6 U.S. conundrums the Left can’t answer

The following list was sent to me by a friend via email –I suppose once again I’ll be attacked by the ravenous progressive socialist Left because it’s an “anonymous source” — whatever, chuckleheads.

Anyway, in a very short and succinct manner it caused me to ponder messaging. Liberal progressives do such a fantastic job lying to the American people — period.

Conservatives need a simple message that enables the sound bite mentality of the American electorate to realize they are being fed a hearty helping of bovine excrement. The political, media, and entertainment elite are pulling the wool over the eyes of everyday hard working Americans — and for what purpose? Their own selfish gain and interest.

Consider the following, which some of may have seen already. It is nevertheless quite profound.

The word conundrum is defined as a complex problem that is often puzzling or confusing. Here are six conundrums of our contemporary United States of America:

1. America is capitalist and greedy – yet almost half of the population is subsidized.

2. Half of the population is subsidized – yet they think they are victims.

3. They think they are victims – yet their representatives run the government.

4. Their representatives run the government – yet the poor keep getting poorer.

5. The poor keep getting poorer – yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.

6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about – yet politicians (mostly progressive socialists) claim they want America to become more like those other countries.

And consider these following three observations about the direction of our current government and cultural environment:

1. We are advised not to judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are admonished to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works, as we see the liberal progressives already jumping on the tragedy from Santa Barbara California. So what about the three victims who were stabbed to death, should we ban knives?

2. We constantly hear about how Social Security is running out of money. How come we never hear about welfare or food stamps on the verge of running out of money? Maybe the first group “worked for” their money, but the second didn’t. It is a simple case of printing money for political bribery and extortion.

3. Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, giving no pay raises for our military and cutting our forces to a level lower than before WWII, but are expanding and increasing the benefits to illegal aliens? It is all about pandering for votes – and who cares about national security or veterans dying at the hands of their own Veterans Administration?

Yesterday afternoon, after a meeting at the Capitol Hill Club, I took the METRO over to the Eastern Market station where I was craving some home-style cooking from Ted’s Bulletin on 8th Street. As I came up the escalator I saw a young black man being held by D.C. Police. As I began to walk away, I got a shout out from a METRO maintenance truck where three black men were sitting — they recognized me.

I walked over and had an awesome chat using the scene before us as a vehicle to talk about “old school” values. You see, they get it — even the one fella who was from Liberia. They feel the cultural shift, and as we talked there was not one dissenting comment as we all agreed that the foundation of America, and especially our black community, is eroding.

Truth prevails, we just have to have the courage to stand upon it. And what angered those men the most? The destruction of the black family and the comparison of gay rights to the black civil rights movement.

“Leaders know what right looks like” were the famed words of my former XVIIIth Airborne Corps Artillery Commanding General, Brigadier General Geoff Miller.

America is definitely looking for that leader, not a charlatan or impostor.

302 COMMENTS

  1. as long as the POTUS can keep dividing us with race, economic class and gender we wont notice the large Islamic push in our nation right now! Somebody oughta tell the idiot we ARE noticing!

  2. The USA is definitely in need of a leader who understands what it means to lead. Many of us wish that you, Col. West, would be that leader.

  3. I can not like this enough. As a man who will graduate as an officer in 2016, I hope you will be my next Commander in Chief

  4. Conservatives need a simple message that enables the sound bite mentality of the American electorate to realize they are being fed a hearty helping of bovine excrement.
    Read more at http://www.allenbwest.com/2014/05/9-conundrums-left-answer/#1YxkjW1GVMGWCSkX.99
    Conservatives need a simple message that enables the sound bite mentality of the American electorate to realize they are being fed a hearty helping of bovine excrement.
    Read more at http://www.allenbwest.com/2014/05/9-conundrums-left-answer/#1YxkjW1GVMGWCSkX.99
    Conservatives need a simple message that enables the sound bite mentality of the American electorate to realize they are being fed a hearty helping of bovine excrement
    Read more at http://www.allenbwest.com/2014/05/9-conundrums-left-answer/#1YxkjW1GVMGWCSkX.99
    Conservatives need a simple message that enables the sound bite mentality of the American electorate to realize they are being fed a hearty helping of bovine excrement
    Read more at http://www.allenbwest.com/2014/05/9-conundrums-left-answer/#1YxkjW1GVMGWCSkX.99
    “… conservatives need a simple message …” I think you said it here Col. West: “TRUTH PREVAILS”

    • And your Trolling begins. No real comments from you. Just copy and paste. You definitely made Allen’s point very clear. See readers they truly cannot answer.

      • Not sure you are being entirely fair to Southern Xposure. Many American voters have grown into a “sound bite mentality.” The “simple message” that I think Southern Xposure was talking about is essentially the expression of our Conservative core values in a nutshell form. Reagan’s “Morning in America” concept is an example. It defined Reagan and American voters got it. Today and in 2016, we Conservatives must again get this kind of simple and eloquent message out there to all American voters.

      • Thank you tblair. I thought I was astute in yet recalling the first statement while observing that “truth prevails” might be that good, simple message. I hope Opinionated slays his troll today.

      • Opinionated might have been a little quick-on-the-draw. We are all terribly concerned about what we have seen happening to our country over the last few years (actually, longer than that!). And so, sometimes, our comprehension takes a back seat to our emotion. We’re all guilty of misinterpretation at times. But I believe, as you do, that “Truth Prevails.” Or will someday soon.

      • At the time I was looking for more info. So tired of copy paste or re-use of the same comments.
        Yes I do agree “We Conservatives must again get this kind of simple and eloquent message out there to all American voters.”
        Let’s us conservatives quit worrying about labels from the left and tell it like it is. That’s what I would like to read in comments. Gut wrenching TRUTH! Than You for the reply.

      • Agreed–and thank you for clarifying. It is hard for us Conservatives to, as you say, “quit worrying about labels from the left.” But we must. You are right and so is Southern Xposure–“Truth Prevails.” Or as Rush L. has said, “Shine the light of Truth…”

  5. It’s strange how my mind was able to follow and comprehend those 6 conundrums 😉 this information is brilliant! Kudos to the person who thought this out and put it together coherently.
    Thank you Col. West! God bless you and your family always 😉

    • Ted isn’t eligible as he is not a Natural Born American.

      The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5, establishes that the
      President must be a “Natural Born Citizen” at the time the Constitution
      was written, and at the time “Natural Law” was a Fairly new concept.

      (1) Natural Born Citizen Came from the Treatise on Natural Law written
      by Emmerich de Vattel written in 1758 and translated into English in
      1765. The is named “Law of Nations or Properties of Natural Law”.
      Everyone in Law has known since 1791 that a Natural Born Citizen was
      defined when it was placed in the Constitution.

      (2) John Jay sent a memo to George Washington at the Constitutional
      Convention, requesting that he add that requirement to the Constitution,
      which Washington did. The meaning per Vattel is, “Born in country of
      Citizen Parents.

      (3) This was taught in Constitutional Law for 200 years. In 1875 a
      Supreme Court Ruling, Minor V Happersett ruled that the Natural Born
      Citizen means, “both parents” had to be USA Citizens.

      NOTE: All of this was done to PREVENT a Person from being influenced
      by Foreign Religions and or Communist Socialist way of Government…

      • If John McCain was eligible, Ted Cruz is eligible.

        “Both parents had to be citizens?” Well, why did that not disqualify obama?

      • It should have but Congress failed to do its job. Several attempts have been made through the courts to reach the SCOTUS and they’re still working on appeals.

      • 6 years into a 2nd term . . . don’t you think that is a bit late?

        BTW, you did not answer the John McCain issue. If you will do the research, this avenue of attack was raised a year ago or more. I watched the debate on CNN. Their political experts were in agreement, Cruz could legally run for the presidency.

      • Both of McCains parents were Americans and I strongly suspect the questioning of his eligibility to have been a ruse.

        They’re falsely claiming a Native Born American and a Natural Born American are one in the same. They’re also purposely failing to consider the “Original Intent” of the drafters. Seems to me they are using the old “repeat a lie often enough” strategy.

        What I believe they’ll try sometime in the future is actually changing the “Natural Born Citizen” clause using Obama as a “Precedent.”

      • whether both of McCains parents were US citizens at the time of his birth does not overcome the requirement you claimed is in the Const., to wit: both parents must be US citizens and you must be born within the US in order to be eligible. Cruz was a citizen of the US at birth, by definition, according to the law in effect at the time of his birth.

      • I don’t doubt their citizenship, I just don’t believe they qualify as “Natural Born Citizens.” Cruz is definitely not because his father is a Cuban. McCain though may or may not qualify and the SCOTUS would have to rule on it.

  6. These were good words and just. Please be one of our repairers and search for others who will build our country to standards that were set many years ago..

  7. The Liberals have blocked that cognitive part of their brains to understand their own hypocrisy. The quest for votes to keep their advantage overrides all other concerns.

    • Kind of like those on the right that want less government, but champion religious teachings in school, less choice for women, ban marriage for homosexuals and want to continue the war on drugs?

      • Not to mention subsidizing corporations and increasing military spending, but cutting off all medicare, social security, and medicaid to the poor and elderly. It’s just who/what you want to call “subsidizing.”

      • For starters the tax code is unfairly skewed in favor of the super rich, while the poor and (mostly) middle class are burdened with the most taxes. Small business owners suffer greatly at the hands of this unfair tax code (by small I mean 0-50 employees…not the governments definition of small). So the entire premise of this article is disingenuous right out of the gate.

      • In 2010, the top 10% paid 71% of all federal income taxes even though they earned only 45% of the income. That does seem skewed, but not in the direction you’re referring to.

  8. Mr. West, please make your thoughts into a curriculum that could be administered to students (old and young alike)!! Young people need to hear this message and logic now!! You are a true patriot!

  9. It’s amazing to me that we are permitting our Military to be decimated. We are allowing our Veterans to be disrespected to the point where they are being killed by inattention. And yet ALL Police agencies Nationwide are arming up or being armed up to Military levels. Government agencies are purchasing BILLIONS of rounds of Hollowpoint ammunition. This stuff is banned by the Geneva Convention from use against enemies in wartime, so for whom is it intended? Commanded by politically appointed commanders these Bureaucratic Armies are just plain terrifying.

  10. On the subject of Elliot Rogers … seeing as they are supposedly spying on all of us to protect us from terrorism … WHERE THE HE11 WAS THE NSA WHEN HE WAS POSTING HIS THREATS ON THE INTERNET??!!!

  11. Well said, Sir. I was in DC a couple months ago and was hoping I’d run into you, but no dice. Also, I could have used your food recommendations that day; Metro PD pointed me in the right direction, though. I highly recommend Potbelly’s on 3rd St.

  12. Libs are already blaming Republicans for the VA scandal, one Dem Senator lambasting the “cost cutting culture” created by Republicans for failures at the VA. Never mind the Dems hold the majority in the Senate, and never mind that the VA budget has been increased by $78 billion since 2008.
    A low info voter doesn’t know the difference, and worse yet, does not care. They have a sound bite.

      • Thank you for sharing. I don’t know if people don’t know that he said this or they just like him and want him to run. I like Dr. Carson, but I don’t like that statement nor do I like the Voucher System for Health Care he talks about. Does he have a place in the administration, yes? I think that Allen West would be better at being the Military Leader versus being President. A lot of people don’t agree with me, but hey, that’s okay.

      • I agree that I think West could better serve as a military adviser of some sort instead of President. I also like Carson but I could not support him because of his 2nd amendment views.

        My choice for President would be either
        Rand Paul – Mike Lee or Ted Cruz – Mike Lee.

      • of course they do…but when you elect the RIGHT person to be YOUR voice, that’s when it’s not an issue…

      • Can you explain your point better. I don’t really understand what you are trying to say. I can perceive it 2 different distinct ways.

    • West has leadership experience which would help him run an executive position. I like Dr. Carson, but he is an unknown when it comes to how well he could preform in such huge executive role. Also, I do not like Carson’s stance on guns, at all.

  13. You’re a very smart man, Col. West and a very keen observant and very excellent writer! I wish you came before Obummer.

  14. #3 and 4. The country is run by representatives who are lobbied and influenced all day long by the richest of the rich. Once in a while they get caught (Randall “The Duke” Cunningham is a recent example) “taking” from very powerful people. There are third world pockets all around America that are just as poor as the poorest people in the world. Some kids get their only meals from schools, and when school is out, they starve or barely survive. Before you start raging on and on about “illegal aliens,” name one group of people outside of Native Americans that were here before we started drawing lines on a map and buying and selling land that was not ours in the first place?The truth is this land was stolen. Native Americans were outnumbered and outgunned/robbed technically, eventually succumbing to the masses. Why do you think Native Americans were given back vast amounts of lands and are considered Sovereign nations? Because the US Government acknowledges the the atrocious/tragic/barbaric pillaging/destruction they caused some of the best wardens and caretakers of the this land. If you want to talk about truth, talk about the part of the ice berg that is below the surface. The erosion to which you refer is caused by the fact that the divide between the haves and the have nots are much more clear than ever before. There is no hiding it. The erosion of the black community is a fallacious coined term. Too many of them only fall under the have nots, especially in the inner cities. In every town, there are landmarks that literally show the disparity between rich and poor. In Coachella Valley for example, the ends of Monroe Street and Jackson Street-right at the last few blocks, there are people who live in city of La Quinta suburbs who show affluence. Just literally a stone’s throw away, there are some of the poorest people picking fruits and veggies. They see all the Benzes and Beemers drive in and out all day out of these gated communities, then they go home to literal shacks, most of which are in run down trailer parks. They provide a critical service and when convenient we point out they are illegal or undocumented. Just over 150 years ago, where were these people? Ahhh…they lived here freely. Then what happened? Lines were drawn. Now they are “illegal” and don’t deserve aid while they do jobs many “Americans” simply won’t do anymore. I am just starting to swim below the surface here, Mr. West. We all know there are answers to the so-called conundrums. At least for those of us not influenced by fallacious reasoning.

    • You know John, when you get down to it, people of Indian ancestry weren’t from here originally either. IF you want me to go back to Europe, they can go back to Mongolia and Siberia. And don’t tell me that Indians didn’t fight, kill and steal each other’s land before we got here either. My ancestors, Clovis Man and Folsom Man want their lands back from the Anasazi and Hohokam invaders, who want their lands back from the Mogollons and Mimbres invaders, who want their lands back from the Apache, Navajo, Hopi, Zuni and Ute Invaders, who want their lands back from the Mexican invaders, who want their land back from the American invaders. Oh, and my Neanderthal ancestors want their damn lands back from the damned Cro-Magnon invaders. Oh, and the apes want their lands back from the Australopithecus Invaders. And the tribes on the Northern side of that line you are talking about are Hopi, Zuni, Ute, Apache, Comanche, Navajo, Pueblo and some other tribes – as I mentioned – that were invaded by Mexico. They don’t want the illegals here either. We also signed a treaty with Mexico, paid their debts and offered protection of property and civil rights of Mexican nationals living within the new boundaries. The United States is the only one who has legal claim to that land now.

      Don’t tell me all these immigrants came here to work either, or give me this bs about them starving. We give them free school, lunch medical care, food stamps, section 8 housing and all other kinds of goodies. The reason for these income disparities is becuase of their skill level and the types of jobs they do, if they want to earn more, assimilate, educate yourself and get a better jobs just like every normal American does. I say normal American, one who understands simple economics not lefty idiots like you.

    • So, why do immigrants from Africa tend to do MUCH better economically then many who come from a slave background? Why do hispanic Cubans do so much better than hispanic Mexicans? Why do Asians excel when they immigrate to America, while many Native Americans (many tribes originally from Asia) do so horribly? Why are Jews and Mormons so successful in business and yet both have faced heavy discrimination?

      Until you start looking at what makes a group successful, you will NEVER understand why other cultures are failing.

  15. Spot on article. My husband and I were discussing the same fact yesterday. Everyone is “GET RID OF THE GUNS” and the first three victims were stabbed…no one says, ban all knives.

      • exactly…there is no end to the possibilities of things that can be used…how about stones? A little archaic, but they were used once and could be again.

      • I recently read that hammers have been used more often than guns and also baseball bats. I still think the present government just wants our guns. makes us very vulnerable.

  16. Lt. Colonel West,

    You continue to impress me with not only your values but your perception of what reality it is that we live in.

    As our political landscape weakens in both intelligence and common sense, I am glad we have men like you willing to take charge and carry out the plan of our founding fathers.

    I hope this gets to you and I hope you find motivation in this.

    Sincerely,

    A prior service jarhead of artillery

  17. I would love to join in the love fest for Lt. Colonel West but can’t seem to find a compelling reason to do so. Most of the article was sent to him from a friend and the rest addresses problems but no issues. Before the haters bash on me please know that I am a Right leaning Independent who was begging for a reason to vote Reb. in 2012. I’m just tired of both groups having agendas that only line their own pockets. Mr. West is obviously not alone in this. It has become a very lucrative business to do what he and others do. We need solutions to problems. we already know what the issues are.

      • Please re-read and let me know where the implication is. “I’m just tired of both groups having agendas that only line their own pockets. Mr. West is obviously not alone in this. It has become a very lucrative business to do what he and others do.”

      • @ Joe P

        “Leaders know what right looks like.”

        A leader cannot and should not be the creator of all ideas. That is a dictator. A leader filters through the input and creates direction. A leader is not afraid to give credit to others. In fact, they embrace it.

        Wouldn’t you agree that good ideas should stand on their merit, not where they came from?

        The fact that Mr. West identifies with these beliefs is what matters. As a leader I want him to take on valuable ideas from others. Leadership is not about showing how smart you are, Leadership is about bringing out the best in others.

      • Not so sure about this, but I do know that the GOP was given a golden goose in 2000 and created a complete shi#show by 2008.

    • Why do independents have the need, to inform us they are independent, to qualify their comments? For some reason they feel that their opinions are more worthy and don’t warrant any criticism.

      • mentioning I’m an Independent is for context only, nowhere in my comments do I suggest my opinions are more worthy or don’t warrant criticism. If you want to criticize go ahead and criticize my comments not who I am.

      • To defensive…….But YOU didn’t offer any solutions

        What are you doing to improve, but not vote?

    • Solution: Use whatever means are necessary to oust every single Democrat (without one single exception) from every single position of authority in the United States Government. All branches. Whatever you believe I mean by that statement, that’s fine. They have staged a coup and are unwilling to yield up that power. Unfortunately, some Republicans are on that team also. If they are found to be, extract them from office, or position, too.

      • good idea. maybe after their term is up, we can have this discussion again. I’d love to see what an entirely new “regime” could do to bring our country back to it’s Christian roots. At least it wouldn’t hurt to try and it might just do some good.

      • No more lifetime politicians, dem or republican or tea party or whatever! 2 year term limits, no retirement benefits, no perks.

  18. Sad but true. These progressive socialists claim they are the only true patriots and the only people that love the Untied States of America, But in every program, policy, thought and breath. These parasitic hypocrites are destroying the very host they live off of.

  19. The main problem is that far too many people have been brain washed by the liberals and the media, and they don’t even realize it. When you try to show them and explain to them that it really is true they call you a crazy tea bagger, terrorist, racist, or that you are the one who is brainwashed.

    • My Momma taught me…Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me. So they can call me all the names they want…I will still think the way I want…and still speak out the way I want!

  20. Stop the welfare after 2 years. No handouts of any kind to illegals. Those babies born of illegal mothers may return when able to live on their own or with a legal citizen. If the mother doesn’t want the child raised in America, take the child back to the country of residence. lifetime stop of all benefits after 2 positive drug tests. No increase in welfare money to a mother having more children after starting government handouts. If that mother isn’t feeding and providing basic necessities to the children, well that is neglect, remove the child ( children) sever all parental rights and let good people adopt those kids,breaking the welfare as a family career path.

    • If we’re going to stop personal welfare, let’s stop corporate welfare as well. No handouts to farmers. No handouts to oil companies. Deal?

      • Which “handouts” to corporations? You mean tax breaks on money they earned? Like the biggest of all …. a tax break for keeping manufacturing jobs in the U.S.? How about those greedy farmers …. do you think it is within the strategic interests of the U.S. to insure a safe abundant food supply from domestic, rather than foreign (read “China”) sources? As a side note, the old Farm Bill is gone. The “handouts” you speak of are gone. Enjoy your sewage irrigated food from China.

      • Well, we can certainly throw crony tax breaks in there now that you mention it. I’m talking about payouts, plain and simple. Do some research. There’s more than $170billion of corporate welfare payments every year in the federal budget, aside from the tax breaks they get “on money they (a-hem) earned.”

        As far as farmers go, I’m just making a point that everyone has special interest groups they want to protect. Yours are corporations and farmers, apparently. For others its the poor and elderly. For farmers and corporations, wouldn’t it be better to abide by the GOP mantra and pull the plug on these payments to let the “market” play itself out?

      • If you believe in free enterprise why would you want anyone to receive handouts from government

      • He/She probably meant those organizations that were too big to fail..so WE bailed them out.

      • I agree. Government needs to move to a flat tax or sells tax with no more “tax breaks” for anyone. ALL corporate taxes should be done away with. You would see a huge flood of businesses into the U.S. Small companies would have a better chance of being able to grow equity. Jobs would boom and government would have far less power over individuals, plus lobbyist would have far less effect on government.

      • One thing democrats and republicans can agree on is a reform of the tax code is necessary. It’s the details that get in the way.

    • Unless it is your child, right? I think that you sound harsh. The answer is to not give benefits at all to the woman and DO NOT allow their babies to anchor just because they were born in America. The baby should be considered Mexican if that is what the mother is.

  21. I loved it Allen and us vets keep getting the slap in the face for defending our rights and the Constitution all the while it to is eroding fast. The whole problem today starts at home in the upbringing and the sanctity of real marriage. This with the strong belief in God in Heaven makes a strong country.

    • Adams said, “Our Constitution is made only for a moral, and a religious people.”

      Washington went so far as to say.. “Anyone who undermines these twin pillars is not a patriot”.

    • Is that all you’ve got? You couldn’t even come up with where one of his points could be disputed? It must be frustrating to not have anything substantial to add to the discussion!

      • OK – let’s start with the tax code. The top .01% pay virtually nothing in taxes, while making sure those they “employ” make the least amount that they can (legally) get away with. That destroys #1 and #2. Should I keep going?

      • Please define “virtually nothing”. Anyone can play the numbers game but the fact is, the wealthy still pay an inordinate amount more than the rest of us (80%ers). How much more do you want them to give in order for you to be happily sustained? Also, if the Left is always complaining about the “unfareness” of the taxes then why don’t they push the flat tax…is there anything farer than the flat tax? Of course, again you’ll complain that the poor will be burdened either way. Oh well, guess they’ll have to figure out a way to improve their lives without relying on others to pay their way.

      • Better yet, the fair tax. That would reduce the IRS drastically. Isn’t that what we need?

      • You are an ignorant fool! Liberal economist Paul Krugman cries about the top 1% “only” pay 17% of their income in federal taxes, while ignoring the fact that they pay almost 37% of ALL federal income taxes. Pay the least amount they can? Then why is the national AVERAGE wage for 2012 $44,321.67? A bit more than the least they can pay dwarfboy.

      • And of course, you know more about economics than a Nobel winning economist. Tell me, what school did you receive your economics degree from? Yeah, just like I thought…You conservatives are totally delusional.

      • The same Nobel that gave Obama a Peace Prize? F’ing simpleton. Know more? Why would I need to know more than Krugman to quote HIS numbers, dumbass? That is right, you are a liberal peon who must be told what you think by your corrupt leaders. I guess you didn’t know that I gave simple facts, prove them wrong little boy.

      • “Come into my parlor” said the spider to the fly…..Those in the upper income brackets make a large portion of their income on investment dollars THAT WERE TAXED BEFORE INVESTING! The old “rich don’t pay enough” arguement has a strong influence on the weak of mind. A chunk of my IRA investments won’t be taxed, BECAUSE THEY WERE TAXED ALREADY! Get it? Please keep going, I love seeing the “have nots” whine about those who save and invest.

      • Isn’t it just the ROTH IRA that is taxed ahead of time? Don’t you have to pay taxes, and fines, when you take from your regular IRA, until you reach a certain age? Then no fines but still pay taxes?

      • You do realize that for instance in California the rich pay 65% of what they earn goes to taxes. What does that pay? the mexicans that come across the border and bilk us for millions of dollars from us tax payers. Warren Buffet for instance, gives away Millions of dollars to charities. They do not get reported on the bottom line. So it may seem like the haves don’t pay but they pay plenty.
        Warren Buffet say we should pay more(rich people) just to keep people off his back. When in reality he does not want to pay a dime more than he has to.
        The interesting thing about you is, you are a legend in your own mind and have no clue what you are really saying

      • yes he does 1.2 billion to be close. Which really tweeks me to no end. !.2 billion would feed a lot of children instead of killing them

    • Sounds like your post, not West’s. I see no logical rebuttal to the points made, only shallow criticism.

  22. We live in a country where when a nut goes on a rampage, not only do they want to blame all gun owners, but they want to demonize all white males. White male privilege drove him to do what he did.
    When black teens murder over a pair of sneakers, nobody says it’s about black male privilege or something…because that would be stupid? Right?

  23. I read the demented psychopath’s manifesto… Among all his hate and extreme God complex ramblings, he wrote several times about how he couldn’t do it on Halloween or Valentine’s Day because there were more cops around with guns who might stop him before he killed enough people because they have guns…. An armed citizenry could have put him down much sooner and fewer people injured and killed. Demented Murderers will kill and most often the only thing to stand between them and the loss of innocent lives is an armed man or woman.

    • I don’t know that a bunch of people on the street, shooting wildly at a armed crazed man is an answer either. This isn’t the wild west, but I do see the point about being armed in a one on one situation.

      • People on the streets if they had guns would be properly trained and schooled. Just because you think that all people who have guns are irresponsible, does not make it so.
        The people who own guns, (except for the occasional lunatic) are responsible trained gun owners.
        You watch too many old westerns. The idea is if you arm people and train them properly violence, (not just gun violence), would decrease dramatically.
        Armed people keep people from committing crimes simply because they are armed.
        Ask a criminal why the commit crimes and they will tell you that it is a safe place to commit a crime, because the people are not armed!

      • Look at switzerland. Everyone is REQUIRED to know how to use guns, and so there are far fewer gun related crimes, because a guy knows that if he wants to walk into someone’s house and take their stuff or go on a killing spree theres a really high likelihood that they are gonna get shot.

    • He was a malignant, psychotic NARCISSIST! His father fought to state there was no GOD. This God-less child was not brought up with good virtues, or boundaries. You can blame what happened…on his parents!

  24. Nailed it! It is only a one way street for liberals. What’s yours is theirs and what’s theirs is theirs.
    You cannot argue logically with an illogical mind. It is always about them and their own betterment and to heck with the general population.
    Sooner or later it will all catch up to them and they will pay dearly and I hope to be around to see it happen

  25. the obamacrats will never get it. they have been greedy and out of touch. the lay abouts will never get it, because they get free stuff. when they run out of works money they will blame the conservatives.

  26. Here’s my favorite: Conservatives general support the death penalty and oppose abortion. That makes our policy “kill the guilty/ save the innocent”. Liberal/ progressive generally oppose the death penalty and support abortion. That makes their policy “save the guilty/ kill the innocent”. Welcome to the madness of the liberal/ progressive mind.

    • Dan, I call myself an Independent voter. I don’t pay much attention to party platforms, but do research candidates and their individual beliefs before I vote. For example; I support our 2nd Amendment rights, as any change to or removal of same affects all citizens and tend to concentrate the power over the subject in certain groups. I neither support abortion or oppose it; that is a question which the mother, in counsel with her religious beliefs, the father, her doctor, parents, friends, etc., etc., must answer for herself. This decision will directly affect Only the mother and her child-to-be. SHE must be the only one responsible for that decision, NOT THE GOVERNMENT !! I do feel that government funds should NOT be available except in extreme cases.

      • Anyone that appends their name with the word “democrat” and is running for office is claiming ALL that the DNC has said they believe regardless of personal belief. Abortion is MURDER and cannot be left to the woman that is pregnant with a human. As to her decision she already made the decision when she had sex, and don’t bother to say anything about raape or incest because those are less than 1% of all abortions of the 58,000,000 since 1977.

      • Don’t forget..at the 2012 DNC convention…they wanted to take GOD out of their agenda…but invited Muslims to the event….

      • What does one have to do with the other? This sounds like just a way you want to look at it. Maybe they just didn’t want to talk about God because it had nothing to do with the platform and a Muslim happen to be there?

      • @smitty6398 Abortion was not mentioned in Lt. Col. Allen West’s article, but, since you brought it up, abortion absolutely should not be a choice for the woman. She chose to have sex which, regardless of the birth control used or not used, created a life. A life which, from the moment of conception, has unique DNA. Abortion is murder, plain and simple. No government funds should be used to support murder. I do like Dan’s comparison of the difference in the belief system of the Conservative vs. the Liberal/Progressive.

  27. 1. America is capitalist and greedy – yet almost half of the population is subsidized but 5% of the population controls 95% of the wealth. If that’s not greed I don’t what is. That was easy, did Col. West pick that piece of wisdom on a discarded napkin on an airplane?

    • It is greed that 5% controls 95% of the the wealth? maybe they earned it by WORKING!! Obviously a new concept to you?

  28. “We are advised not to judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are admonished to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works, as we see the liberal progressives already jumping on the tragedy from Santa Barbara California. So what about the three victims who were stabbed to death, should we ban knives?”
    Koran cannot go off by accident and kill someone. No one has ever pleaded the knife went off by accident when defanding a manslaughter case. This is fun I’m just getting warmed up.

  29. “We constantly hear about how Social Security is running out of money. How come we never hear about welfare or food stamps on the verge of running out of money? Maybe the first group “worked for” their money, but the second didn’t. It is a simple case of printing money for political bribery and extortion.”
    Someone works for years lose their job, uemployment benefit runs out ends-up on welfare because he’s not eligible for Soc Sec. Hasn’t that person earned it?

    • Yes, and the elderly. I know..I am one of them. But the government says I am not eligible! The room was full of illegal aliens, and young Black people. Very few were elderly, or infirmed. SS disability was supposed to be for those CITIZENS who could not work, because they were disabled, or too old, and disabled to work. I have 19 disabilities..(got hurt on the job as a police officer, and was born into a polluted gene pool) Yet I am not eligible. I am almost 64 years old. I paid into SS for many, many years. But, when I married, I became a stay at home Mom. Because I did that..it made me ineligible. Why? The SS states you have to be working 5 of the last 10 years, with SS coming out of your paycheck, to be eligible for SSI. What? What about all those years I put into it? Their answer..”SS is like an insurance policy. If quit paying the monthly amount..you lose it all.”

      • That is correct, you lose it all. Because SS is an an annuity insurance contract. You should have got your own disability policy many years ago. SS is structured around retirement benefits(an insurance policy). The unfortunate thing I understand you on is the fact that many people do get benefits that shouldn’t.

  30. How many of the people mentioned as being subsidized are readily able to get SS, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps, housing subsidies, child care, student loans, need I go on? Yet they are somehow completely incapable of getting a free, government issued photo ID in order to vote and secure our elections.
    I say we make all SS, Medicare, Medicaid, food stamp and other government hammock (they are not safety nets anymore) cards photo ID’s. Why they haven’t been made such generations ago I do not grasp.

  31. We need a military man as our leader. Why don’t you and Ben Carson come together and make the BEST team EVER for President and Vice President! You two could REALLY clean up this mess called the USA!

  32. Easy answer for all six “conundrums” of the first part: the “subsidized” half of the country is corporations and their CEOs and shareholders.

    • Your “easy answer” is also not true Brian. The subsidized, almost half of the country are those who are receiving entitlements such as welfare and unemployment checks while not looking to get a job. The corporations are a huge part of what makes Capitalism work, they create jobs, they drive industries and provide products, services and consumables to the consumers. Government realises that to have a functioning Democratic Republic operating under a system of Capitalism, they must promote businesses to profit and expand. If you think that someone who is wealthy because he worked hard and provided jobs to thousands of individuals is greedy because they turn a profit than isn’t it also greedy for someone who produces nothing to expect to get money for doing nothing? This mentality is what is killing the middle class, you expect the 1% to pay more when they already CONTRIBUTE (<—- see that, I said contribute because although their tax rates may be lower, the amount they are being taxed on is significantly higher than everyone else, so in turn, they already pay more) to supporting the middle and lower class is much higher than any other "class" who pays into the same system. Under Liberal policies they demand that big business pay their fair share, in reality they are already paying more than their fair share but I guess that doesn't matter to Liberals. As for the Shareholders you targeted, anyone who has a 401K or Mutual Fund, or any other responsible form of investment is considerd a Shareholder. That includes most of the middle class folks as well, so should they also have to pay more just because they are responsible enough to know they need to invest and plan for their futures? I understand the basic precept of your arguement but you are making it without weighing all the facts. Businesses are being exploited, small businesses are being regulated into failure, middle class are working hard and trying to stay afloat all while the government is growing and taking more and more every day. Government does not produce anything, government taxes and regulates, government enables entitlement spending and than taxes the producers to provide it. Government cannot give anything to someone without taking from someone else first.

      • You’re right, government doesn’t produce anything. Yet it is still necessary. That is how it is and how it has been since government was created. I understand you are wanting to make it very cut and dry by saying government enables entitlement spending yet we all know it is human nature of laziness that enables this. We all know that is not the issue since there are so many more cases besides the “takers” that you could go with instead.

      • “The subsidized, almost half of the country are those who are receiving entitlements such as welfare and unemployment checks while not looking to get a job.” This is patently false. Not looking to get a job?!?!? Can you back up that slander? And yes, corporations create jobs… until they ship them overseas to maximize profits or the technology comes along to automate. The vast majority of people want to work for a living (and plenty of the 1% don’t, which is why we have inheritance and capital gains taxes even if they are too low), but corporations won’t pay living wages and keep us good little worker drones enslaved in a vicious circle of wage slavery (hello WalMart!). Government regulation, what little there is of it, helps prevent corporate exploitation of workers, of the environment, of “we the people”.

        Putting your bland faith in capitalism (and a “free market” that is not free) is the worship of money. I’m not religious, but that sounds like a false idol to me.

      • “From retail workers to adjunct college professors, the new normal for workaday people is poverty-wage, part-time, temporary, no-benefit employment. At McDonald’s, the world’s biggest burger chain with 860,000 U.S. workers and $5.5 billion in profits, typical pay is only $8.20 an hour and “full-time” jobs amount to only 30 hours a week. McDonald’s business plan: Shift the bulk of its labor costs to taxpayers and workers themselves. The top executives calculate that employees will subsidize their gross underpayment by finding second jobs, and then get health care from emergency rooms and go to welfare offices for food and other basic needs.”
        http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/5-signs-america-has-gone-bonkers-and-glimmer-hope?akid=11859.110071.iwSosM&rd=1&src=newsletter997451&t=3

  33. Oh, I see there are three more:

    “1. We are advised not to judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are admonished to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works, as we see the liberal progressives already jumping on the tragedy from Santa Barbara California. So what about the three victims who were stabbed to death, should we ban knives?”

    No, we should ban guns and reinstate the psychiatric social services Reagan and the GOP cut.

    “2. We constantly hear about how Social Security is running out of money. How come we never hear about welfare or food stamps on the verge of running out of money? Maybe the first group “worked for” their money, but the second didn’t. It is a simple case of printing money for political bribery and extortion.”

    I can’t even begin to address the greedy, selfish, non-empathetic sniveling and pandering of this statement. Except to ask, why are the GOP always trying to raid (aka “privatize”) Social Security?

    “3. Why are we cutting benefits for our veterans, giving no pay raises for our military and cutting our forces to a level lower than before WWII, but are expanding and increasing the benefits to illegal aliens? It is all about pandering for votes – and who cares about national security or veterans dying at the hands of their own Veterans Administration?”

    Ask the GOP, who are constantly slashing vets’ benefits.

    But you just keep on bootstrappin’. Cuz everyone knows you got where you are today without government’s help. *rolls eyes* WHAT. A. DOUCHEBAG.

    • Just WHO do you think the government is? They are employees of “we the people”, so “anything” they did/do is for us anyway. Social security “raided”? If I put all the $$$ that was “taken” from me to go into SS, and “privately” invested it, I would have 5-10 times the $$$ to retire on. And to think, YOU GET TO VOTE, heaven help us, but NOT YOU!!!

    • Brian, agreed, but regarding psychiatric services… If the problem is psychosis, then we need to explain why other countries equally psychotic as us don’t have mass shootings. I agree that more psychiatric care is better than less, but that’s really not the core problem. It’s the guns. Increasing psychiatric funding is just a feel-good measure by conservatives to deflect the problem away from sea of handguns we are all floating in. 🙁

  34. You’re first observation is based on a complete umbrella statement. Liberal progressive’s are a small figment of the population just like you are a small figment of the population. The irony comparison is irrelevant and the reference to stabbings not being talked about is something people with a level head have heard enough times already. It doesn’t help move the argument along in a positive way for either side. Guns aren’t going away and that is the way we want it. Your argument is not going to win over anybody but your own cult following. I really was hoping to get some convincing points by reading your article but it was very out-dated.

    • A small “figment”??? Maybe you meant “segment” of the population because the word “figment” means “fantasy.”

  35. “1. We are advised not to judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are admonished to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics”

    Okay, have it your way. I’ll humor you and agree that all Muslims are rotten (even though I don’t believe that) if you agree to give up all your guns. Since all you want is consistency, I’ll give you the consistency you seem to be craving above all else.

    • I haven’t read any of his articles before and didn’t know what to expect for consistency. All I can gather is his opinion reports old news spin on new stories. I understand pandering to your following but I would hope it was a better argument with such a teasing title. 6 conundrums the left cant answer. Really? Anybody can answer those, especially when you bullet point it with taking half of what you wrote in the bullet point prior and adding onto the same topic. Its just a run on rant basically. I was expecting more content with a title like that.

      • Anybody can answer those, indeed, if you have the non-stupidity to think through the problem. Here’s what I wrote to a good friend of mine who leans to the right:

        Okay, here we go.

        1. America is capitalist and greedy – yet almost half of the population is subsidized.

        Wrong on two points out of three.

        1 – Capitalist, true.

        2 – Greedy, false. Americans are the most generous people in the world when it comes to philanthropy. There are a small percentage of ultra-competitive Americans who are profoundly greedy, who view life as a zero-sum game, and who do everything they can to advance their own self-interests by unashamedly stepping on everyone else. These people are simply evil, and in truth, belong to no nation.

        3 – 50% subsidized. False. Americans are 100% subsidized, including non-living, non-citizen Americans (i.e., corporations), through tax policies of one form or another. In fact, the wealthier you are, the smaller a percentage of taxes you pay in proportion to everyone else. So the wealthy are proportionately subsidized more so than anyone else.

        2. Half of the population is subsidized – yet they think they are victims.

        I ride the bus with low income folks every day and have yet to hear anyone claim to be a victim. Not sure what victims he’s talking about other than imaginary stereotypes. If he can show me with Actual Statistics that 50% of the American population consider themselves victims, I’ll take the claim seriously. But I’m willing to bet he’s just talking out of his arse here.

        3. They think they are victims – yet their representatives run the government.

        If you’re talking about poor minorities (the “victims”), I’d argue that they have no representation in government. Nobody, anywhere, is throwing big money into lobbying for the poor. In fact, Republican legislators are working nationwide to further disenfranchise the poor by making it difficult for them to vote at all. Everybody knows this and it’s an acknowledged Republican strategy. So on the contrary, the poor have no effective representation — none. People like the Koch brothers, on the other hand, have all the representation that money can buy.

        4. Their representatives run the government – yet the poor keep getting poorer.

        This falls under “No sh*t, Sherlock”. See above. You can’t get ahead when the wealthy optimize the law to benefit themselves.

        5. The poor keep getting poorer – yet they have things that people in other countries only dream about.

        If the author thinks the poor have it nice here in America, my advice is brutally simple — shut your mouth, quit your job, and start collecting welfare checks. Then you can ride the royal gravy train too, and bask in the luxurious glory of subsidized living. If the author wants to trade places with anyone on food stamps, he’s welcome to do so at any time. Put your belly where your mouth is and join the indigent today. Then you too can have an awesome life. It’s easy.

        6. They have things that people in other countries only dream about – yet politicians (mostly progressive socialists) claim they want America to become more like those other countries.

        The author needs to be a little more specific. What other countries? And in what ways are we supposed to be more like them? Any why are those traits (which we’re apparently lacking) so bad?

        Mr. West’s problem seems to be that he’s just plain dumb — and thus views these as impenetrable “conundrums”, mysteries of American culture. Which they aren’t.

      • I like what you are saying but I won’t just say he is dumb. He has an agenda and I think he is living in his American Dream. Yet for the rest of of us the American dream wasn’t built around subsidies, yet that is what much of the economy is derived on today and it his hard for folks to grasp. We in one way or another all believe in a Capitalist society as the “American Dream”. There is a lot more to it. People forget how subsidies work, or who all gets them. The word subsidies alone scare people and I can completely understand that. Farm subsidies alone are maddening but necessary because the way we have gone about it over the years. Why don’t we ever talk about them instead of the people who live in cities? Oh yeah, most people don’t care to talk about it.

      • Right. And everyone who owns a home has had it partially paid for by other taxpayers, through the mortgage interest deduction. That’s a subsidy, too. That fact was apparently over Mr. West’s head.

      • Tax deductions are not subsidies. They are simply the government agreeing to not steal more from wealth earners for some given reason (mortgage interest deduction in this case). A subsidy is wealth given, a tax deduction is wealth not taken away.

      • No, that’s not what taxes and subsidies are at all. Go to any dictionary or economics textbook — even conservative ones — and you won’t find taxes and subsidies defined that way anywhere. In this case, you’re just plain old-fashioned wrong.

      • OK, Guest, let’s keep this real simple for starters. I have several dictionaries in my library as well as access to others online. NONE of them define the word “subsidy” as a tax deduction. “Subsidy” is always defined as a given amount of money by government to a recipient or recipient class. It is not defined as less money taken from a wealth producing individual or entity as allowed in the tax code.

        The closest rule in the U.S. tax code that can be construed as a “subsidy” is the “Earned Income Credit” for those that may not have paid any taxes, yet can apply for a “refund”. The “free money” these people receive is a subsidy according to the dictionary definition.

        You CAN find plenty of rhetoric being spewed about equating certain tax deductions as subsidies for the wealthy, et al, but that is just spewed rhetoric, not fact. What it amounts to is an idealogical point of view. A more leftist point of view sees wealth as property of the collective or government as opposed to wealth being the property of the individuals or entities that created it. The former point of view may very well see a tax deduction as a “subsidy”, since the government owns everything and doles out the wealth as it sees fit, therefore, EVERYTHING it allows you to keep is a subsidy! However, in America we can still hold on to the idea that what we work for is ours, therefore, when the government takes less from us, for whatever reason, it is NOT a subsidy.

      • Good job. Since we’re all in favor of equal time, and you’re a fan of dictionaries, have you found a definition of “taxes” as “the government agreeing to not steal more from wealth earners” yet?

      • I offered that phrase as an abstract and rhetorical definition of “tax deduction” as used in the U.S. Tax Code, not as a definition of the word “taxes” or are you “utterly ignorant” of reading the English language? [Side note: Collectivists really hate it when the income tax is referred to as theft – see my comments regarding points of view above]. OK, now that we’ve traded ad hominems is it possible to get back to the discussion? The phrase “tax deduction” does not appear in my dictionaries, nor is a definition for the exact phrase supplied in some of the publications (tax form instruction booklets) I have from the IRS. The word “deduction” is used quite often by the IRS, but is NEVER equated to the word “subsidy”. A quick search brings us to a definition and discussion of the phrase “tax deduction” in Wikipedia, but even there the phrase is NEVER equated to the word “subsidy”.

        BTW, keep it civil and I will converse with you as time permits. Hurl insults, then bye bye, because you won’t be worth my time.

      • You’re hung up on definitions rather than the concepts behind them, so yes, there’s no reason to continue this. I’m still waiting for the accepted formal definition of tax as theft. Have you found that yet or were you just making that up?

      • Words have meaning, which is their definition. Concepts are expressed using words with meaning. Without word meaning, expression of concepts gets reduced to grunting and pointing, which is not very efficient for complex concepts. Conmen use words outside their meaning to make a lie sound like truth. For example, the official name (in English) for the country of North Korea is “The Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea”. This top-down totalitarian state is neither democratic, nor of the people, nor is it a republic by any definition of those words, but it sure has a sweet sounding name doesn’t it? The same technique can be used to disparage others, such as calling a tax deduction a subsidy.

        What do you mean “still”? I never stated the definition of the word taxes is theft and this is the first time you asked. I will state, from my point of view, the income tax is theft because I believe in individual property rights and the fruits of ones labor is private property. Taking that property without permission by anyone, including government, is theft. Here an individual would ask “How much of what I have is the government taking from me?”

        I went through the trouble earlier to explain two general points of view. Notice, to a collectivist where there are no individual property rights, the income tax would not be theft since individuals do not own the fruits of their labor. Those fruits are owned by the collective (government), which doles them out presumably by need. Here an individual would ask “How much will the government allow me to have?”

      • And btw, “You CAN find plenty of rhetoric being spewed about equating certain tax deductions as subsidies for the wealthy, et al, but that is just spewed rhetoric, not fact”.

        Why exactly is this “spew” and not “fact”? Please be convincing and precise. Do you just dislike the definitions (of tax and subsidy), or are you utterly ignorant of basic abstract accounting (inflow and outflows of money to and from an entity)?

      • It is “spew” because there are no accepted formal definitions of the word “subsidy” as “tax deduction”, and there are no formally accepted definitions of the phrase “tax deduction” as the word “subsidy”.

      • SUBSIDY: A. a grant or gift of money. B. money granted by one state to another. C. a grant by a government to a private person or company to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public.

      • The difference between a subsidy and tax break is ONLY in how the money flow is operationally administered as law. We can change a tax break into a subsidy by 1) eliminating the tax break (which forces you to pay more taxes), and then 2) sending you a subsidy check for the same amount, to accomplish the same net effect as the original tax break. Is it clear to you now why the two are equivalent? Tax break == subsidy, period.

      • Mr. Douglas R, go argue with Webster. I already know the difference. I need no educational lesson from you.

      • Well then perhaps you’ll enjoy self-help instead. From Amazon: Kalf, A. A. “Arithmetic Refresher: Improve your working knowledge of arithmetic” (1964) ISBN-13: 978-0486212418

      • This is just a test. My comments keep disappearing and I’m wondering why. No profanity, no insults. Is it a machine error or is it crybaby censorship by someone weary of holding up his end of the argument?

    • Douglas R. Does this also mean we take all baseball bats, knives, swords, hammers, cars, screwdrivers, pens and paper, and sugared foods from everyone because they have been used in crimes or can harm people?
      You make that much sense.

      • Nah, I don’t think so. Let’s stick to Muslims and guns, which is the equivalency the author apparently proposed. I’m happy to stick with just that.

    • And in the name of consistency, just as you don’t believe all Muslims are rotten, then you couldn’t possibly believe that everyone who owns a gun is a murderer.

      • Of course I don’t, genius. Nobody anywhere believes that all gun owners are murders. Mr. West’s equivalency between Muslims and gun owners is completely ludicrous in the first place, and it has no business being the basis of an argument. That was the point.

      • Mr. West is not making an analogy between Muslims and gun owners. He’s making an analogy of the expected judgment between the two.

      • And there may be completely different reasons for making judgments about the two different groups. That’s why the analogy fails. The sources of so-called lunacy within each group are unrelated, and we may well be entitled, even obligated, to view the two groups differently. After all, if we want to solve the problem, we’re concerned about the cause of the lunacy, right, not the effect?

      • And David, I did indeed consider the viewpoint you proposed (about expected judgement), but it didn’t seem right, in part because of the clearly ridiculous, satirical solution I proposed in my original post (I’ll agree to judge Muslims harshly if you agree to give up your guns). That’s patently absurd, which points to a flaw hidden in the original analogy in the first place.

      • Most people are reasonable and have common sense and know what an expected judgment would be. Mr West was speaking to them not some moron with a clearly ridiculous, satirical solution that doesn’t make sense to normal people.

      • Exactly, David, but they’re ***NOTHING*** valid or logical about the entire chain of rubbish that Mr. West cites in this post. This is exactly the kind of garbage that has PROPAGANDA VALUE, even to audiences composed of “reasonable” people with “common sense”. It masquerades as truth when in reality everything in the passage is flat-out false. If pointing that out makes me a moron, then the folks who lick their lips over this crap are so far below “moron” status they have no business stepping into a voting booth in the first place.

    • Douglas, I suggest you watch a youtube lecture called “New Age Bullshit and the Suppression of the Sacred Masculine” to help get your head on straight.

    • No deal, giving up an idea is no where near to giving up my right to protect my family. Your delusional to think its the same.

    • No, you need to believe that all Muslims are rotten too. You can’t just pick and choose terminology, ignore the ideology behind it, and call it consistency. Instead what you just said is that you’ll lie to not only take away the rights of others, but to condemn an entire demographic as rotten… but only when it suits your needs. I mean, you wouldn’t want to call a Muslim rotten to their face, would you? That would require some of moral fortitude (however misplaced) on your part, and you’ve clearly communicated you’re incapable of doing that. If anyone here just wanted meaningless blather disguised as consistency we would have voted for Obama too! Geesh.

      • For christ sake Johathan, try this: http://onegoodmove.org/fallacy/falsean.htm

        My point was that West’s analogy was nonsensical in the first place and forms no basis for a valid argument. Muslims and gun owners in general **have nothing to do with each other**, and there’s no basis here for comparison by analogy.

        Actually, Mr. West’s argument is worse than that. His second premise (i.e., we’re advised to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few) is flat-out false. No responsible person — anywhere — advises us to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Not one.

      • And nobody is surprised. Conservative pedants generally shut down and crawl into a hidey-hole the instant someone steps on their toes, deliberately or not.

      • And btw, other misspellings / rearrangements of you name contain the words “snot”, “jihad” and “satan”. Good think I didn’t accidently typo one of those. Who knows what you might have done.

      • According to your logic the only analogy possible would be to compare anything to itself only. According to the false analogy rule of property, Mr. West’s analogy had property P as expectation of peoples judgment. Both are valid and very progressive. Your last paragraph is a lie because of the progressive propaganda machines and gun confiscation.

      • I guess your just not in touch with the states passing all the new anti-gun laws. The ones where you have to tell everyone where the guns are so the criminals can come steal them or face gun confiscation and jail if you don’t.

      • Sorry, haven’t heard of them. Which states are those, and which laws, specifically? I’d like to read the text of those laws, to see whether or not what you’re implying here is actually true.

      • “No responsible person — anywhere — advises us to judge all gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Not one.” OUR PRESIDENT DOES, but he IS NOT responsible, so I guess your argument is VALID

      • Both of your assertions are factually inaccurate, and the quote of mine that you cite isn’t an argument. So everything you just said is more-or-less 100% rubbish.

    • Consistency is agreeing that all Muslims are lunatics and that all gun owners are also lunatics. See how that works? Giving up our constitutional rights would not be sane or prudent.

  36. How come Allen West isn’t president? Seriously. Sometimes I wish I never heard of him because he’s the guy we want in office and the country is too out of its collective mind to put him there, and it’s just depressing. West for president—it’s as simple as that.

    • Because he sensationalizes and creates bullet points of run on sentences. Yes our current president does that too but this guy isn’t very good at it.

      • Because you can’t follow doesn’t mean he’s not good at it. Besides, you’re just a pig racist …

      • And if INTC is a racist pig because he disagree with an African American, what happens when two African Americans disagree with each other? Are they both racists pigs too?

      • Of course he is a ‘kook’. He has ‘common sense’ which most people do not. Therefore he is not ‘normal.’ I prefer non-normal, focused, moral people with plenty of common sense.

      • Nah…actually…he is a KOOK! just read some of these post and comments this man has said….he is a kook!

      • Everyone who disagrees with liberals or opposes their policies is automatically labeled a ‘kook’ or other worse names by you robots. That doesn’t make it true. What’s kooky is you liberals who can’t think for themselves and just espouse talking points and call names.

      • Bill0…the kool aid drinker. Wouldn’t know common sense if it smacked him in the face. Just stand out there in the frickin’ rain moron.

      • Another leftwing racist with talking points he got from his last KKK meeting.

    • Because he was FORCED to retire from the military. Because he didn’t stand with his men. Because he faced 11 years in prison. Because he couldn’t win his own district. Because he is more interested in LEFT vs RIGHT than the country as a WHOLE. Because he is a BIGOT. Because he said and continue to say some VILE crap! Just pick one…this man will NEVER be president!!

      • he can’t do that, he takes his que from his butt bumping buddy barry the imposter, part-time fag.

      • Allen B. West saved the lives of the men under his command. One can not find a single one of those who were in that shithole called iraq that does not support him—not a single one. You are just a racist POS. Now go get instructions from the Democrats at your local KKK HQ.

  37. Pretty sobering list. obama is the worst President -ever.
    The fact these questions are being asked is proof.

      • well, i use the word in a legal sense, he was elected by the majority of state electors as certified by the President o the Senate after a countig of those votes before a joint session of congress in 08 and 12. in 12 i have no doubt he stole the votes that made the difference.

  38. I think we have found that leader Col. But now we need you to step up and BE that leader. Yes, that’s right, YOU! It’s time to answer your nation’s call.

  39. “I suppose once again I’ll be attacked by the ravenous progressive socialist Left because it’s an “anonymous source”
    Just like Harry Reid was for his anonymous source concerning Mitt Romney not paying his taxes. Oh, wait…

  40. the last election was stolen from him with 143% voter turnout. He stood up for his men was the reason he was forced to retire. If you search the net you will find the story. I would vote for him over anyone that has indicated that they might run. We need someone like him in the White House

  41. I could easily answer your 6 “questions”, but the problem is they are based on lies (the backbone of conservative ideology). You see, only about 30% of households in the US receive poverty based assistance. You only get your “almost half” of the population if you include retirees who collect Social Security and Medicare, things they paid for as you point out later in your article, the second of your three observations. So your whole infantile argument is based on a lie from the beginning, and if you were a sane, rational person, you would realize that invalidates your entire argument. And here’s a link for your followers to see for themselves, because I know they’re too stupid to research it for themselves.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/18/who-receives-benefits-from-the-federal-government-in-six-charts/

    • Mr Mike, you obliterated any credibility you might have enjoyed by insinuating “lies,” “infantile,” “stupid” and leveling accusations of insanity and irrationality. And yet, after only vaguely questioning a solitary, otherwise debatable aspect of one component of Mr. West’s column, you straight-up declare the “entire argument” invalid! Well, It’s not my usual style to go there, but since you opened the door, please tell us how any of that is honest, mature, smart, sane or rational.

      • The idea that when you base an entire argument on a false supposition makes the entire argument invalid is easily understood by anyone who possesses honesty, maturity, intelligence and sanity. Therefore, I understand your inability to understand this concept. I posted the link so that people like you would be able to understand that saying “nearly half” of all people are on government assistance is not a “debatable aspect” of this article, it is in fact an indisputable truth. I know conservatives are too stupid to research things for themselves, and now you have shown me that they are too stupid to understand facts when they are handed to them as well.

      • I’m sorry. I tried typing slowly so you would understand what I was saying, but I guess that didn’t work.

      • that old saying is TRUE!! If you aren’t a liberal by your 20’s you have no HEART. If you aren’t a conservative by your 30’s you have no BRAIN!!!!

      • I sound like a broken record, but, again, Mr. Mike, the Alinsky tactics?? You need a better racket. People are onto this kind of progressive crap and we don’t buy into it anymore. We shrug off people like you and laugh.

        As Pjones says, you talk in circles and never validate anything. You come across as a wannabe community organizer that can only spew Saul’s rules to back up your off base, out of touch, special brand of bullshit. The last 6 years have educated a lot of people, I doubt we see your type in office for a long time after we suffer through the final two years of your majesty’s reign.

    • No mike it is you who is lying. He never said ‘poverty based’, he said subsidized which is accurate. And you are evidently ignorant about social security and medicare. One does not pay for “their” benefits, they pay for the benefits of those who are collecting now, virtually all of whom will collect much more than they ever paid in, ie, .subsidized. Also the Supreme Court ruled decades ago that you have no “right” to benefits, regardless of how much you paid in. So YOUR case is built from the beginning on false premise, a lie as it were, hence all that follows is automatically void. By your logic(?).

      • Please cite that Supreme court case you speak of, because I know of no such ruling. And I DO pay for my benefits. It is because of your lord and savior Ronnie Raygun, who stole money from social security to pay for his illegal weapons deals that my current payments go to those collecting now. Bit I do pay for these benefits. But thanks for proving once again how conservatives live in an alternate reality.

      • Don’t bother with this asshat, he is a political troll. The guy specializes in Alinsky tactics, prob worships Saul. Either way, he refuses to offer up proof to his arguments, you should do the same.

      • Nice strawman. You can look up what that means for yourself. I’m done serving up life lessons to ignorant conservatives who only repeat lies they hear in the conservative media, and are unwilling to research things for themselves.

      • Thanks Mr Mike….you proved my point…..you just used Alinsky tactics, #5…#11….and #13 !! 🙂

      • Hahahaha I wish I had read your reply before I commented. You made the points I was making and you did a better job!

    • Love the Alinsky tactics here. We have him claiming to be able to answer the 6 point’s, then he never comes close. This is calling to question the validity of the point. Then he calls people names, and questions their sanity. He belittle’s those of differing opinion than his own and in the end, his proof…. says that we indeed are at roughly 49% of our population on some form of Government payout.

      You Sir, need to understand that others are entitled to their own opinion and just because they differ, does not mean they are beneath you. You come across as an angry, hostile person who lacks the ability to do exactly what you liberals like to brag is your finest quality, tolerance. Something you appear to be devoid of.

  42. The basis of all this confusion is propaganda, the life-blood of politics and political change. Learn propaganda, human psychology etc. and these will become self-explanatory. Each ‘issue’ is a manufactured, artificially created ‘crisis’ that when discussed they instantiate Marx’s contention theories. Bring up a civil right for discussion? Why? Only to change it into something it is not through argument with false premises, argument of created crises. Why change civil rights? Gun rights? instead of learning to live by them…

  43. Source: http://jpfo.org/filegen-n-z/ragingagainstselfdefense.htm

    Excerpt from; Rage Against Self Defense by Sarah Thompson, M.D.

    Identity as Victim

    If I were to summarize this article in three sentences, they would be:

    [1] People who identify themselves as “victims” harbor excessive
    amounts of rage at other people, whom they perceive as “not victims.”

    [2] In order psychologically to deal with this rage, these “victims”
    utilize defense mechanisms that enable them to harm others in socially
    acceptable ways, without accepting responsibility or suffering guilt,
    and without having to give up their status as “victims.”

    [3] Gun owners are frequently the targets of professional victims
    because gun owners are willing and able to prevent their own
    victimization.

    Thus the concept of “identity as victim” is essential. How and why do
    members of some groups choose to identify themselves as victims and
    teach their children to do the same? While it’s true that women, Jews,
    and African–Americans have historically been victimized, they now
    participate in American society on an equal basis. And other groups,
    most notably Asian–Americans, have been equally victimized, and yet have
    transcended the “eternal victim” mentality.

    Why, for example, would a 6’10″ NBA player who makes $10 million a
    year see himself as a “victim”? Why would a successful, respected,
    wealthy, Jewish physician regard himself as a “victim”? Conversely, why
    might a wheelchair bound woman who lives on government disability NOT
    regard herself as a victim?

    I would argue it’s because the basketball player and the physician
    believe that their identities are dependent on being victims — not
    because they have actually been victimized, but because they’re members
    of groups that claim victim status. Conversely, the disabled woman was
    probably raised to believe that she is responsible for her own success
    or failure.

    In fact, many people who have been victims of actual violent crime,
    or who have survived war or civil strife, support the right of
    self–defense. The old saying is often correct: “a conservative is a
    liberal who has been mugged.”

  44. The left spews opinions and if you disagree with them they call you names. But the right states facts and shows proof. These comments are proof in themselves.

  45. “And what angered those men the most? …the comparison of gay rights to the black civil rights movement.” This is where this article lost all credibility for me. Only in this “civilized society” can one prejudice be an admonishment while another is accepted based on the same hate!

    • And you spew your hate on everyone who objects to you smearing your behavior choices in their faces at every opportunity.

      • Would like to know where your hatred begins. Do you approve of multiple people marriages? Do you approve of brother-sister or mother-son marriages? Do you approve of man-animal marriages? Do you approve of adults who are attracted to children? These are all deviant sexual behaviors that are not considered ‘normal.’ If you don’t approve of all of these relationships, then you, too, are a ‘hater.’

    • You homos keep saying that we ( the ones that disapprove) are haters, I believe that deep inside of the homo you know that you are demented and therefore must seek out hatred from others because you denial your demented lifestyle. Whether it’s falsely perceived hatred or deserved, you don’t care, just as long as you get some. Seek Jesus, he’ll give you a sound mind.

    • Normal people will forever be repulsed by a man penetrating another man or woman anally. Gays are free to live anyway they want without being persecuted by society. But society will never accept it.

    • Men weren’t created to screw other men. Period. Just because you can drive a car with your feet, doesn’t mean it was designed for that.

    • What does the credibility of the article have to do with these men’s opinion? Are you suggesting that West is lying and that these men really told him that the decades of slavery and subsequent discrimination for the color of their skin is just like the prejudice and discrimination experienced by gays? Do you even know what credibility means?

      The Constitution discriminated against blacks, and the Civil Rights movement was a humanitarian attempt to publicly right this wrong. The Constitution NEVER discriminated against gays. The Bible does not teach us that being black is a sin, and black people have no choice in skin color. Contrarily, the Bible is clear about sodomy, and people absolutely do have a choice between either abstaining or invoking their God-given free will. There is absolutely no comparison between something that is legislatively and unfairly imposed on people and something people choose at their own peril.

      A better comparison might be the common societal view of convicted
      criminals to that of gays. Both come from making choices against the accepted norm, while neither are derived from feelings, thoughts or attitudes of superiority based on skin color.

      What gays really seek is an equality to that of married people of all races. What you really seek is a Godless civil union, not a blessed marriage. You want to call your platform civil rights (an affront to blacks) but balk at the term civil union, which serves as proof that your platform has nothing
      to do with the Civil Rights movement and everything to do with redefining
      marriage by attempting to eradicate God. I personally find the dishonesty of the gay agenda more reprehensible than the actual act of sodomy, but that’s just little old me.
      Stop H8TING yourself, and just be honest.

    • You have to be a lib in order to have missed the point by that much. Try reading it again, this time using common sense in place of emotion

  46. Because “Welfare” is for the politicians, not the people.
    Because corruption is OK as long as it’s Progressive corruption.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here