Yeah the granting action is what I meant Mr. Woods. I was simply gushing with a stream of consciousness. The 65 years of "freedom" to which I was referring was the cold war and the NATO action. The Warsaw Pact countries started towards freedom and democracy after the fall of the war. The success of much or many of the worlds countries financially and politically since WWII is often attributed to the policies and practices of the USA, I believe. From the management of post war Japan and Germany, the Cold War competition with the dictatorial communist regimes and the opening with the Chineese. The term "free" world may not be an absolutely correct construction but it was meant to define those nations who practiced DEMOCRACY as opposed to those nations that had some other kind of Republic like the Soviet Union. Democracy seemingly defeated those Republics and is still making some head way. I always thought I could have been President. I only know of one Manchurian.

Why is the sea and the air any different than property above which is to be held tenaciously? Why does not all property have the rights of nature and public usage? Does Elizabeth contradict the other guys above?

I did not mean to drive out the industry Mike but the capitalists who have taken the industry away. And are you saying here that you want more pro-slavery people to live here, and RBESRQ wants more illegals to live here. Do I see clearly what you are saying, it certainly would be the first time.

Republic means "return to the people" power to the people etcetra ipso facto DEMOCRACY!

Mike you are really ill informed if you think the Nazi's, the Maoists, were majorities. What Hitler, Stalin, Mao did is what right wing conservatism will do to us if we fail to maintian a stong and activist DEMOCRACY in this country. Those guys are examples of what happens when majorities are stifled. Geez Mike how can you actually miss this stuff.

Mike is not only a dreamer who is either a liar or more likely just totally ill informed. There never was such a land as he describes, I suggest not even in Camelot. As far as the free world every nation under that banner is now heavily in debt (Italy over 100% of GDP, Japan 170% of GDP, UK only 47% of GDP, Canada 62% of GDP). Strangely the non FREE world like China and Russia are like 0 and 6 % respectivley. The free world has proven itself worthy however in many respects, granting freedom and independence to the likes of Phillipines, Indonesia, India, Africa etc since WWII. Aid and technology etc to all the world etc, not to mention learning, capitalism, micro loan economics, and most of all DEMOCRACY especially in South America, Iraq, Israel, etcetera. Sometimes it is good to count our blessings and see the good that "We" have done. The US via its policies has kept the world from world war and kept the nations of Europe free from tyranny for 65 years and brought down the Berlin Wall. Mike never says anything interesting just repeats the same ole trite garbage, he is like that Manchurian man..

Virtue has somewhat to do with relationality while freedom has somewhat to do with lack of relationality. Every thing seems to have the ying and yang, the Greeks discovered the answer - Moderation In All Things. THE HAPPY MEAN!

We need more of those virtuous ones and need to ship the illegals, the tax cheats, the capitalist thugs that ship our jobs overseas, overseas.

A bad quote, I wonder if it is accurate. I love Washington of course but he was not the best formally educated of the founders. This quote is troubling or confusing. "Law, under no form of government" what the heck does that mean. Even natual law is under the government of God, Mother Nature or the Universe whomever you choose to place over it and when you violate it there are consequences. Republicanism is certainly a form of government so what did he mean by that remark. Mans law without mans enforcement is worthless. The folk in the wild wild west new that and gloried in the day that the sheriff came to town and the Federal Marshalls. Marshalls and Sheriffs are after all just government. I think what George really meant to say is "laws, under no form of government, are better dispensed to mankind THAN UNDER A REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMEMNT. If that is what he meant then I change my mind and give it a five. A government of, by, and for the people is the answer aka Democracy.

It is not reason to the individual (or to some individuals) but it is reason to the greatest majority of individuals, else why was it created since time immemorial unto the present day. Government is like law, abolish it entirely and a new one will be set up the very next day. This quote is red meat for the non-thinking rabble among us and certainly they will grovel over it. (An eye should be kept on the abuses of government, institutions, businesses, and individuals, just in case they are not doing what they OUGHT.)

Kennedy worked for and Johnson passed the Civil Rights act, voting rights acts etcetera. I can think of few more liberating laws passed by the US Congress at the moment. Bush 1 voted against the Civil Rights act. So there is two for you. Nixon used southern antipathy to these liberty enhancing laws to construct his southern strategy of Republican/conservative politics. Conservatives as a general rule (and William F. Buckley in particular for one) were not for these liberty enhancing ideas. Generally they took a go slow attitude if not a go backwards attitude. So until you can prove to me otherwise I see last nights award by Conservatives to Roy Innis of the Congress of Racial Equality as the height of hypocrisy. Now if you have an ounce of fairness Mike give me an answer concerning a do gooder conservative. I suggest there ain't any and you just returned a question with another question rather than with an answer. What does that say about you may I ask?

Last night I watch the tele and saw the Conservative Political Action Committee give an award to Roy Innis the long time life time head and leader of the Congress of Racial Equality. What hypocrisy, can anyone name a conservative who ever supported or worked for racial equality or equality of any kind?

Yes, goes against the idea that it is something that falls out of a universal sky, supports the idea that liberty is a construct between indiviudals, groups and societies.

I dunno about this. For the Colonialists it was a negation of monarchy. For the religionists it was a negation of heirarchy etcetera. For many liberty also was a call for equality and fraternity.

Interesting!

Are the international bankers now giving it back?

Freedom must be guarded with vigilance, if it is a universal self perpetuating thing it needs no protection, no vigilance nothing de nada. Well it is not a universal as we all well know. Washington DC is the protector, defender and spreader of Liberty here and aroung the world. I understand Jim K's hatred of environmental laws and Al Gore. According to PBS radio the Feds are ready to decend upon Texas due to its total lack of envrionmental respect. Of course they say "Don't mess with Texas" as the rest of us victims of their lack of wholesome restraint in the areas of pollution say "Texas stop messing with us". Go, go, go, Washington defend our envronmental freedoms from the bad Texans.

If you are totally free there is no "ought". If there is an ought then you are not absolutely free. Good news today, apparently another tax cheat is dead, hallelujah!

I always feel your total concept of freedom is simply about money? How about state taxes do they also go to international bankers. Here locally there is a lot of street and road construction, does that mean those international guys are giving it back?

Responsibility to what Carlton? Could you equally construct and reverse your response to say "Individual Freedom and Personal Responsibility". If I should or must be responsible am I truly free. If liberty can be cease to exist become extinct due to lack of personal responsibility does it then actually exist as an absolute, I suggest that it does not. I suggest that Webster is saying what I was saying recently that LIBERTY and FREEDOM is carefully worked out charter of a society, culture, tradition. Freedom is not free or absolute or universal, it must not only be fought for physically but maintained through vigilance and a wholesome restraint. Vigilance includes in my value system Civil Rights Laws, Environmental Protection (to wholsomely restrain those who feel free to destroy it, and to globally warm it),

Here we go again "Universal" freedom is to do what you like, "true" freedom is to do what you ought. Where does one learn about this "oughtness" may I ask. Would it could it be from parents, religion, Ten Commandments, society, neighbors, others. Maybe this quote will help Carlton and Mike to answer the question of "What is freedom" to them. This quote implies that it involves a doing and aciton. Maybe it will get them thinking.

What the heck happened in 1913, Prof J.? Responsible to your selves is an interesting construction, I have heard of responsible for myself and responsible to others by never responsible to "myself".

What is freedom to you guys? No one is absolutely free to do whatever they like when they like. Your lack of abilties to communicate and resorting to name calling does not solve or win any argument. The proof that none are totally free is the courts and litigation. If someone builds others can litigate as to where, how etcetera. And this same litigation can be brought to bear on anything you do for that matter. If some universal law were accurately known and existed in fact rather than just in feeling we would not have or need mankinds litigation. These are the cards we have been dealt, whose fault is it that you guys chosse to keep your heads in the sand and call every one above the sand names. WHAT DO YOU GUYS MEAN BY FREEDOM?

Universal individual freedom would seem to say that if you wish to build your house in the middle of the downtown intersection well that is one thing. The societal construct or zoning that says no but you may build your house here or there is another thing. To look at the stars or to observe the blue sky is a universal thing that all may wonder at and feel to be part of the universse. These things are universal things as is the teaching that all are created equal and that all have "freedom" but and it is a very big but, many of us live in societies where groups decide and individuasl follow. This deciding is generally refered to as law. As long as you follow the "Law" you remain free to do as you please in every other way, once you break the law you become what is known as an outlaw or outside of the law and are subject to loosing your freedom. This is easy stuff not rocket science so why cannot you understand common sense and wisdom Mike, why? Freedom needs to be defined and explained Carlton. What do you mean by freedom, some wish to be free of the ten commandments, Mike has oft expressed contempt and wishes to be free of the "law" that tells you on which side of the road to drive, or where to stop. What the hell do you guys mean by "freedom is freedom"? The underlying sentiment I get from most of you is you yearn for a freedom from Washington, and from taxation. Others may find that leadership and governance from Washington is the only thing that keeps us or at least them free, such as Civil Rights Acts, hate crime laws, environmental laws etc. Is freedom from Washington your only mantra?

Individual freedom and societal freedom are two different things. When I back pack and live out in the woods I know a little bit aobut universal freedom but when I come back I understand a little bit about society. Universal freedom is a thing of faith and is a sentient a felt kind of freedom. Societal freedom is a construct of the human race and is constructed differently in different places. These constructs or relationships must be set down either in charters or understandings or traditions. Thus I give the quorte a thumbs down for its lack of completeness or explanation.