Cohan's journalism card should be pulled. Makes me wonder if the the journalists of today even know there is a Journalists Creed, written about one hundred years ago.

http://www.mdn.org/jschool/CREED.HTM

Papers of today are no longer accurately reporting real news. They tend to be propaganda rags parroting the agenda du jour, which is not only decidedly liberal, but is anti-conservative.

There is only one place in a newspaper where opinion should be found and that is on the editorial page. All the rest should be accurately reported news with no bias. However, almost all newsrooms are now filled with the products of liberal educations, leaving the populace not only dangerously uninformed, but in actuality, duped by their misinformation. They need to "read and heed" the Journalists Creed.

http://www.mdn.org/jschool/CREED.HTM

Succinct and accurate.

Crime is committed by criminals. Simple enough to understand. I agree with Scott and Val. Desperation to feed one's family would be the only thing that should drive a person to take what does not belong to them (after all other efforts are exhausted) and then only what is needed. The caveat being it must be paid back as soon as personal circumstances allow. Ingersoll would fit right in with our present socialist leaning government. His is the sort of mindset that brought about the present corruption we see in this administration.

Wilson said that and at the same time segregated the military. Sure seems to me as if he was trying to separate the American people. If one segment of society is segregated, it's all segregated. The military was a physical separation, the others are mentally and emotionally separated, pitting one group against the other. Sometimes it's done by the government, sometimes by people themselves. If everyone gave up their hyphenated labels and realized we are all Americans (if here legally) our country would be a lot safer. It might be a good idea to figure out who are not "worthy sons," such as those who would drive a wedge into society in favor of one group over another. There are several who come to mind.

Read his book, "The Road to Serfdom."

In checking other of Cleveland's quotes, I find the above is only part of a greater quote. It warrants a full understanding of his comment, so I'm including it here. "I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the Constitution, and I do not believe that the power and duty of the general government ought to be extended to the relief of individual suffering which is in no manner properly related to the public service or benefit. Federal aid in such cases encourages the expectation of paternal care on the part of the government and weakens the sturdiness of our national character, while it prevents the indulgence among our people of that kindly sentiment and conduct which strengthens the bonds of a common brotherhood." I've added a second quote which I find just as telling as the first quote if read in full. The "kindly sentiment" to which he is referring is probably the benevolence of churches and philanthropists who cared for the needy and helped them overcome their difficulties. "Welfare's purpose should be to eliminate, as far as possible, the need for its own existence." Ronald Reagan

To Cal in TX--Democrats were entirely different in Cleveland's day. It is sad what has happened to the Democratic Party since the Progressives have infiltrated it or should I say, since they took it over. It's not just Obama. If Hillary Clinton decides to challenge him, beware! She is as bad as he is, just a lot more subtle. Her college thesis, which was not made public was in praise of Saul Alinsky, no less. God help us if we fail to elect a Constitutional Conservative.

Mary--I agree with all above, but what to do with those who refuse to stop the drug abuse. If the government will not keep us safe from enemies foreign and domestic, and this is surely one of the threats, how should it be handled? Prison is obviously not the answer. People destroy their lives, crimes are committed in order to obtain either drugs or money to buy them, people under the influence maim or kill innocent people in accidents. Should the equivalent of opium dens be re-instituted and quarantined away from the normal population providing them with their poison of choice and let them slowly commit drug induced suicide?

Five stars for Carlton!!

He got it right the first time in 2006. But he's like a chameleon, he changes to suit whatever he wants at the moment. I never thought I would give 5 stars to anything Obama said, but in 2006 he got it right in spite of himself.

Thanks to Mike - Norwalk, for his insightful comments. ( I don't think there's any real hope for Waffler, but thank you for trying.) I believe JFK was somewhat naive in thinking it "extremely unlikely that the fear of governmental tyranny...will ever be a major danger to our nation," since he was educated at some of the most prestigious schools here and abroad and lived his life on the world stage for the most part including going to war. Did he not read history? I dare say, he did. So, on what could he base his assumption of negligible risk? At least he was not trying to dismantle it as is the case today.

No Waffler, not weird. He has more sense than most liberals who would deny everyone the right to protect themselves, their family and their property. The present occupant of the WH is working on the issue of confiscation as we read and comment on these Liberty Tree quotes. I really don't want to be like Cuba or Britain or Germany or any other country that has denied their people the right to keep and bear arms. History confirms how dangerous it is to disarm a People. Guns do not kill people, killers kill people.

Castro was a great communicator, a very charismatic speaker, had a troubled childhood, born illegitimately, had a fake birth certificate (to achieve entry into the school his father wished him to attend) was not a good student, however he excelled at numerous sports, for example, swimming, baseball and basketball, and went on to become the brutal dictator of our neighbor to the south, Cuba. Does all this sound somewhat familiar? Have we ever heard this story before? Has anything like this ever happened in America? Hmmm!! Oh, by the way, gun control here in this country is rearing it's ugly head again. Waffler, violence is never the best answer, but there are times when that is the only defense, hence the Revolutionary war, the Civil war, etc. And again I remind you, America is not a democracy. We are a Constitutional Republic, which is now under extreme attack from those in the government who would abolish our Constitution and have a country ruled by a totalitarian group of elites.

This is exactly how tyranny happens. Our Constitutional rights have been infringed for most of the last hundred years. We the People must continue to wake up and "mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." Nothing less will turn this around.

The only change we would see from legalization of "certain substances" is more violence and corruption., broken marriages and injured if not killed young people. Even if the rule of law would not collapse (being legal), "certain segments" of society would be adversely affected. Since there is very little in the way of a self disciplining "conscience" in this secular society, it would be all too easy for those who would ordinarily decide against drug use to "give it a try." We can only hope those in congress would never entertain the idea of legalizing any "certain substances."

The same convoluted thinking that says if there are no guns, the crime rate will go down. If illegal drugs are legalized we can expect far more users along with many more car accidents. Do we really want our airline pilots smoking a joint? How about the police or firefighters or the school bus drivers? And what about the paramedic that answers your emergency call. What part of "Zoning Out" do these advocates for drug use not understand? Thumbs down doesn't really cover it, a thousand thumbs down!

Thomas Sowell deserves a constellation of stars for his ongoing contributions. His body of work is incredible.

The Takers have no idea what is in store for them and for this nation once the transition is complete. There will be no more handouts, but there will be fighting in the streets for a mouthful of bread. Those who have depended (some, all their lives) on the distribution of others wealth (livelihood) will find one day find they do not even know where to begin in taking care of themselves and the government won't be able to.

Waffler, please go to Prof. Shaffer's other quotes (included below) and then view his videos on types of government. It will give you a much better understanding of what the Prof is saying. You have read a simplistic interpretation into a very complex thought. There is a 3 part series of his from which you may learn about different types of governments. I think it would clarify a few things for you. All 3 videos together are about 20 plus minutes total.

Waffler must be reading liberal rags instead of factual information. The stock market is down, although we can't really use that as an indicator since it is so manipulated. However, the length of time unemployment has been down has now surpassed how long it lasted during the Great Depression. That, my friend, IS an indicator. Also, the only unemployment numbers being Counted are the ones actively looking for work. It does not count the people that have given up, the people that are near retirement age and just decided to formally retire because they've looked for a job for two years and no one is hiring. It does not count those people that are underemployed which is also a part of the foreclosure problem. And it does not count those people just graduated from college that did not work previously but are applying now and there is no work for them. We also have a historic record number of people on food stamps to the tune of 47% of Americans. Does that sound like prosperity? And Waffler, the reason government jobs must be cut is because too much money is being spent on them and government is supposed to be small, not the monstrous size it is now under Obama's regime. He has laid more debt on the people of America in two years than all the combined debt in the history of the United States since it began. NAFTA was passed during the Clinton Administration which allowed companies to move overseas, hence the American people lost most of the manufacturing jobs. Walmart originally was a "Buy America" store when Sam Walton was alive. Try finding something made in America in there now.

This is why the folly of raising the minimum wage does not work to improve the lot of the poor. Employers who have to pay more for unskilled labor will not hire. Because of minimum wage increases, everything else in the economy gets out of proportion and becomes more expensive, therefore lowering the quality of life for those who did not get a raise. The minimum raise would only apply to the lowest rung on the economic ladder. Reagan nailed it.

This is a strange quote; the wording is troubling. I would like to know the context, although even knowing that, I do not think I would agree. The third word is a stumbling block for me. I find Mike's comments helpful and agree with Edith. To J.Carlton: Where does the quote end in your comment or is the entire comment a quote? Thank you.

Reston. No one shoots to kill. They shoot that they might live. In the hands of responsible shooters, a gun is a defensive weapon. In the hands of criminals it is offensive. Therefore the gun is not the problem, the criminal is. I give this quote five stars, squared!