly decide of their own accord to blow up innocent men, women and children because they are unhappy about some official action of the government. We have channels for expressing such dissatisfaction in an orderly manner. Setting aside ideology - again - imagine the consequences if it were otherwise: an Oklahoma City every week or so. This was "terrorism" in every possible meaning of the word and is unjustifiable on any possible level.

Speaking as someone who laments the Fed's actions near Waco as murderous (at worst) or mind-bogglingly foolhardy and malicious (at best), I agree 100% with Eric. Timmy-boy was an unjustified fool and murderer, no matter what he claimed as his motivation. Never mind that he did more to undermine the "cause" of the Mt Carmel murders than anyone else could have. It's a dead (sorry) issue now, thanks to him.

And I wish an early and painful death on anyone planning such foolishness in the future, whatever the cause.

I'll just note that NO one here was defending McVeigh. Even Tansy described his actions as "stupidity."

And Bill Clinton and Janet Reno (among others) should STILL be tried for, at a minimum, 80+ counts of manslaughter for Waco.

It was not OK to murder the folks at the Murrah building. It was not OK to murder the folks in Waco. (I agree with Al that der Schlickmeister and Janet Reno have much for which to answer.) And it was not OK to murder Timothy McVeigh (who was much more than merely stupid).

"An eye for an eye" is so Old Testament. Not to mention inhumane.

I never said I agreed with McVeigh, he was as wrong
as the stormtroops that attacked the Davidians,
and maybe my attitude wouldn't be quite the
same if my grandmother had been in that Federal
building over her SS check or some such thing.

But then, my attitude might again be worse toward
the FedMommy had one of MY family been at
Waco in '93. Regardless, McVeigh made it clear he
believed our federal government executed 80
men, women, and children at Waco. He was NOT
alone in that opinion.

Here's a thought for you, they sure took that building
down quick, didn't they? Seemed to me they
destroyed another "crime scene" without thoroughly
investigating. Bureaucratic stupidity? Generally, it's
been my experience nothing the Fed does
moves THAT quickly, except stepping on people.

No love for stupidity, but McVeigh became the entire
country's whipping boy, and scapegoat. A distraction
that allowed everyone to put ALL their anger and/or
resentment at their own inability to control current
events into SEEING the devil put to sleep before their eyes!

Think it could happen again? YUP. Abuse counselors
tell you it's only "really" hard for mommy, or daddy, or
hubby (or even wifey) to hurt you the first time,
it gets easier after that.

Head up, eyes wide open!

I am pleased to hear all that, but it still sounds perilously close to Conspiracy Theory

And if Tansy's comments DO imply conspiracy? Does that mean automatically therefore that he is wrong, because there are no such things?

I tend to stay away from conspiracy theories myself, on the grounds that the stuff that is upfront and considered legitimate is so bad. You don't need a lot of shadowy conspiracies to find a great deal of absolutely prosecutable government criminality at Waco, for example.

Still, even I am seriously suspicious about how the Murrah building was razed quite quickly. The ruins of that building should still be there today, just on grounds that it's a HUGE CRIME SCENE with lots of significant unanswered questions. They were awfully goddam anxious to bulldoze away a shitload of evidence.

Precisely my thinking, Al. Conspiracy theories are often loony, but sometimes they indeed are correct.

Conspiracies happen, but they are almost always found out eventually because conspiracists can't seem to keep their mouths shut forever. And they're stupid.

What evidence could possibly have been found in Okla City? I am against the death penalty so McVeigh should still be alive for eternal interrogation, but I hope you're not talking about some kind of governement cover-up. This topic makes for very strange bedfellows.

Yes, this stuff does make for strange bedfellows, and that's a significant part of the interest in these discussions.

And we'll just never know what kind of evidence was destroyed at Murrah, will we?

I'm sure there's nothing to it, though. It's not like the Clinton administration would tamper with witnesses, obstruct investigations, or sell the country out to the Chinese communists for campaign contributions.