Skip to content

RE: Open Letter to the President

November 8, 2009

I received a comment on my letter to the President (if you scroll down you’ll see it, it was my alst post) and I normally wouldn’t dedicate a whole blog post in response to a comment but I couldn’t let this one comment slide by. The comment was longer than my letter itself and this is my reaction to it. I am using simple facts. I was going to use the links provided by the person who commented by I have surpassed using Wikipedia as a reliable source. He also cited Media Matters, The Daily Show and the New York Times.  

I first want to start with the suggestion by the man who commented on my post to do a Google search for “Glenn Beck 1990”. So he was obviously hoping I’d find out that Glenn Beck raped a murdered a girl.  So I did, and wow look at all the proof I found, proving that Glenn Beck did in fact NOT rape and murder a girl. If you’ll notice this website http://gb1990.com/ “The Official Parody Site about the Controversy”, or this one http://foxnewsboycott.com/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-raped-and-murdered-a-girl-in-1990/ notice the “NOTE: This is a satire/parody, but a valid example of the fallacious reasoning Beck is known for.” Still not convinced check this link out and links supplied by the website. http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2009/09/03/internet-hoax-says-glenn-beck-raped-murdered-young-girl-in-1990.htm. I’m not sure what I was suppose to find by typing in “Glenn Beck 1990” that would convince me he is guilty of this hideous accusation. What that search did for me was reassure how vicious people can become just because they don’t agree with a person. I have a message for the creators of those sites “GET A LIFE.” If you are really going to resort to those tactics and have people believe them then you are making it okay for anyone to come up with garbage about anyone, so I think it’s your facts that need to be double checked.

On to the next point, he told me that

“in your first paragraph you state that “all you’ve seen is change”. This, is a good thing Jackie, see with change brings hope that tomorrow will be a better day for all of us.”

 I have a hard time with this because it depends on what your idea is of “good” change that determines how you feel about a situation and since this man and I obviously disagree the change Obama brings doesn’t give me hope that tomorrow will be a better day. This was followed up by his praise of the healthcare bill that passed the house last night

“The changes taking effect now on this health reform bill is historic and a lot of hard working people (both Democrats and Republicans) put their time and effort into crafting something that can change America, thus bringing a better life to everyone, and especially to those without insurance. See, that’s where the hope lays. With those people who have no way to pay for decent healthcare, do not forget about those people, they are still Americans too, no matter how poor they may be. Let us remember the preamble of the United States Constitution at this moment:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, Promote the General Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. I don’t think I have to underline the part that I am referring to.” Ah yes the common blunder of using the “promote the general welfare” clause of the constitution to prove that it is the government’s responsibility to provide everything for its people. “

Notice it says promote, not provide. Also if you’ll look at this quote from James Madison (the “Father of the Constitution” and main author of it) you’ll see the founders had a feeling it would be taken out of context.

“With respect to the two words ‘general welfare,’ I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators.”

Sounds to me like Mr. Madison knew what was going to happen today, and warned us.  And if you’d really like some proof that a government run healthcare plan is a poor idea you can first of all look to Canada or Europe, or hey, here is a crazy idea check out some of the stuff included in the one the house passed last night.

  •  Creation of a government-run health plan that experts say would result in up to 114 million Americans losing their current coverage-a clear violation of any pledge to allow individuals to keep their current health plan;
  • Nearly half a trillion dollars in tax increases on certain income filers, a majority of whom are small businesses-and $729.5 billion in tax increases overall;
  • Insurance regulations that would raise costs for nearly all Americans, particularly young Americans, and confine choice of plans to those approved by a board of bureaucrats;
  • New price controls on health insurance companies that provide perverse incentives to keep individuals sick rather than managing chronic disease, while impeding patient access to important services just because those services do not provide a direct clinical benefit;
  • Additional federal mandates that would significantly erode the flexibility currently provided to employers-and could result in firms dropping coverage;
  • Massive expansion of Medicaid to all individuals with incomes below 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Level ($33,075 for a family of four), replacing the existing private health coverage of millions with taxpayer-funded health care-and imposing tens of billions of dollars in new unfunded mandates on States;
  • Denial of health plan choice to 15 million Americans, consigning them instead to a Medicaid program riddled with bureaucratic obstacles and poor access to care, such that its own beneficiaries do not consider it “real insurance;”
  • Language opening employers operating group health plans to State law remedies and private causes of action-subjecting employers to review by 50 different State court rulings, thereby raising costs and encouraging more employers to drop their current health plans;
  • Liability “reforms” intended to ensure trial lawyers do not have their compensation reduced, rather than meaningful changes that would reduce the cost of health care by eliminating wasteful defensive medicine practices;
  • Establishment of a bureaucrat-run health Exchange that would abolish the private market for individual insurance outside the Exchange-and could evolve into a single-payer approach due to the Exchange’s ability to cannibalize existing employer plans;
  • Creation of a new government board, the “Health Benefits Advisory Committee,” that would empower federal bureaucrats to impose new mandates on individuals and insurance carriers;
  • Taxation of individuals who do not purchase a level of health coverage that meets the diktats of a board of bureaucrats-including those who cannot afford the coverage options provided;
  • New, job-killing taxes-$135 billion worth-on employers who cannot afford to provide their workers health insurance, resulting in up to 5.5 million lost jobs, according to a model developed by President Obama’s chief economic advisor;
  • Penalties as high as $500,000 on employers who make honest mistakes when filing paperwork with the government health board-which would likely dissuade businesses from continuing to provide coverage, increasing enrollment in the bureaucrat-run Exchange;
  • “Low-income” health insurance subsidies to a family of four making up to $88,200;
  • Arbitrary and harmful cuts to popular Medicare Advantage plans that would result in millions of seniors losing their current health coverage; and
  • Expanded price controls on pharmaceutical products that would discourage companies from producing life-saving breakthrough treatments.

That and more can be found at http://www.gop.gov/resources/library/documents/legdigests/111/Pelosi%20HC%20Bill%20Full%20Summary%20110309.pdf which I would strongly recommend you read through, you might change your mind. Let’s not forget the number of people who are uninsured. I’d use an actual number but the democrats have changed it so many times I’m not sure where it stands as of now. But when you get down to it the majority of the uninsured include: a)Illegal immigrants b)wealthy people who can pay for everything c)young adults who choose not to have it and d) the unemployed. So why not focus on the unemployment issue and illegal immigrant issue?

He also referred to my comment about Barack Obama changing, dismantling and controlling the constitution, in clear violation of his oath and tried to assure me everything the president has done has been constitutional. Well, I’d like to challenge that. Here is a link to a whole slew of things that have questioned the constitutionality of some things the president has done. http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2009/06/10/how-unconstitutional-is-barack-obama-let-me-count-the-ways/.

Moving on to the tea parties this summer and the words that were put in my mouth here is the commenter’s response:

 “Really? Every single “leader” of this country handled healthcare reform opponents wrongly in your eyes? Firstly, who are these “leaders” you speak of and why are you lumping the President of the United States in with them?”

I don’t recall saying every single leader I believe I said “I became deeply saddened with the way you and OTHER leaders of this country…” I guess he took the liberty of replacing OTHER with ALL. I didn’t accuse the President specifically of accusing the tea partiers of being Nazi’s or brown shirts, those were accusations from other leaders but the President did take his fair share of jabs at the protestors. I think this video from an Obama rally can be pointed not only to GOPers but also to Tea Partiers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zkoLgi0pR4 This one is in reaction to him using quotes around NEWS in Fox News this is one of my all time favorites by a news channel I’m sure the man is familiar with, MSNBC http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfGF-wI6KUw&feature=related .

Yes, I do believe the president has very little respect for our Constitution and a lot of the bills, like healthcare and cap and trade are just a power grab.

“Seriously? You think President Obama, one of the MOST powerful men in the world -already- is still trying for “power grabs” and is not trying to help the American people? But then again, like I stated in my paragraph above, if you believe President Obama has been “hatching some diabolical secret scheme” over the past 10-20 years you probably wouldn’t have gotten this far into my reply.”

A cap and trade plan that would allow the government to check and make sure your home meets energy standards sounds a bit like a power grab or a healthcare plan that allows the government to dictate which doctors you can go to sounds like a power grab.

In terms of taxes I’m glad I can agree with the guy that I don’t like taxes, however he doesn’t feel so bad once he thinks about all the great programs his taxes are going to to help fund.  Ah yes the beauty of Social Security and the Post Office and the DMV and let’s not forget all the stuff in the stimulus we are paying for: $1.7 million “for a honey bee factory” in Weslaco, TX, $475,000 to build a parking garage in Provo City, Utah, $200,000 for a tattoo removal violence outreach program that could help gang members or others shed visible signs of their past, $300,000 for the Montana World Trade Center 6. $1 million for Mormon cricket control in Utah, $650,000 for beaver management in North Carolina and Mississippi, $2.1 million for the Center for Grape Genetics in New York 3. $332,000 for the design and construction of a school sidewalk in Franklin, Texas, $2 million “for the promotion of astronomy” in Hawaii, $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa.  He also alluded to tax money going to education, mmhhmm you gotta love that your money is going to help teachers indoctrinate their students.

On the topic of Obama’s crazy advisors I never said those people shouldn’t be allowed to say those things, I realize what the first amendment is and they had every right to say those things, but that doesn’t remove that fact that what they said is ridiculous and should send a light off in the American peoples mind because I’m not exactly excited about having someone working for our President who is a big fan of Chairman Mao or Hugo Chavez, but that’s just me I guess.

 And there is the topic of fox news where once again words were put into my mouth, I don’t recall saying the White House has censored Fox News, although it wouldn’t surprise me. And believe me Fox News isn’t asking the President or aides to come on in order to help their ratings, their ratings are high enough as is, they’re practically untouchable by any other news channel. Oh, thanks for the Daily Show clip but I didn’t laugh I did however roll my eyes. But I will respond to it. I can assure you when FOX News says their shows from 4pm on are not “news” shows they didn’t mean everything reported on those shows is pure fallacy. They are the opinions of those commentators but those opinions are backed up by hours of research from a excellent team of researchers. If you look at anything said by his FCC Czar you’d see why I’m a bit worried about freedom of speech, not only on television but also radio.

Also concerning FOX News here is an article from today where the White House has told a democratic strategist “We better not see you on there again” after he appeared on FOX News http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-obama-fox7-2009nov07,0,7720786.story

The Copenhagen Treaty, yes I realize there is not a final draft yet or that the President has not said whether he will or will not sign it. However, in terms of that treaty I’m preparing for the worst but hoping for the best. I’d like to think he would not if the final draft did include a new government like the rough draft does. But to think Barack Obama, now a Nobel Peace Prize winner would not sign a treaty like that would be surprising to me. I will highly commend him if he walks away from that meeting and didn’t sign it, but I am in fact skeptical. Being a Christian and knowing what I do about end times prophecy makes me so staunch on believing he will sign it. Regardless if he does or doesn’t the idea of one world government is here to stay.

I do believe the men who founded this country were aware of our Creator, look at any of their writings and you will see that. I’m not saying every one of them believed in God, I do know that Jefferson and Franklin were deists. I’ve watched movies and learned history and history has told me that this country was founded upon a Creator.

I would like to thank the man who commented on my blog for his input, however I do disagree and I hope I’ve supplied plenty of facts to state my position. I do not regret anything I wrote in my letter nor do I take any of it back.

Advertisements
34 Comments leave one →
  1. November 9, 2009 1:44 am

    I want to first of all congratulate you on a well thought out letter and response to whoever the respondent was. Your points were very clear and as usual those of the respondent were about as clear as the lies we so often have become accustom to with this administration and the Democrats controlling Congress. Keep up the good fight and hopefully we’ll get our country back in the hands of common sense conservatism with less government and real hope for future generations.

    God Bless You!
    Jimmy McIver
    Brenham, Texas

  2. November 10, 2009 12:27 am

    Great points … Did not know about some of those stimulus projects!

  3. Robert C Parker permalink
    November 10, 2009 5:27 am

    Wow very good. Keep filling the Internet with truth. It will combat the lies. I am glad your on my side!!

    Robert

  4. November 19, 2009 11:52 pm

    Jackie,

    Nicely done. I would have laid into that guy so much he would have been bleeding out his ass for months and his mother would never look at him again. Well done in keeping it cool.

    Just gotta say this, that X something dude cracked me up, his arguments were so ridiculous. My favorite:

    “in your first paragraph you state that “all you’ve seen is change”. This, is a good thing Jackie, see with change brings hope that tomorrow will be a better day for all of us.”

    Mr. X, if I said I would “change” stuff and than began killing every radical left winged liberal with a communist agenda, although that would be very good for this country, it would not be good change for you because it only brings the hope for you that your death would be quick, and it wouldn’t.

    Again nicely done Jackie.

    -Ian

  5. Kevin permalink
    November 20, 2009 3:30 pm

    You are great! Don’t worry about getting tricked like that. It is what the liberal media does. You are only 17, even Tiger Woods had more to learn at that age.

    Norah might fake a smile, but she is an ugly viper.

    I recommend reading Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose. Also good is americanthinker.com and nationalreview.com.

    By the way, homosexuality is a choice. There is no gay gene. Look at Anne Heche. Gays can get married but they just have to fall in love with and marry someone of the opposite sex. I might love my pet, but I shouldn’t marry it. Men need women and women need men. The Bible doesn’t explain this very well, but it is, as usual, correct. I bring this up because it is one of the biggest social issues that your generation will have to deal with.

  6. November 21, 2009 5:31 am

    Good to here about your encounter with Sarah, and glad to know you got your book signed. As far as your encounter with the elite media goes, well, that’s who they are. Not only do they denigrate Sarah, but they seek to do the same to her fans. I heard the shout-out Rush gave you today and sent them an email telling them you were trying to call the show. I know you didn’t get through now but I encourage you to try again Monday. I gave them your twitter name and blog URL as well. Thanks for your writings! They give me hope that not all young people such as yourself are not falling for the blatant indoctrination the schools and media are trying to force on your generation. You’re a great patriot and also a worthy follow on twitter.

    TNJim on twitter and RedState.

  7. John Hitchcock permalink
    November 21, 2009 12:04 pm

    You have a lot more class and reasoned style than I. You provide a lot of food for thought for many people. There is no doubt your “15 minutes of fame” will have a lot of residual effect, and your sturdy head on your shoulders will bear you through it all. Just consider yourself a modern-day Esther. 🙂

  8. November 22, 2009 4:28 am

    Hot Damn!

    With young women like you coming up in the ranks of Conservatism Sister Sarah had better watch her back, because she’s got some strong competition coming in the decades ahead. ;-D

    I’ve read your blog, and am expremely impressed.

    I was interested in the issues of the day when I was your age, and wish the Internet & Blogging had been around way back in the “Olden Days” of the 70’s and 80’s.

    I might have stayed a Conservative, and not took a decade long detour into Clintonistaism in the 90’s. ;-D

    On my current personal blog I don’t blog issues like I did earlier this decade, but I DO have a list of Conservative Links I call Food for Thought that I hope visitors to my blog choose to read of their own free will.

    Young lady, you will be added to that list, and I sincely hope all the encouragement, and support you have been getting encourages you to keep this blog up, and continue to follow your passion for the issues, and getting involved in fighting the good fight throught expressing of ones thoughts and ideas.

  9. SallyW permalink
    November 22, 2009 8:35 pm

    Well, I’d call that one first class act smack down on all the lame (backed up by wiki, J Stewart and other liberal talking points) responses in X guy’s comment. I thot he was doing a comedy routine by his comment and now that you’ve shown the light of truth on his nonsense, you’ve proven him to be a fool. One who only knows how to follow the lib points without any reality behind them. It’s his comfort zone tho… Yikes!! All that warm and fuzzy stuff… LOL
    You, Young Lady, are a true Patriot!!

  10. Citizen Jerry permalink
    November 22, 2009 10:41 pm

    Jackie,

    You’ve become somewhat of a national celebrity, for what it’s worth, with your impressive response to the smug, arrogant and condescending Norah. But that’s standard equipment for leftists.

    My only quibble re: your open letter is whether Franklin and Jefferson were deists. A deist sees God as creating the universe, then leaving it to its own devices without His further involvement.

    But speaking before the Continental Convention, Franklin said, “… the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth — that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?”

    Thank you for your Christian witness in tumultuous times like this. For now, we need to continue praying that God will deliver us from evil and keep us safe from those whose plan is to enslave us to generations of debt and government dependence.

    Stay strong ’til freedom dawns.

  11. Mr Blifil permalink
    November 23, 2009 5:25 am

    “Mr. X, if I said I would “change” stuff and than began killing every radical left winged liberal with a communist agenda, although that would be very good for this country, it would not be good change for you because it only brings the hope for you that your death would be quick, and it wouldn’t.”

    Stay classy Jackie. Nice group of friends you have here. It would be too bad if any future violent acts could be tied to the commenting activity on your blog. I’d hate for you to have to go through the trial of such negative attention.

  12. November 23, 2009 5:23 pm

    It seems you have your trackbacks and pingbacks turned off or something. I just wrote an article on my site and cross-posted it on CSPT where I quoted Franklin and linked to here.

    As I said in my article, you are well-researched and much more respectful than am I. And, for the record, more than just teens need to read your words. Yes, of course teens need to read your words as they (and you) will soon be responsible for our future; but parents of teens and parents of adults need to read your words and your research as well.

    Keep your light strong, “Esther”.

  13. Frances permalink
    November 23, 2009 10:03 pm

    I’m sorry, gop.gov is not a reliable source for facts. Get yourself some apolitical source material.

    Then again, I must be the fool who just spent 10 minutes reading the political and economic opinions of a child (which I must assume are being from the RNC and Fox news, the talking points are so similar). As St. Paul says, “When I was a child, I used to talk as a child, think as a child, reason as a child; when I became a man, I put aside childish things.”

    • November 25, 2009 4:47 am

      Frances, would you suggest the apolitical KOS or the apolitical Huffington Puffington Post, or the apolitical LA Times (that Patterico rightly calls the “dog trainer”), or the apolitical NY Times, or the apolitical MSNBC?

      At 17, this young lady has already put away childish thinking. Apparently you have not.

  14. November 24, 2009 9:16 am

    Jackie:
    You go girl!!! Saw your ambush on another blog and came over to console and encourage you…. I didn’t realize how “big” this thing got for you…. I’m glad to see you have found a lot of encouragement!!

    Isn’t it amazing how God just hands us opportunities when we least expect them? The key is being ready… and you were!!! KUDOS!

    S

  15. Matt permalink
    November 24, 2009 4:53 pm

    Just wanted to make a comment on your criticism of the health care plan when you say “And if you’d really like some proof that a government run healthcare plan is a poor idea you can first of all look to Canada or Europe, or hey, here is a crazy idea check out some of the stuff included in the one the house passed last night.” First of all – government-run healthcare works quite well in most of Europe. I dont know where people are getting the idea that its not working.

    For example, I’m an American working in France. As an employee of a French company, I’m entitled to the French national healthcare system. What does this mean? Pretty much any procedure I have done is covered by the gov’t health care at 70%. Prescriptions are covered at a variable rate, but its generally pretty high. If I want additional coverage, there are plenty of private supplemental insurance companies to choose from that cover above and beyond the national system. Just as a point of comparison, I pay less per paycheck here for the public system than I did working in the US for a private system, and the coverage here is much much better.

    An article from BusinessWeek a few years ago summarizes the French system pretty well http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_28/b4042070.htm (see also the Wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_in_France).

    For a different style of gov’t health care, see Switzerland’s sytem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Switzerland), which is essentially a government regulated system of private non-profits providing insurance.

    • November 25, 2009 4:49 am

      Matt, you do need to read before you comment. Jackie already (rightly) said she has grown beyond using wiki as a credible source. Perhaps you could grow beyond that, too, someday. Just sayin’.

      • Matt permalink
        November 25, 2009 8:41 am

        Can you provide any reasoning why wikipedia is not a credible source? Both articles I’ve posted are merely summaries of facts and statistics, properly cited. I’d point you to the French government website, but I’m sure you wouldn’t read that either since its 1) in French and 2) a government website, and therefore probably ‘biased’ in your mind.

        Could you provide me with a list of pre-approved sources I can use when citing facts? It would be helpful to me in future discussions to know if, for example, things from Washington Post are allowed this week or not.

      • November 25, 2009 8:50 am

        Matt, the recent Rush Limbaugh kerfuffle where the source of his supposed inflamatory statements was a book that cited a wiki that was later cleansed where the wiki later cited the book comes to mind. I can go on wiki and make an entry that all people named Matt are known heroin users and then come here and cite that wiki as proof of something.

        Beyond that, I wrote an article about wiki a while back which should interest you. Or not. You decide.

      • November 25, 2009 8:53 am

        And, Matt, try writing a 20-page college research paper and filling it with wiki cites. See what that does for your grade. Just sayin’.

      • Matt permalink
        November 25, 2009 9:05 am

        Thats a fallacy of composition: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/composition.html Claiming Wikipedia is biased/wrong on 2 articles does not invalidate the whole thing. Thats like finding a spelling mistake in a dictionary and then claiming the entire dictionary is wrong. It doesnt logically follow, unless a clear systematic bias can be shown.

        In general, one must read with a critical mind – whether its Fox News, NY Times, Wikipedia, etc. Blindly following any one source (or sources on a single side of an issue) is a recipe for disaster. Which is why in my original post, I cited Business Week and Wikipedia in reference to the French healthcare system.

      • Matt permalink
        November 25, 2009 9:11 am

        I’m not writing a 20-page research paper here. If I was, the sources I’d be citing wouldn’t be easily accessible by people on this forum, because they’d either be behind a paywall somewhere, or a hardcopy resource in my local library. Things on the internet are always subject to change, hence they’re not good sources for a research paper. However, for the purposes of an online discussion, things like Wikipedia are necessary to give a general background on a subject, and to open up further discussion.

        Anyway, regarding my original post on French healthcare, here is the French Assurance Maladie webpage, which you can read at your leisure http://www.ameli.fr/

      • November 25, 2009 9:27 am

        First off, Matt, don’t give me this “firewall” lame excuse. If you cite a peer-reviewed article, and properly cite it, it can be easily enough found without paying money. So that argument is DOA.

        Second, your “hardcopy” excuse is also DOA unless you referenced a book that was printed in singular form, which would effectively kill your reference from the get-go.

        Third, no JR or SR year HS English teacher will accept wiki as a credible source, for reasons I pointed out, your focus on the two examples of those reasons notwithstanding.

        You’re not talking to someone without college exp here, kiddo. You’re talking to someone who has experienced education from both sides of the desk. Do try harder next time.

      • Matt permalink
        November 25, 2009 9:49 am

        Umm, I believe thats what I said. Focus on reading what I wrote. Here, let me break it down for you.

        For research papers: internet sources = bad; hardcopy/journal = good.

        For internet discussion: internet sources = useful; hardcopy/journal = not as useful.

        (For your reference, this is an internet discussion.)

        As for paywalls, they’re very common for online journal resources. For example, can you find a copy of this paper without paying?

        Examination of Diffusion Modeling Using Zero-Mean-Shear Turbulence
        A. G. Straatman, ; G. D. Stubley, ; G. D. Raithby,
        AIAA Journal 1998
        0001-1452 vol.36 no.6 (929-935)
        doi: 10.2514/2.497

      • November 25, 2009 9:53 am

        Internet sources for research papers != bad.
        Hardcopy sources for research papers != good.

        Other than those two falsehoods I just corrected, what else did you say?

      • November 25, 2009 9:56 am

        Oh, and Matt, you should check this out.

      • Matt permalink
        November 25, 2009 10:04 am

        Care to tell me which one of those google links contains the full text? Or did you just post that without looking at any of the results?

        Just to keep you honest, whats the last sentence of the Discussion section?

      • November 25, 2009 10:13 am

        Matt, I already showed you that you can get the stuff without paying for it. I already told you internet citatations != bad and hardcopy citations != good. I already told you I sat on both sides of the desk.

        Do play your sophomoric games with… wait for it… freshmen.

      • Matt permalink
        November 25, 2009 10:17 am

        Ok, since you cant answer a simple question, guess its time to stop feeding the troll. Have fun in your echo chamber.

      • November 25, 2009 10:18 am

        Does that mean you’re leaving, troll?

  16. Citizen Jerry permalink
    November 25, 2009 2:51 am

    Sorry Frances, but maybe next time you can contribute something that actually advances the discussion. Otherwise, you’re just embarrassing yourself with your condescending attitude.

Trackbacks

  1. A Quote To Remember For You ‘General Welfare’ Leftists « Truth Before Dishonor
  2. Common Sense Political Thought » Blog Archive » A Quote To Remember For You ‘General Welfare’ Leftists
  3. Considering Preambles « Truth Before Dishonor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: