I think Rudy Messerschmidt hit the nail on the head. A PEOPLE'S HISTORY OF THE U.S. should be required reading by every citizen of this country---along with THE GOD DELUSION by Richard Dawkins.

Reston, VA, is right as usual.

If it were not for great liberals like Clarence Darrow, we would all be serfs scratching for our very lives while the super rich laugh at our ignorance to know the difference between truth and what is ridiculous demagoguery and superstition. And while I'm at it, one of the supertitions I'm writing about is an afterlife where we'll all be reunited and live on easy street.

Mark Twain could not possibly have written this. Perhaps something like it but his writing was so superior to this rambling, ungrammatical nonsense, that it is inexcusable to put his name to it.

What really rankled him was having to think, something he was never able to do.

I like even more the words Jefferson wrote where the dots are and not quoted. Those were "The legitimate powers of government extend to such acts only as are injurious to others. But it does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are twenty gods, or no god. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.....Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error. Give a loose to them, they will support the true religion, by bringing every false one to their tribunal, to the test of their investigation. They are the natrual enemies of error, and of error only. Had not the Roman government permitted free enquiry, Christianity could never have been introduced. Had not free enquiry been indulged, at the aera of the reformation, the corruptions of Christianity could not have been purged away."

Judith and Anonymous--Liberal: I seldom look here for the same reason (conservative or fascist dominated). But your two replies will encourage more interest.

Reston, I encourage your reading more about Emma Goldman. She was communist when that was the only hope working people had. She was a brilliant lady with fantastic courage and real zeal for human rights. Her quote was made when voting was even less democratic than it has become with our brainwashing media of today.

I think, by God, you are in trouble putting my name on something I have not written. This is the second time I have caught you in deliberately printing a lie with my name on it. And don't give me the line before that I had really made the statement in a previous reply. This is something I don't believe and I would never have used such poor grammar. I will see my lawyer about this. DT

Pure bullshit.

Dr. Vieira is so astute he could have followed up with: and when you find yourself on the side of the majority you had better rethink your position.

How about the life of a slave? Or one of the millions who have no liberty, insufficient sustenance, sadistic parents, disabling deformities or injuries to name just a few?

None of you have mentioned what history books and what authors offer the most objective history. If you haven't read Noam Chomsky's "People's History of the U. S." you don't really know our own history. Might lead you to also read Barbara Tuchman, Henry Steele Commager, the Durants, or James Loewen's "Lies My Teacher Told Me." It MATTERS who is doing the writing.

Nothing but a definition and a very poor one at that.

It is interesting that Lincoln, in a letter to Judge J. A. Wakefield in 1862, wrote: "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian Scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures have become clearer and stronger with advancing years, and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them." Mary Todd Lincoln, speaking of the Bible, confirmed that "Mr. Lincoln had no hope and no faith in the usual acceptance of those words." It is also known that Lincoln's favorite authors were the heretics Thomas Paine and Voltaire. Among many of his sayings re religion were these: "Friends, I agree with you in Providence; but I believe in the Providence of the most men, the largest purse, and the longest cannon." And finally, "It will not do to investigate the subject of religion too closely, as it is apt to lead to infidelity."

To think we in the 21st Century still believe a collection of 27 books selected from a much larger collection, all claiming to be gospels, written when so little was known about the world, science, or much else is sad indeed. Franklin, as well as Jefferson, Washington, Madison and other of the deists (definitely not Christian), was closer to the truth than most. With all that is known today it is more likely he would doubt that Jesus could have been anything other than a wandering fellow preaching a more loving, compassionate version of his Judaism.

Not really, unfortunately. They shall more likely be called "red tinted liberals."

The least one could do is learn the definition of welfare. Reston said it best.

James Knox Polk said it beautifully. Mike seems not to know the least bit about the differences of socialism and fascism. They are not in the least similar. They cannot both be practiced at the same time. What we have been experiencing at our harm is FASCISM, not socialism.

An interest anomaly of fine expressions coming from quintessentially opposite viewpoints (Arendt).

The value or truth of a statement is not responsible for its source but in this case it couldn't have had a better one.

Mencken accurately labeled this country not a democracy (or republic which is just semantics) but a 'booboisie.' That's because the big majority of its citizens, like Mike, merry, and J carlton, always vote against their own interests, preferring to swallow the pablum of the fascist-moving right wing.

Talk about delusional! Can't you people acknowledge the truth that it has been DE-regulation that has caused all of us to lose our ass to the "free trade" hi-rollers? Even the idiot McCain now, now, now admits that regulation was needed. When will people learn the REAL differences of socialism and capitalism???

How utterly ridiculous is this statement. If it weren't for an occasional decent government action such as the Glass Steagall Act most of us would be penniless. It would be 1/2% filthy rich and the rest of us working for peanuts until we drop dead.

Friedman's kind of freedom means freedom to monopolize, to steal markets, to drain resources from other countries, and generally to use unfettered laissez faire capitalism to create huge disparities in wealth between the haves and have-nots. He may believe in free markets but definitely not fair markets.