I do not own a firearm. I don’t. Yet, I believe the 2nd Amendment to be essential to the maintenance of our rights as guaranteed by the Constitution. It is paramount that we, as Americans, retain our right to bear arms in order to fulfill the Liberties espoused in the Declaration of Independence. Without the right to bear arms, we are at the mercy of the Federal, State and Local Governments.
And I do not trust any of them. These institutions are ever grasping of our prerogatives. They are eternally growing. Each time they exceed their authority and we do nothing, they reach out for more and more. The attempt of governments in the United States to control the lives of ordinary citizens everyday lives is a menace to our freedom. Our freedom is endangered.
Do we need the right to bear arms? I think so. I believe we do. With every fiber of my free being, I believe that the right to bear arms is the last line between American Liberty and despotism.
Our right to bear arms protects us against predators such as these:
Yes, that is Anthony Holder smiling at Bill Clinton.
Can there be any clearer proof that the liberal agenda is complete abolition of the 2nd Amendment Rights of American Citizens?
I suppose if you need more proof, you’re either a liberal and in on the agenda, stupid or too lazy to fight for your own rights.
“If I could have banned them all – ‘Mr. and Mrs. America turn in your guns’ – I would have!”
But such comparisons are not easy to dismiss. Lenin stated “One man with a gun can control 100 without one.” Stalin, his successor declared, “If the opposition disarms, well and good. If it refuses to disarm, we shall disarm it ourselves.” When the Kulaks refused, Stalin instituted his own “executive order,” and they were helpless as the state mowed them down.
It’s probably something that millions of others have pondered.
Why do we allow politicians to lie to us?
Time after time politicians look us in the eye. In person. On national TV. They look at us. They calculate. That calculation includes the prediction that come election day, we, the American public, will forget and forgive.
Sequestration did not originate with the White House.
I did not have sexual relations with that woman.
It seems that no President in my life time has been truthful with the American Public. They take for granted that we will forgive them their trespasses.
Why? Why do we forgive them when they constantly lie to us.
The Patriot Act and Obamacare are two examples of Stalinistic BIG LIES that have forever altered the lives of millions of American citizens. The War on Drugs has ruined lives in the multitudes. Yet, it is based upon a carefully packaged set of lies designed wholly and from the outset to deceive the American public.
The office of the President and the various offices of Congress are supposed to be servants of the people. How can these people serve us if they feel that they must constantly lie to us. FOR OUR OWN GOOD! As if we are all too stupid to understand.
Now, it is a given that some of us are too ignorant. Too superstitious. Too uneducated. By and large, this is a product of the systems emplaced by that very Congress and the lesser State Congresses.
No Child Left Behind is an example of the heinous programs set upon us by the Federal Government when it has usurped the power of the States and encroached upon the power of the people. This worthless act nearly guarantees that children will, educationally speaking, be left behind. It forces teachers and administrators to teach to a test. It stifles learning and critical thinking. It solved nothing but, instead, added a new layer of bureaucracy upon many more stale layers of bureaucracy that had been laid in the decades preceding.
No Child Left Behind is a lie.
VAWA is another lie. The Violence Against Women Act originated by Bill Clinton. It is a bill crafted to give monies to certain organizations that support the Democratic National Party. It is a terrible example of cronyism and the spoils system. It solves nothing and adds layers of bureaucracy to a bureaucracy laden system. It inculcates a notion of guilty until proven innocent into our “justice” system. Under this bill, thousands are treated as if they are guilty, they’re rights abused simply because a woman accuses a man. That man must not be found guilty to have his life destroyed. If the man is found to be innocent of the charges arrayed against him, it is too late. He has already been violated.
This is VAWA. This is Bill Clinton and Barack Obama’s vision of justice. Guilty until proven innocent. It is almost Islamic in it’s outlook. Shariah law writ large upon the American justice system.
If a woman becomes angered at a man because he cheated on her or if they argue over finances, that woman can scream “domestic abuse.” Her victim, for he is a victim in these cases, is forever stained and forever scarred by the system put in place by VAWA. I have seen it in action. This is no theory. A woman beats a man. That man defends himself merely by holding up his arms and then grabbing the woman to stop her from hitting him with a whiskey bottle. The police are called in. The man is taken away in hand cuffs for defending himself. The woman is left free to terrorize others.
In that case and others like it, the police apologized repeatedly to the man. “We have no choice. In cases of domestic abuse, we must take the man into custody.”
This man was then demonized by others who did not know the truth.
The pity of it was that he loved her and could not bring himself to do the right thing and leave her.
He was arrested several times over the course of two years until he was finally able to make the decision to leave her.
They had children. The courts, not being able to fully believe that a man could be a victim and that the woman could be the perpetrator, awarded full custody to the alcoholic mother.
This is VAWA in action.
This is the BIG LIE that the Left tells us when they pass laws such as VAWA.
Then they wonder why people are against such egregious acts in defense of “victims.”
The left has victimitis. They feel that the only cure is more government or, rather, more Federal Government.
Which leads us to another political lie told by both Republicans and Democrats. They rip the Constitution to threads and tell us that it is for our own good. They usurp powers from the State in the name of Security, Health and Welfare.
Ronald Reagan was the Great Communicator. He was also a great liar. When he wanted the States to pass legislation placing the age of consumption of Alcohol to 21 from 18 years, Reagan pushed the States to pass those laws. This was in keeping with his State’s Rights Small Government stance.
However, what he did not advertise was that he bullied the States into passing his legislation. Men can be sent off to war at age 18. However, they are not to be trusted with the consumption of alcohol. This was a Reagan policy. The man of the people.
In order to force the State Legislatures to pass his Alcohol Consumption law, Reagan threatened to withhold interstate highway funds from all States that did not pass his law.
Reagan. Not so States Rights oriented when he wanted to get his way. The way of the tyrant. The spoiled brat who will get his way or else.
Reagan was also the author of the Iran-Contra Affair. I find it hard to believe that a President did not know of a program of such possible detriment to his administration. I believe that Reagan lied here as well. Bush probably lied about it as well. They let Ollie North be their fall guy and they paid him well for it.
There are more examples of our government and their perpetual lies. All Presidents lie to us. Regardless of their party affiliation. Only fools believe that one party is more or less guilty than the other.
The question is: When will be begin to hold these Parties and their Candidates accountable for their words and deeds?
I believe that Presidents should be liable for their actions up to their deaths. When scandals arise, apolitical action should be taken. If George Bush knowingly lied about WMD, let him be judged. If Obama lied about Benghazi or his Mexican Drug Gun deals, let him pay the price. Let them all be judged.
We need to set a precedent.
The precedent needs to be set for the good of the country. Not for the good of a political party.
Presidential ties to organizations such as Goldman Sachs should be carefully investigated. Any and all Presidents with too close ties to Goldman Sachs and who have profited off of their scandalous deals and their corruption should be tried in open hearing before the public.
A message needs to be sent. We will no longer excuse your lies. Give us the truth or we will give you your just desserts.
Wishful thinking, I know. The general public is addicted to US Weekly, the Kardashians, The Voice and Survivor.
What is the health of the Republic compared to being brainlessly entertained by celebrities?
America! You’ve been had. You had a choice between Jim Jones and Jim Bakker. You chose between a guy who wants you to drink the Kool Aid and blindly follow him to the abyss and a guy who wanted to bilk you out of your money and to follow blindly like a sheep off the cliff.
You chose to drink the Kool Aid. Don’t whine later. Just drink the Kool Aid and pass away into the great darkness.
I’m standing by to pick up some pieces.
The poor will still be poor but a little more dependent. The Rich are still going to get richer. Though, they’ll hide it better as you take little notice having drank deeply of the cool waters offered by your Cult Leader.
Four more years of the World losing respect and our enemies being emboldened.
As the Middle East burns, America desires cupcakes and free government cheese and crackers.
This guarantees a future war which isn’t all that bad. The war[s] will kill off some of the excess population that is dragging the planet and the people down.
Look for more violence in the coming years while Obama stands by and apologizes for America’s culpability in the genesis of said violence.
Speaking of politics, there is no real intelligent choice. Obama has some good and some bad points. Same with Romney. Both, though, are on the side of despotism and against real empowerment of the people. Both are secretive and, despite their sly sentiments and outright lies, are less transparent than a California mudslide.
There is no intelligent choice in this election and, with few exceptions (Lincoln, Madison, possibly TR), there probably hasn’t been one since Thomas Jefferson ran against Adams.
The people who should run will not run because they will not be savaged by the masses and the uber-idiotic professional politicians. No one with real integrity will touch American politics with a ten foot pole and full haz-mat suit.
And it’s our own fault. We created this.
I’d vote for the corpse of Andrew Jackson before I’d waste my time voting for one of the carbon copied whores running for President in this election cycle.
Obama has either not read the Qu’ran or:
1. He is a Muslim.
2. He is a Muslim Dhimmi.
3. He’s a complete apologist, appeasement addict and a moron.
There is no way to treat with radicals like the Muslim Brotherhood. They are the religious equivalent of the Red Bolsheviks in Russia of the 1920s. They have one goal. Sucker everyone into letting them get their way. The blood will be on the
The Muslim Brotherhood should be hunted down and exterminated. Anything else is cowardice and self sabotage.
The election is coming. Vote for El Presidente of the United States of America.
A. A man who hates you if you get off of your ass and work it until you become successful. He’ll take your money from you unless you can become as good as he is at hiding your assets. He’ll use that money to buy votes from the poor and disenfranchised, illegal immigrants, Mexican/Texan drug lords and Big Oil and Big Government.
B. A man who hates you if you try to get off of your ass and demand to be paid a fair wage for your hard labors. Instead, he thinks that you should give your money away in taxes to Big Business, the Military Industrial Complex and he wants to continue to outsource all jobs until Americans can’t buy jack shit. Then he and his cronies will move out of the country as it falls apart. He also wants to give your money to the poor and disenfranchised because he needs their votes, too. He wants to convert you to an archaic religion “of love” that he himself doesn’t practice. He supports Big Business and the War on Drugs (it’s profitable). He supports sending people to prison longer for possession of a few bags of marijuana than murder. He’s also in the bag with Mexican/Texan drug lords and he wants to keep America addicted to the other drug called Black Gold. You don’t smoke that, though. You put it in your car and support Wahhabi terrorists.
They’re both dickheads and you shouldn’t vote for either of them. But! You will.
Why? Because you’re stupid.
I guess Obama knows what’s best for us. We should all bow down to his Lordship and take the Hope and Change that being ramrodded up our collective rears.
Can you believe this? After the largest online protest in history, the Obama administration is still voicing support for SOPA.
We promised to ask for your help if SOPA returned. We’re asking now. This kind of backtracking demands a strong, fast response. We’re running a petition to demand that Obama drop all support for internet censorship.
Our goal? Get more signatures than the top petition on whitehouse.gov — 151,000 signatures. Tell Obama to promise: “I will never advance legislation that blocks websites or disconnects Americans’ internet access.”
What is the White House working on exactly? Just the other day, the administration sent a letter to Congress to demonstrate their support for new internet censorship legislation. A few weeks ago, the White House struck a deal to give corporations private powers to shut down your internet connection (after “six strikes” without due process or judicial review), completely in secret.
Obama’s internet would let private companies block sites and turn off our web connections. Blocking websites censors free speech, hurts jobs, and breaks the internet. These are tactics used by totalitarian governments and we believe they’re never ok.
Let’s get more signatures than any petition on whitehouse.gov.
As Wired noted*, “The White House did say that it wouldn’t endorse a bill that endangers freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risks, or negatively affects the DNS system. On the other hand, it says elsewhere that “combating online infringement” — not protecting free speech — is a governmental priority “of the highest order.” What about free speech, Obama?
Sign the petition now, then share it to keep the internet strong. Our friends need to know where the President is currently standing on SOPA.
We couldn’t have stopped SOPA and PIPA without you and all of your friends! And we can’t do it without you now. Let’s make sure SOPA 2.0 never gets written.
Tiffiniy, Zak, Fight for the Future!
Barack Obama is merely continuing the erosion of American Liberty as begun by Lincoln during the War between the States and continued by FDR during World War II.
Someone please tell me the difference between Bush and Obama. I see none.
No, I don’t think that to be the case. It’s not really about Islam generally speaking.
It’s more complicated than that.
Islam. Muslims. They’re not bad folks and many of them are damn fine people.
The problem that we won’t face is the Nejd.
Saudi Arabia owns it and has BLACK GOLD.
Also, the official religion of Saudi Arabia is the same form of Islam from which sprang all of the Fundamentalist Thugs who are terrorists. Saudi Arabia is a State Sponsor of Terrorism.
BUT because they have oil. It’s the truth that shall remain unspoken.
It is the evil with no name.
To speak it’s name is to reveal the truth.
It’s easier to keep the public ignorant and let a few hundred or a few thousand die at a time and keep the pipe line open to “cheap” oil.
What’s a few thousand civilians to Big Business and Big Government. Most of the ones who die don’t pay taxes or pay negligible taxes anyway. They don’t matter.
Saudi Arabia is the monster. Wahhabism is their little secret Dr. Frankenstein. Islamic Fundamentalism is the monster escaped from it’s dungeon.
It’s escaped before and the Muslims themselves went in and killed thousands of them in the Nejd while the Brits killed thousand more in the NWFP and the FATA in Central Asia.
Today, though, we choose to ignore the belly of the beast and instead, we “combat” the excretions.
Thousands, no, hundreds of thousands have died in the past 10 years.
To keep that Saudi oil pipeline open.
If Obama’s Mother was a US citizen, then it matters not one iota where Obama was born.
Was his Mother not born in the US?
What does the Constitution state?
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.
The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps. The Constitution authorizes the Congress to do create clarifying legislation in Section 5 of the 14th Amendment; the Constitution, in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 4, also allows the Congress to create law regarding naturalization, which includes citizenship.
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”
- Anyone born inside the United States *
- Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe
- Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
- Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
- Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
- Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
- A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law — the person must be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.
Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402), Alaska (8 USC 1404), Hawaii (8 USC 1405), the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406), and Guam (8 USC 1407). Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date, and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date. For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952). Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States. Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.
The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama. In 8 USC 1403, the law states that anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen, was “declared” to be a United States citizen. Note that the terms “natural-born” or “citizen at birth” are missing from this section.
Now, can we please move to something real.
Like perhaps the fact that he is an incompetent ass.
I’ve got a friend who was born in Japan. His pops is American. His mother is Japanese. He married a Thai woman. His child was born in Bangkok. That child is still an American citizen.
I know a guy from the Army. He is Jewish and was born in Israel to an American father and an Israeli mother. He’s still an American.
I dated a gal in the early 90s. She was born in Korea. Lived there most of her life. Her father was a civilian working in Seoul. Her mother is a Korean. The girl is still an American citizen.
So what if Obama was not born in Hawaii or inside the United States. His Mother is an American. He is an American.
What’s the big deal?
Clearly, his mother was a US citizen. His maternal Grandparents are US citizens.
What is the importance of the Birth Certificate? He is clearly a US citizen by virtue of his Mothers lineage. It matters not what his absentee daddy did or did not do. It matters not that or if he was raised in Indonesia. It matters not that his step father lied on a school enrollment to get cheaper tuition or whatever.
I don’t even care that he may or may not have been schooled in a madrassah. He was born much to early to be some sort of Muslim Manchurian candidate. The huge rift between the Muslim world and the US did not occur until the years ’67 and ’73. Obama is a little older than 42 or 43. The Manchurian Candidate seems so far fetched as to be insane. Especially in light of the fact that he doesn’t truly seem to understand Islam or Muslims. At least, not from what I can tell.
Obviously (to me), if Obama is Muslim, he’s still not Muslim enough to understand Muslims or Islam. The guy is too stupid, clueless and ridiculous to have an understanding of much of anything if you ask me.
I’ve never understood this birth certificate hype.
Unless his mother’s family is in cahoots and has been for decades, he’s an American citizen.
The guy is arrogant. He’s a puffed up empty suit. He’s an idiot. He’s Captain Kick Ass. He’s a lipsticked pig on a stick. He’s a tool. That doesn’t make him an alien. It’s makes him a Liberal.
(June 5) — Women in Saudi Arabia should give their breast milk to male colleagues and acquaintances in order to avoid breaking strict Islamic law forbidding mixing between the sexes, two powerful Saudi clerics have said. They are at odds, however, over precisely how the milk should be conveyed.
A fatwa issued recently about adult breast-feeding to establish “maternal relations” and preclude the possibility of sexual contact has resulted in a week’s worth of newspaper headlines in Saudi Arabia. Some have found the debate so bizarre that they’re calling for stricter regulations about how and when fatwas should be issued.
Sheikh Al Obeikan, an adviser to the royal court and consultant to the Ministry of Justice, set off a firestorm of controversy recently when he said on TV that women who come into regular contact with men who aren’t related to them ought to give them their breast milk so they will be considered relatives.
“The man should take the milk, but not directly from the breast of the woman,” Al Obeikan said, according to Gulf News. “He should drink it and then becomes a relative of the family, a fact that allows him to come in contact with the women without breaking Islam’s rules about mixing.”
Obeikan said the fatwa applied to men who live in the same house or come into contact with women on a regular basis, except for drivers.
Al Obeikan, who made the statement after being asked on TV about a 2007 fatwa issued by an Egyptian scholar about adult breast-feeding, said that the breast milk ought to be pumped out and given to men in a glass.
But his remarks were followed by an announcement by another high-profile sheik, Abi Ishaq Al Huwaini, who said that men should suckle the breast milk directly from a woman’s breast.
Shortly after the two sheiks weighed in on the matter, a bus driver in the country’s Eastern Region reportedly told one of the female teachers whom he drives regularly that he wanted to suckle milk from her breast. The teacher has threaten to file a lawsuit against him.
The fatwa stems from the tenets of the strict Wahhabi version of Islam that governs modern Saudi Arabia and forbids women from mixing with men who are not relatives. They are also not allowed to vote, drive or even leave the country without the consent of a male “guardian.”
Under Islamic law, women are encouraged to breast-feed their children until the age of 2. It is not uncommon for sisters, for example, to breast-feed their nephews so they and their daughters will not have to cover their faces in front of them later in life. The custom is called being a “breast milk sibling.”
In another bizarre fatwa (ruling) by the Wahhabi Clerics of that insane religion from the Nejd, a group of Saudi Clerics has stated that men who frequently interact with women from outside of their family should drink the breast milk of said women in order to become their “siblings.”
Why make rules or even follow the Qu’ran if they are going to go to such lengths to get around them. The Saudi Kings and Princes [supposedly] follow Islam while they are in the Kingdom. When they depart the sacred land of Arabia, these Princes do as they please. The rules apparently only apply while they are on sacred Saudi soil.
I know that while I was in Kuwait several Filipino gals were kidnapped, raped, murdered and then deposited in the desert. The desert tells no tales. Another “custom” of these holy men of Arabia is to lure young Filipino and other Asian gals into one of the desert Kingdoms with the lure of employment. Come to Kuwait or Saudi Arabia or one of the UAE countries to become a maid, an aux pair or run a restaurant. Once the girls arrive, the sponsor takes her passport. The first thing that takes place is that the girl is raped and beaten. She no longer is in possession of her passport. This is in the possession of her sponsor. She has no recourse. She can’t complain to the police. They’ll not believe her. Especially as the rules of Sharee’ah are in force. She needs witnesses. If she claims rape, yet, has no witnesses, she’s guilty of adultery or fornication or crimes against chastity. She’ll be judged against and punished harshly. Up to and including beatings, canings, lashes and death.
I guess now, though, all they have to do is give up a little breast milk and their siblings.
Hey! Then everything is A-OK.
Ain’t that grand.
And that’s Islam in a nutshell.
Power in the name of religion, Allah, Mohammad.
The Wahhabis need to be ended. Period.
Without Wahhabism, Islam could be a decent religion. Possibly have a renaissance era that brings it into an era of peace and out of it’s essence of death, violence and war.
Any person in the West who is mad enough or stupid enough to justify or rationalize this lunacy should be deported and made to live in Saudi Arabia in the Nejd.
Air drop their ridiculous selves into the Nejd and let them fend for themselves. That’s a perfect punishment for child molestors, rapists and murderers, too. Hell, perhaps we could send our politicians there, too. Let’s make Obama the first example of Islamic “Justice.”
The two men were delivering bread to her.
Is this the Mercy of Allah?
(CNN) — A Saudi Arabian court has sentenced a 75-year-old Syrian woman to 40 lashes, four months imprisonment and deportation from the kingdom for having two unrelated men in her house, according to local media reports.
According to the Saudi daily newspaper Al-Watan, troubles for the woman, Khamisa Mohammed Sawadi, began last year when a member of the religious police entered her house in the city of Al-Chamli and found her with two unrelated men, “Fahd” and “Hadian.”
Fahd told the policeman he had the right to be there, because Sawadi had breast-fed him as a baby and was therefore considered to be a son to her in Islam, according to Al-Watan. Fahd, 24, added that his friend Hadian was escorting him as he delivered bread for the elderly woman. The policeman then arrested both men.
Saudi Arabia follows a strict interpretation of Islam called Wahhabism and punishes unrelated men and women who are caught mingling.
The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice, feared by many Saudis, is made up of several thousand religious policemen charged with duties such as enforcing dress codes, prayer times and segregation of the sexes. Under Saudi law, women face many restrictions, including a strict dress code and a ban on driving. Women also need to have a man’s permission to travel.
Good Old Islamic Justice of Saudi Arabia. It’s gotta make Muslims all over the world so proud.
This “culture” needs to be eradicated. The stain of this belief needs to be removed from the world.
Someone please explain to me how the Saudis are different from the taliban? I’ll give you a hint. They’re not. The only real difference is that Saudi Arabia has oil. Therefore, no one cares that they are savage animals with no morals. No one cares for their people or that their brand of Islam is exactly that which was espoused and enacted by the Taliban. No one cares that Saudi Arabia and their rulers practice the exact same brand of Islam as Osama bin Laden and his cronies in al Qaeda.
Saudi Arabia is one of the greatest enemies of freedom and liberty extant in the world. They are second only to Iran and their dogs in hizbollah, Quds force and Revolutionary Guards.
Yet, they are our “allies.”
Continuing to do business with Saudi Arabia is like handing your enemy a loaded gun, pointing it at your heart and assisting said enemy in pulling the trigger. It is insanity.
“It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.”
“If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is it that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race?”