Lou Pritchett, you make me fear for my nation – an open letter to a former soap salesman


It looks like an internet hoax, but it’s not. It’s worse than that.  It is a triumph of cynicism and pessimism wedded to false claims, crafted to impugn a good man.  Lou Pritchett’s letter is scary because he appears to believe it, and others may, too.

Lou Pritchett on a yacht, holding his book, which has nothing to do with politics. Notice the lack of libraries in the photo.

Lou Pritchett on a yacht, holding his book, which has nothing to do with politics. Notice the lack of libraries in the photo. Image from LouPritchett.com

It usually comes with this line:  “Subject:  Letter from Procter & Gamble Exec to Obama.”  It may be entitled “An Open Letter to President Obama.”  It’s a letter filled with rant and inaccurate claims against Obama.  But it demonstrates something troubling.  It’s a letter from a guy who should know better, from a guy who can read newspapers and check facts for himself, but a guy who has been suckered in by every false and calumnous claim made against our President.

In short, it’s a letter from a supreme cynic, who has every reason to know better but appears to refuse to think.

Below the fold, I post the letter completely as it came to me, and I respond, with an Open Letter to Former Soap Salesman Lou Pritchett.


Here’s how the letter came to me, and below that, a careful and more pensive response.

“Subject: Letter from Procter & Gamble Exec to Obama

Please read, even if you are an Obama fan.  It is legitimate, written by respected, Lou Pritchett, formerly of Proctor and Gamble.  Lou Pritchett is one of corporate America’s true living  legends- an acclaimed author, dynamic teacher and one of the world’s  highest rated speakers. Successful corporate executives everywhere recognize him as the foremost leader in change management. Lou changed the way America does business by creating an audacious concept that came to be known as “partnering.” Pritchett rose from soap salesman to Vice-President, Sales and Customer Development for Procter and Gamble and over the course of 36 years, made corporate history.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA

Dear President Obama:

You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.

You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.

You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.

You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don’t understand it at its core.

You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others.

You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.

You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America ‘ crowd and deliver this message abroad.

You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.

You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.

You scare me because you prefer ‘wind mills’ to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.

You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.

You scare me because you have begun to use ‘extortion’ tactics against certain banks and corporations.

You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending  proposals.

You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.

You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.

You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.

You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O’Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.

You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.

Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8  years.

Lou Pritchett

The letter came with this explanation attached:

TRUE – CHECK:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp

This letter was sent to the NY Times but they never acknowledged it.

Big surprise!  Since it hit the internet, however, it has had over 500,000 hits.  Keep it going.  All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.  It’s happening right now.

I disagree.  I think people can actively promote evil, even when they do not intend to.  For example, this letter contains a number of nasty, erroneous claims (I have to work hard not to call them “lies,” but I’ll wager Pritchett just doesn’t know better; I can’t pass judgment on his motives).

No rational person should read anything into the failure of the New York Times to publish the letter.  They get thousands of letters on many topics, and they try to pick the best.  Plus, that paper as most responsible, major papers do, put letters through a basic fact check.  This letter wouldn’t survive that.  Had the paper published Pritchett’s letter, he would have been subject to widespread ridicule.

And, this should not be news, The New York Times does not respond to each of the thousands of letters-to-the-editor it gets every day.

I doubt Pritchett will ever get this letter, though I’d like to be proved wrong.  Garbage should be picked up an carted off so vermin can’t breed in it, however, and so I offer my response below

Open letter to Former Soap Salesman Lou Pritchett

Dear Mr. Pritchett,

Knowing that you’re a voting citizen of the United States, and that you have access to vast stores of accurate information, I look at your letter to President Obama, and I fear for my country. Someone noted the old saw that the only thing necessary for evil to succeed is for good people to do nothing.  On that basis, I cannot let your cynical claims go uncorrected where they err, and unrebutted.

I’ve only lived through 11 presidencies, so you have at least 6 years on me.  But you’re comfortably retired, sitting on a fat pile of assets from your comfortable job at Procter and Gamble.  I will be lucky to be able to retire before I hit 85, after years of public service.  I have reason to be cynical [while you don’t].  Your irrational lashing out puzzles me all the more, and troubles me all the more.

You say you don’t know Barack Obama.  That is no one’s fault but your own.

Barack Obama’s been a character on the national stage since he offered a stunningly beautiful keynote speech to the Democratic National Convention in 2004.  There were dozens of profiles written about him in magazines and newspapers, and profiles offered on national television.  His race for the U.S. Senate in Illinois, a major state, got heavy coverage when the Republicans offered a carpet-bagging man from Maryland as candidate for the seat, when the duly-selected Republican candidate dropped out when scandal caught up with him.

Obama won the right to represent Illinois in the U.S. Senate, in the seat occupied before him by people like Alan Dixon, Adlai Stevenson III, Everett Dirksen, and Stephen A. Douglas.  That seat is always watched closely by national media.

Obama’s popularity was based on many things, including two terms in the Illinois State Senate where he pushed through an ethics reform bill, which most people though impossible, and on his best-selling book, Dreams from My Father, a book contracted for by the publishers after Obama had been elected president of the prestigious journal, Harvard Law Review.   Published first in 1995, it was re-published in 2004.  You’ve had 14 years to get to your local library and read the book.

The book wasn’t a secret.  Wikipedia summarizes some of the reaction to the book:

In discussing Dreams from My Father, Nobel Laureate Toni Morrison has called Obama “a writer in my high esteem” and the book “quite extraordinary.” She praised “his ability to reflect on this extraordinary mesh of experiences that he has had, some familiar and some not, and to really meditate on that the way he does, and to set up scenes in narrative structure, dialogue, conversation–all of these things that you don’t often see, obviously, in the routine political memoir biography. […] It’s unique. It’s his. There are no other ones like that.”[28]

The book “may be the best-written memoir ever produced by an American politician,” wrote Time columnist Joe Klein.[29] In 2008, The Guardians Rob Woodard wrote that Dreams from My Father “is easily the most honest, daring, and ambitious volume put out by a major US politician in the last 50 years.”[30] Michiko Kakutani, the Pulitzer Prize-winning critic for The New York Times, described it as “the most evocative, lyrical and candid autobiography written by a future president.”[31]

The audio book edition earned Obama the 2006 Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album.[32]

Your library might have the audio book, too.   Have you looked?

After he joined the U.S. Senate, he wrote another book based on his campaign and what he saw in Washington, The Audacity of Hope:  Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream.  It topped the New York Times best-seller list in the fall of 2006.

So, you say you don’t know a guy who strode quickly into the limelight in 2004, wrote two best-selling books spilling his guts on his hopes and dreams as an American for a better and stronger America.  Seriously, man, whose fault is it that you didn’t bother to check him out?

You didn’t know anything about George W. Bush, either, even after he’d spent four years as president.  Did you vote for him?

There is no excuse to claim you don’t know about the man we elect president.  Your lack of curiosity, failure to pick up a newspaper or go to the library, is not Barack Obama’s fault.  You need to read more.

If you’d read the books, or the profiles, you’d know that Obama attended Columbia and Harvard on scholarship.  Most students at those schools, today, attend on scholarship.  Several Ivy League schools tell prospective applicants up front that, if they are accepted, they will have the money to go.  Even in the 1990s they prided themselves on helping bright but poor students.

How can you fail to know that?

Barack Obama left the U.S. for a few years early in his life.  He was born in the U.S.A. — in our 50th state! — and he attended school in the U.S. for eight years — longer than Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Jackson and George Washington combined.  He was raised by his two Kansas-born grandparents — as American as L. Frank Baum’s Dorothy, who was raised in similar circumstances (other than her trip to Oz).

Obama grew up playing basketball, the sport invented in a YMCA in New Jersey.  He attended Occidental College in Los Angeles, that all-American megalopolis in California, hoping to play basketball.  But, like William J. Bennett who said he went to Williams College to play football but discovered he had a brain, Obama woke up to scholarship at Occidental — in a big way.  He transferred to Columbia and graduated, worked building a powerful anti-poverty program from scratch in Chicago, and went off to law school at Harvard where he was a smashing success as a scholar and good guy.

These are all grand, American institutions.  Your claiming that basketball, college, Hawaii, California, New York City, Chicago, and Occidental, Columbia and Harvard are outside American culture is a slander to our entire nation and most of the people who live here.

Neither you nor I are more American than any of this culture, or any of these institutions, or Barack Obama.  Your claim insults us all — it is thoughtless, unwarranted and unsupportable.

Why did you not bother to learn this before you wrote your letter?

You accuse Obama of never having had to make a payroll.  I don’t know your early career, but your experience in a large corporation like Procter and Gamble is no better.  You never had to meet a payroll there, either — there was always plenty of money in the bank, a good line of credit from the world’s biggest banks, a good expense account for you, and someone else to do the accounting and cut the checks.

Obama, on the other hand, built from the ground up a non-profit poverty fighting organization for the Catholic Church in Chicago, building it to several employees and a half-million dollar budget in just a few years.

Why do you not know this?

You complain that Obama doesn’t understand the military, but National Guard veteran George W. Bush ignored the advice and wise counsel of the military and led us into a blunder in Iraq.  Military experience is no substitute for genuine curiosity, scholarship and wisdom.

You claim, without any cause I can find, that Obama lacks “humility and class.”  And yet he put his campaign on hold for days to fly to Hawaii for a few moments with his dying grandmother, to say “thank you” for her work raising him.  It could have cost him the election.  Those white, conservatives who voted for him for president of the Harvard Law Review (with many others) note what a good leader he was, not cocky but sure, a class act.

Obama blames others?  What I see is a man who steps up to responsibility, on the economy, on the budget, on our wars, on social issues, though they are all situations he inherited.  He engineered a new budget through Congress — a task George Bush couldn’t get done — in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression.  He went to the Capitol to offer to work with Republicans — an offer they promptly repudiated — and he has soldiered on trying to get America’s course straight without their help since.

Obama has never aligned himself with radicals who want to see America fail.  Specifically, he has never aligned himself with Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly or Glenn Back.  Nor has he aligned himself with anyone half as radical on the left.  He’s very much a moderate, and his cabinet choices reflect that.  Ray LaHood is no radical of any stripe.

Where did you ever get that odd idea?  Didn’t you read his books?  Don’t you read the newspapers?

Cheerleader for the “blame America crowd?”  No, that’s not Obama.  He did not say America deserved to be attacked on September 11, 2001, as Christian preachers Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson did.  When he met with Vladimir Putin, unlike George Bush who claimed to have looked into Putin’s eyes and claimed to have seen “trustworthy” man, Obama told Putin the facts and extracted tough agreements to our nation’s advantage.

How could you miss those events?

Obama has never said he wants to change America into a European-style country — though, when we look at greatly reduced heart disease rates in every nation of Europe, or when we look at mass transit in France, Germany and England, we might see places we could do better.

Where did you get such a far-fetched idea?

Obama has never said he wants a government-run health care system.  He has said we have a moral duty to find ways to cover the nearly-50 million Americans who lack insurance and access to timely and inexpensive health care.  He has said we pay too much (we spend $7,000 per capita for health care, way more than double any other nation — and we pay that for the 50 million people who don’t get health care, too).   He has said we need to rein in health care cost inflation, which is double the rate of other goods and services, and which was a major factor in crippling American auto companies competing against foreign producers whose governments offer health coverage for all citizens including auto workers.

Have you read Obama’s statements?  Have you read the House bill, H.R. 3200, which is not Obama’s proposal, but which also doesn’t nationalize health care?  How can you draw that conclusion, when there is no proposal to do so?

Obama wisely urges that we ramp up alternatives to fossil fuels.  But he has also urged that we explore “clean coal,” a proposal that sends environmentalists screaming away. You’re imagining Obama’s opposition to fossil fuels. Windmills?  He’s said we should produce them in the U.S., and not buy them from foreign producers — keep the jobs at home.  Do you favor sending those jobs off-shore?

Where did you get such an idea?  Did you check it out for yourself?

Obama has said not one word in opposition to capitalism. When faced with a choice between nationalizing industries to rescue them, and any other choice, he has in every case avoided nationalization.  The government is a stockholder in some rescued companies, but not the sole owner.  Obama has chosen free market solutions to tough problems where other free-enterprise nations did not.

Why don’t you consider what Obama has done, rather than wild claims from . . . where?

Since when is it “extortion” to give banks enough money to stay in business? Good heavens, man!  The alternative was collapse of our banking system.  Most people complain that the banks were “given” too much!

Plus, most of the banking actions were done by George Bush’s appointee to the Federal Reserve Board, Ben Bernanke, and by the Bush administration prior to January 21, 2009.

Where did you get the idea Obama was behind the actions of the Bush administration, since much of this stuff occurred well before January 21, 2009?

Since when is funding the Pentagon “wild and irresponsible?”  You’ve never heard of the “Blue Dog Democrats,” who threaten to derail our much-needed health care reforms because of the cost?

Surely you live where a newspaper is available, no?

Historian Doris Kearns Goodwin, and others, noted that Obama seems to have paid careful attention to her book on Abraham Lincoln’s cabinet, Team of Rivals.  She summarized lessons for Obama from the book in the Harvard Business Journal earlier this year.  I mention that because you cite that Harvard case study of your project, which tells me that you probably grant credence to that journal — though that makes your disrespect of Obama’s term heading the Harvard Law Review more mysterious and silly. Obama said he wants opposing views in the White House, in the basic discussions in his cabinet room and all other rooms of power.

In any case, Obama has populated his cabinet with people who have opposing views — Hillary Clinton, his chief and sometimes bitter rival for the Democratic nomination, Republican Ray LaHood at the critical Department of Transportation. He kept on Robert Gates at the critical post of Secretary of Defense — George W. Bush’s appointee.  No one thinks Gates is a pushover Obama supporter.

Obama made a point of going to the Capitol to confer with congressmen — Republicans first.

When Obama nominated a candidate for the Supreme Court, he consulted with my old boss, Orrin Hatch, first.

Obama’s team, like Rahm Emanuel, makes it a practice not to ignore Republicans, as the Bush administration ignored Democrats and — truth be told — Republican Members of Congress.

“I’ve heard more from Rahm in six months than I heard from Andy Card in six years, and Card’s daughter worked for me,” said former Representative Tom Davis, Republican of Virginia, referring to a chief of staff under President George W. Bush.

Where did you get the idea that Obama doesn’t like discussion or debate, or that he doesn’t listen to dissent?  That view is wholly unsupportable in history and current action.  Have you read the newspapers this week?  Proponents of health care reform claims he’s listened too much to the opposition.  One might have assumed that if one assumed George Bush’s White House was the model — but Obama promised to change things.  This is one area where he’s delivered better than anyone had any right to hope.

Obama thinks he is omnipotent and omniscient?  Then you must have stood and cheered when he noted — wisely — that the U.S. would have no comment in the first days after the disputed Iranian election, noting that any comment would be taken by the rulers as evidence of  U.S. interference.  The U.S. cannot dictate what happens he noted then, and often as well in regard to Iraq and Afghanistan.

On the one hand you claim Obama thinks himself omnipotent and omniscient, but when he goes to Europe to confer with our allies, saying we are neither omnipotent or omniscient and we need and will honor their views and information, you accuse him of “blaming America.”   I think you have not thought through these issues, nor where America’s best interests lie — certainly not as well as has President Obama.

Lou, your bizarre claim about Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly and Beck almost doesn’t deserve comment.  These are guys who revel in America’s failure, whose ratings and income go up if America fails.  Rush Limbaugh admits that he wants Obama to fail, damn the cost to you, me and all other Americans.

And then you have the gall to claim that Obama demonizes them?

In a just universe, their transmitters would be taken out by lightning.  Obama has merely pointed out a few of their errors, but by no stretch, all of their errors.  Obama hasn’t even mentioned more than a dozen of their hundreds of slanders, errors, and misreportings of events.

Do you have a newspaper?  Where could any fair-minded person think these broadcast bullies deserve protection from the guy they try to bully most?

Obama favors control over governing?  In the most important big policy changer so far, health care reform, rather than dictate to Congress, Obama asked Congress to assemble a proposal.  Republicans refused to participate in making a good bill until Nancy Pelosi got it passed in the House.  Then, rather than wake up and try to make changes they might need in the Senate, they launched a campaign of slander and fiction against health care.

Lou, you, particularly, should appreciate what is going on here.  You worked for Procter & Gamble.  Would it be fair to claim you are a satan-worshipper, as Procter & Gamble’s old logo “proved?”  Of course such a charge is bizarre, ungrounded in fact, and damaging to people who have no intention to worship satan (I hope!).  Since you worked for a company that literally had to change its logo due to unfair and wild claims, you should be particularly sensitive to wild and unfair claims against others.  And yet, here you are with a letter read by more than a half million people, passing along wild and unfair claims.

Did you at least blush when you realized what you had done?

Control?  Obama has given up a great deal of control in order, he hopes, to get the reform that will keep our nation from going bankrupt (more than 60% of personal bankruptcies in the U.S. are due to excessive health costs).   This is the mark of a leader.  Did you read Goodwin’s book on Lincoln?  You should.  Obama did.  It shows how a true, flag-waving patriot leads this nation.

Lou, we survived eight years of George Bush and his assault on the Constitution.  Your dissenting views will be honored far more than any dissent was ever honored by Bush — and if Obama has his way, your life will be better, more secure, and your dissent more free, in four years, six years, and eight years.

You could have learned all of that by reading Obama’s two books, by reading his extensive profiles in newspapers and magazines, by watching his well-known speeches and campaign appearances.  Lou, you’re a bright guy, a successful guy who should be reading newspapers and gathering information about how to vote.

It scares me mightily that despite these many opportunities for you to get the facts, you don’t have them, and you promote wild and scurrilous claims across the internet.  If you don’t know better, that’s your fault.  You should know better.

And if Lou Pritchett, with all his money and information gathering ability, smarts and charm, has such a distorted view of America, America’s election process, and our president, then I truly fear for my nation.

James Madison told us why it’s important to have a good public education system and why it’s important to use that education:

A popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance: And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives.

  • James Madison in a letter to William T. Barry, August 4, 1822; Library of Congress, Letters of James Madison

How many others like you might there be, Lou, literally endangering our republic with disinformation and wrong ideas about what is going on?

Is this the result of the slashing of library budgets begun in the Reagan administration?  Is your lack of information due to a lack of a library?  Is this a result of the reduction in news holes in newspapers as that industry struggles to survive against electronic competition?

In any case, shouldn’t a citizen know what the citizen does not know, and seek that information out before making unfounded charges based on false information?

Madison said knowledge governs ignorance.  But Kin Hubbard or someone like him noted that it’s not what we don’t know that gets us into trouble:  It’s what we know that isn’ t so.  You “know” a lot of stuff about Obama that is wrong. If that misplaced “knowledge” governs, America is doomed.

You wrote that letter months ago.  Please tell us you’ve learned in the passed time, and that you now know better.

Yours truly,

Ed Darrell

(I’ve e-mailed this letter to Mr. Pritchett.)

Update: Pritchett responded, sort of.  Like poking a hog.

More information:

Spread the good words instead:

Add to FacebookAdd to NewsvineAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Furl

Advertisements

131 Responses to Lou Pritchett, you make me fear for my nation – an open letter to a former soap salesman

  1. Bob Barton says:

    We are a Republic. Democracies, true Democracies, are not much more than mob rule. Thanks for all the “education” guys. I feel smarter already.

    Like

  2. Very well, Ed. Then in furtherance of Mr. Barton’s education I bring up this: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/09/04/opinion/04reich-graphic.html?ref=sunday

    From 1947 to 1979 the following five groups saw their incomes rise at the indicated percentage:

    Bottom fifth: 122%
    Second lowest fifth: 101%
    Middle fifth: 113%
    Second highest fifth: 115%
    Top fifth: 99%

    From 1980 to 2009 the same groups saw this change in their income

    Bottom fifth: – 4%
    Second lowest fifth: 7%
    Middle fifth: 15%
    Second highest fifth: 25%
    Top fifth: 55%

    In 1928 1% of the country had 23.9% of the national income. In 1976 the top 1% of the country had 8.9% of the national income. By 2007 the top 1% of the country had 23.5% of the national income.

    Qouting from an editioral in: http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/129558583.html

    In Ike’s day, the bottom 90 percent held 60 percent of the wealth. Today, the top 1 percent to 2 percent have 40 percent; the next 8 percent have 33 percent, and the bottom 90 percent have 27 percent.

    Fourteen million Americans seek jobs. Forty-four million make less than $12,000 a year. Twenty-five percent of our kids are poor. Large companies, reportedly sitting on huge reserves, are not hiring due to “a lack of demand.”

    Really? That same 90 percent of Americans whose real incomes rose 4.5 percent from 2000 to 2009 aren’t producing expected demands?
    ~~~~

    It is the right wing that is engaging in income redistribution. They are the ones waging class warfare along with their rich masters. And their targets? The middle class and the poor. The Republicans along with the rest of the right wing are trying to destroy the United States as a democracy so they can set up an oligarchy ruled by the aristocrats.

    Like

  3. Ed Darrell says:

    I think we should encourage Mr. Barton to comment here — there’s always hope that an educational process may occur.

    Don’t splash soap in other people’s eyes, please.

    Like

  4. The next time Barton opens his fat mouth here he should bother to remember that the tea party/Republican party has an approval rating of less than 20%.

    Like

  5. Ed Darrell says:

    I don’t argue Obama would win with 39%. I would also note that 39% approval does not translate to 39% of the vote, especially opposed to a nutcase like Ron Paul, or wild-eyed Rick Perry.

    Obama’s administration has been a huge disappointment to me. I did not conceive that Republicans genuinely would sacrifice their nation just to score political points against him. And there’s the rub for Republicans — Obama has not done enough of the good stuff. Would people vote for a Republican who promises to do less of the the good stuff, or none at all? A Republican win depends on their discouraging rational voters and Obama supporters from voting at all. If they can bring the vote down low enough, their hard-core flame throwers might win.

    No rational person would look at the need for jobs in our economy, for example, and vote for Rick Perry’s promise to cut more jobs.

    “My plan to increase jobs is to cut jobs first” just can’t stand as a winning argument once people listen to it, and the laughter starts.

    Like

  6. Rick says:

    Perhaps off-topic here, and despite some of the conclusions by the news media post-debate last night, my prediction is that Perry will win the nomination handily. Here’s why…

    For the most part, evangelicals can now back him 100% without worrying who he selects as VP. If he selects Palin he could pickup the female vote too! He tows the pure evangelical truth doctrine about creationism, Zionism, Old Testament capital punishment (even if their interpretation is wrong), and most of all – the biggy – that America should be governed like a theocracy. Make no mistake – Perry is a cunning wolf in sheep’s clothing.

    His strict biblical governing philosophy will come out over the next 14 months and some will need explaining, but he was throwing out the red-meat meat to his base in full form last night. I’m sure the evangs were jumping for joy. Did everyone hear the applause by the audience when the capital punishment question came up? Even before Perry answered it!

    Whether, or not Perry can pick up enough of the free-thinking independents in the general election is the $64k question. If he can, then he just might win. I hope I’m wrong, but I think my assessment of Perry is spot on. BTW, the way, I’m not endorsing Perry. Far from it. I’m a recovering Evangelical.

    Red

    Like

  7. Jim says:

    Ed offers, “Abraham Lincoln won the presidency in the election of 1860 with 39% of the vote.”

    And Bubba won it in 1992 with just barely 43%. But for Obama to win this time, it may take a powerful third party challenge to make it happen.

    I half wonder if Governor Huntsman, understandably mortified by his own party’s rejection of science, might not give it a go. He is certainly not gaining any traction in the primary process.

    No, most likely he’s running to be Perry or Romney’s VP or a cabinet secretary. After Perot, I think serious (above 10%) third party efforts died.

    I could be wrong, however.

    Jim

    Like

  8. Ed Darrell says:

    Abraham Lincoln won the presidency in the election of 1860 with 39% of the vote. Eleven southern states refused to put the Republican Party on the ballot.

    Obama and Lincoln, brothers in more ways than one, eh?

    Like

  9. baidu678 says:

    Hard words break no bones.

    Like

  10. Jim says:

    Hey there, Bob!

    Thanks for the details. I did find it. I was looking at Reuters and CNN. Much appreciated!

    Jim

    Like

  11. Jim,

    The number is from a Gallup poll quoted on NBC and CBS, as well as the Washington Post.

    Bob

    Like

  12. Jim says:

    Hi Robert!

    Got a source for that poll? I’m not saying it’s bogus, I just haven’t seen it anywhere. I’d love to know where you got it so I can get my facts straight. Thanks so much!

    Jim

    Like

  13. Scariest part of all of this is that as of today’s polls 39% of Americans still support President Obama. Wonders never cease. Wake up America!

    Like

  14. Jim says:

    Hi again, Big Steve! My, but you’re a busy boy today.

    Let’s see if we can engage a couple of your incisive points, alrighty?

    To open, you say — “Obamacare has failed in the courts.”

    In some, yes. In others, it has been upheld. The 6th Circuit upheld it in June with no less than a Bush-43 appointee referring to Obamacare as perfectly constitutional.

    Tomato, tuh-mah-toh.

    The real question is whether or not the SCOTUS will grant cert and if they agree to hear the case, how they will vote. Most people think 5-4 against. I am hearing some buzz about a 4-4-1 ruling, with Kagan recusing herself. If she indicates that she might, then there will be unprecedented pressure on Clarence Thomas to do likewise, since his wife has at least as much riding on his vote as Kagan would. Oh these are interesting times, n’est pas?

    You further advance the conversation, “All I’m saying is everything Obama has done has been detrimental to America. Everything.”

    Oh. Is that ALL you’re saying? Thank God for small favors.

    Well, if EVERYTHING the President has done has been detrimental to America, then it would be helpful if you could explain how the following are bad for this country…

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/276/create-a-community-college-partnership-program/

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/293/call-for-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-policy/

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/6/create-an-advanced-manufacturing-fund-to-invest-in/

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/33/establish-a-credit-card-bill-of-rights/

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/36/expand-loan-programs-for-small-businesses/

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/109/fully-fund-the-veterans-administration/

    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/promise/121/fully-fund-the-violence-against-women-act/

    That’s a smattering of things President Obama has done, Big Steve. Now, I might argue that he made mistakes in not making some of these things bigger, broader and more forward-looking. But you would surely be hard-pressed to explain how ANY of these this is — as you phrase it — “detrimental” to America.

    One really should be careful when employing words like “everything”, Big Steve.

    Food for thought…

    Jim

    Like

  15. Flakey says:

    “I wouldn’t expect you guys to understand the truth. I see how you misinterpret it in your posts. All I’m saying is everything Obama has done has been detrimental to America”

    The lying for Jesus tactic. Lies are ok, because they promote the larger “TRUTH”. You blatantly commit at least 2 outright lies but then insist that they do not matter because the “Truth” is what you on about, but why should we believe in you speaking honestly about the truth when your posts lie to us?

    Like

  16. Big Steve says:

    I wouldn’t expect you guys to understand the truth. I see how you misinterpret it in your posts. All I’m saying is everything Obama has done has been detrimental to America. Everything. That’s not going out on a limb. Even Obama won’t talk about Obamacare or his last stimulus. Sure, he will talk about a future stimulus, but he won’t talk about his past “accomplishments.” Even Obama can’t point to one diplomatic victory, one economic decision that worked out, one executive order that improved America. He has done nothing good.

    Like

  17. Ed Darrell says:

    It is now Aug 2011.

    And every one of Pritchett’s claims has been exposed as false.

    Yes, the nation is in a fix. Pritchett’s fear and fear-mongering caused more damage than anything Obama did.

    Like

  18. Flakey says:

    “toppled a strong ally in Egypt” – I am surprised you did not blame Japan on him too. The rest of the world had little to do with Egypt, and caught many by surprise. Or are you saying he should have sent troops in to keep the guy in power?

    “screwed up Afghanistan and Iraq” – The situation being all screwed up even before he became President was his fault too? The situation has been screwed up in Iraq ever since the USA presented their allies a 160,000 page plan on the invasion of Iraq, and a 10 page outline of what happens afterwards Which mostly boiled down to “we overthrow Saddam and everyone becomes happy democracy supporters” that a Republican Administration planned, and implemented.

    Like

  19. Big Steve says:

    This misguided blog was posted in Aug 2009. It is now Aug 2011. Obamacare has failed in the courts. Obama has toppled a strong ally in Egypt, screwed up Afghanistan and Irag, and started a third war. He gave aid to Brazil to help them drill for oil, but he restricts drilling in America. Gasoline prices have soared. The stock market has collapsed. We have lost our AAA rating. Unemployment is at 9 percent overall, but higher for minorities. The Post Office is about to lay off 100,000 workers. Food prices have skyrocketed. He spent a trillion on a stimulus. He wants to do it again. It looks to me like Pritchett was correct to be fearful. America can’t stand much “hope and change.” It hurts too much.

    Like

  20. I cannot understand how you arrived at me stating that Jews founded America. I referred to the God of the Jews, Jehovah, as the one true God. I know Jefferson had beliefs I do not agree with, as I have ones he would not go along with. He did, however, refer to that same God as “that Being in whose hands we are”. As to believing Jesus is the son of God, the Jews deny that also. While on that subject, your believing something or my believing something does not make it true. You and I can read the same thing and get different opinions. I personally believe that the “separation of church and state” was much more to keep the government out of the church than to keep the church out of the government. To each his own.

    Like

  21. Ed Darrell says:

    So, you think we were founded by Jews? I’m confused. You come in here thundering that Lou Pritchett is correct in all his error, but when we get down to specifics, you back up, and say you support Jefferson’s god. Jefferson did not share your belief that Jesus was the son of God. So, when Jefferson makes an oblique reference to a god in his inauguration speech, might we assume he is referring to the God of Israel, and not the God of Rome?

    I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our forefathers, as Israel of old, from their native land, and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered our infancy with his providence, and our riper years with his wisdom and power; and to whose goodness I ask you to join with me in supplications, that he will so enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils, and prosper their measures, that whatsoever they do, shall result in your good, and shall secure to you the peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations.

    Also, that was after he had specifically addressed the issue of separation of church and state:

    In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the constitution independent of the powers of the general government. I have therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious exercises suited to it; but have left them, as the constitution found them, under the direction and discipline of state or church authorities acknowledged by the several religious societies.

    Pritchett is still crabby and wrong.

    Like

  22. I have never said that I believe that America should be a theocracy. I am well aware that not all of the founding fathers were devout born again Christians. Franklin was a self proclaimed non-believer who was witnessed to by George Whitfield to no avail. Jefferson was a complicated man, who I am not sure anyone really “understands”. I will not bore you with who I have or have not read. I have read the Bible, The Constitution, The Bill of Rights, and many other things I will not take the time to mention. I admire men like Ravi Zaccharias, John McCarthur, David Jeremiah, Clarence Sexton, and others. I know of men like John Bunyan, Martin Luther, and others who stood against overreaching, government enforced churches. I do not wish to see that in America. I also do not care for a government that allows the unborn to be slain by the millions, seeks to redefine marriage, redistribute wealth, and control more and more of the things that a person should be able to decide for themselves. If one studies world religions, the true Christian religion is one of the few, if not the only one, that allows people the choice of how they relate to God. I believe there is one God, the one Jefferson himself referred to in his 1805 inaugural speech. The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. I believe their is one way to know Him, and that is through His son Jesus. Period. Man is a free moral agent, so you and I and everyone else can believe whatever they choose. That being said, if we as a nation continue to leave God behind and remove Him from our daily lives, we will suffer for it. As I propose, we already are.

    Like

  23. Jim Stanley says:

    If you’re interested in reading what intellectual Evangelicals have to say about the founding of this nation, I would commend “The Search For Christian America” by Mark Noll, Nathan Hatch and George Marsden.

    Until recently, Noll was a professor of history at Wheaton College. Marsden teaches at Notre Dame, but is considered the leading authority on the history of Evangelicalism & Fundamentalism in the world. He is, himself, an unapologetic Evangelical.

    The conclusion these historians (actual historians, not wannabes like Peter Marshall) reach is that this country was founded by a mix of Christians, Unitarians, Deists, Jews and some entirely secular folk — but with the clear and stated intention of being a nation where people of any faith — or with no religious bent whatsoever — could follow the dictates of their own conscience without being forced to pledge fealty to a faith, especially a state-sponsored, taxpayer-funded one.

    The book does a tremendous job of crediting Christians for playing a large role in that. Indeed Robert, the most ardent and passionate call for a secular nation came from the Baptists of Rhode Island, who knew persecution all too well. Where have all the Baptists gone? Today, they are among the leaders in calling for theocracy in this country. What happened? Most Baptists I have talked with have no idea who Roger Williams even is! Talk about a tragedy…

    Like

  24. Ed Darrell says:

    The America that I know and love was founded on Judeo/Christian beliefs and standards.

    But, as we discovered and have seen in this exchange, the America you thought you know and love was fictional, and not real.

    I’ll wager you’ve never read Tom Jefferson. You should. Get a copy of “Notes on the State of Virginia,” and steam through it. Get Madison’s Memorial and Remonstrance, read it carefully (20 minutes). Maybe best: Get Franklin’s “autobiography,” and read it.

    The Constitution? Get Pauline Maier, and read her history.

    The real story is much grander and more wonderful than the cheap fiction somebody sold you. “Judeo-Christian?” No, that’s 1950s communist fiction. Enlightenment? Don’t dismiss it so quickly. When the founders rebelled against Christianity, when they rejected wholesale the “Christian” notion of divine right kings, when they rejected the idea that the laws of nature can be understood by listening to a preacher misread the Bible from the pulpit, they invented something better than anything in Christianity to that point, or since.

    In the U.S., as de Tocqueville noted in 1831, Americans are genuinely religious, Why?

    Because, he observed after being told by clergymen and others across America, in America you make your own peace with God. No government mediates, or does the job for you. Separation of church and state created the medium in which American religiosity and faith grows, better than in any other place on Earth.

    You want “Judeo-Christian?” In Europe, many of the nations still have established churches, supported by tax dollars. Beautiful building, free for everyone to use, empty on Sundays.

    Don’t be misled to sell your heritage for a tiny pot of made-up-quote stew.

    That John Jay quote you once had at your site, in which jay said Americans should elect Christians as their leaders? You should read the whole series of letters. Jay argues that the old order of Europe, the “Judeo-Christian” order, was rotten to the core. Real Christians would not lead their nations into stupid wars out of vanity, as European leaders, had, Jay said. America would be protected from stupid wars because Jesus was anti-war, and getting rid of divine right rules was the way to go. America, Jay argued, would never take part in wars for territory, like the Mexican-American War of 1846-1848, or the Spanish-American War of 1898.

    You wouldn’t take your scripture diluted by people you don’t know and who you know are not recognized scholars of the Bible. Don’t take your history from people you don’t know who are not recognized scholars of history, either. Fast food is bad for you. So is fast history.

    Lou Pritchett isn’t dangerous because he wants to defend American values. He’s dangerous because he doesn’t know what American values are, because he’s been misled. To the extent he’s willing to fight anyone who disagrees with him, he’s a genuine threat to our national security, especially when he’s misled to believe our national security is a bad idea.

    Like

  25. This is just to apologize for typos in my previous post. I meant to say “I can be cordial and respectful, and I certainly do not mean them any harm”. I also used quiet instead of quite. Don’t want any misunderstandings.

    Like

  26. Okay, one more round. I do not wish to “mislead” people by lying. (intransitive verb 1 : to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive) I am not trying to deceive anyone. The America that I know and love was founded on Judeo/Christian beliefs and standards. You guys are not going to change your minds, and I most certainly won’t change mine. I am a conservative, but I am not a liar. I do not agree in totality with all conservatives, but the majority of what I consider liberals are on the other end of the spectrum from me. I can be cordial and respectful, and I certainly wish them any harm. As to whether or not they are Christians, that is between them and God. My website is quiet clear on what a Christian is, according to the Bible. I’ll stick with spiritual matters and winning people to Christ, and leave the political free for all to someone else.

    Like

  27. Jim Stanley says:

    Robert,

    You entirely mischaracterized my post. Read it again, please.

    I said the only truthful CONSERVATIVE Christians I knew were my in-laws. They are devoutly Christian, very conservative and have refused to become liars for Jesus. I don’t agree with their politics. But I respect and honor their integrity.

    I know hundreds…maybe thousands…of truthful Christians. I consider myself one. I am just not conservative. Or do you believe that to be Christian, one must be conservative? If so, that’s quite telling.

    I do applaud and commend you for removing the lies from your web site. I think that’s a positive step in the right direction. A mea culpa would be a further step. When I was a racist, it was good that — due to the intervention of Jesus in my life — I stopped behaving like a racist. After awhile though, I discovered that it was even better to apologize for my racism and then devote myself to correcting some of the damage I had done.

    I wish you nothing but the best.

    Jim

    Like

  28. Ed Darrell says:

    Robert Barton was persuaded by the facts? He’s taken down all the statements about U.S. history and art and architecture at his website, and replaced it with this:

    Did You Know?

    Psalms 9:17 The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God.

    Quite a turn for a guy who, up to that moment, appeared to be doing all he could to help people forget the righteous history of the U.S.

    Power of truth demonstrated.

    Like

  29. Ed,
    One of the posts on this topic said the only truthful Christians he knew were his in-laws. If that was not you, I apologize. Thanks for the reference to the song, it explains a lot about the left. By the way,if I really want find a cache of liars, I can always look to Washington, DC. Also, I always thought the House of Representatives was in the Capitol building. My bad. I did update the website so as not to “mislead” anyone. Remember, Jesus loves you!

    Like

  30. Ed Darrell says:

    Robert, I know lots of honest Christians. My guess is that Jim does, too. Interesting how, caught in error, you make fantastic assumptions in error.

    To paraphrase the old country tune, “Been wrong so _ _ long that it looks like right to me.”

    You said you’ve updated your site. I was just there, and I found this:

    DID YOU KNOW?

    As you walk up the steps to the Capitol building, which housed the U.S. Supreme Court until 1935, you can see near the top of the building a row of the world’s law givers and each one is facing one in the middle who is facing forward with a full frontal view .. it is Moses and he is holding the Ten Commandments!

    So, informed clearly that your description of the Supreme Court building was in error, rather than confess, you just changed the building. You won’t see that on the Capitol, either. I think you may be confusing an erroneous description of the bas reliefs of the heritage of U.S. law in the chamber of the U.S. House of Representatives, but what you describe is not on the Capitol, either.

    Not sure I can get an image to show in comments, but here’s the description of the East Pediment from the Architect of the Capitol’s office (people who ought to know)(take special note of the actual quote from John Adams, a real founder whose words are often distorted in claims of false art in Washington, such as you make at your website), “Genius of America” with only three characters, none of them Moses:
    East Central Pediment to U.S. Capitol

    Luigi Persico, sandstone, 1825-1828
    Copied by Bruno Mankowski in marble, 1959-1960
    Pediment over the east central entrance of the U.S. Capitol

    The sculptural pediment over the east central entrance of the U.S. Capitol is called Genius of America. The central figure represents America, who rests her right arm on a shield inscribed “USA”; the shield is supported by an altar bearing the inscription “July 4, 1776.” America points to Justice, who lifts scales in her left hand and in her right hand holds a scroll inscribed “Constitution, 17 September 1787.” To America’s left are an Eagle and the figure of Hope, who rests her arm on an anchor.

    Italian sculptor Luigi Persico’s original design for the sculpture included figures of Peace, Plenty, and Hercules; these were replaced at the suggestion of President John Quincy Adams with the figure of Hope. Adams wished the design to “represent the American Union founded on the Declaration of Independence and consummated by the organization of the general government under the Federal Constitution, supported by Justice in the past, and relying upon Hope in Providence for the future.”

    Persico created the original sandstone figures in 1825-1828. When the Capitol’s east central front was extended in 1958-1962, the badly deteriorated figures were removed and restored and plaster models were made of them. From these models the reproductions seen today on the pediment were carved in Georgia White marble by Bruno Mankowski.

    The entire pediment is 81 feet 6 inches in length and the figures are 9 feet high. The plaster models are displayed in the basement rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building, on the subway level. The original sandstone figures are in storage.

    Can you explain how you goofed so badly? Or, is it that you so disrespect America that you wish to hide?

    Or perhaps you copied that from David Barton or another Christian hate agenda promulgator. Take the hint: If they’ll lie to you about art in Washington, they’ll lie to you about anything. Don’t trust them. Check stuff out for yourself.

    Go to the Capitol, for example. One of my favorite buildings. Roam the halls and look at the real artwork there. It’s stunning — but not at all as you describe it.

    Especially spend time on the first and second floors, looking at the flourishes and portraits put there to celebrate American history, achievement and genius. You could learn a lot just by observing, as Yogi Berra once said.

    DID YOU KNOW?

    As you enter the Supreme Court courtroom, the two huge doors have the symbols representing Ten Commandments engraved on each lower portion of each door.

    So, I gather you’ve never seen the doors yourself, right? I think the doors you’re referring to are the doors of the Court building itself, the west side (which doors are now closed to the public, tragically, I think). Most of the people who had anything to do with it say the Roman numerals I through X refer to the first ten Amendments to the Constitution — you may be familiar with the Bill of Rights.

    Here’s how the Supreme Court website describes the doors:

    One can enter the building through the opened bronze doors of the west front, each of which weighs six and one-half tons and slides into a wall recess when open. The door panels, sculpted by John Donnelly, Jr., depict historic scenes in the development of law: the trial scene from the shield of Achilles, as described in the Iliad; a Roman praetor publishing an edict; Julian and a pupil; Justinian publishing the Corpus Juris; King John sealing the Magna Carta; the Chancellor publishing the first Statute of Westminster; Lord Coke barring King James from sitting as a Judge; and Chief Justice Marshall and Justice Story.

    You forgot the Romans, and Achilles, and Julian and Justinian . . . gee, your source missed most of the doors, most of the story. Biased much?

    Let me recommend the virtual tour offered at the Oyez.org site. Pay particular attention to the totality of the tour — for example, of a dozen busts, none or religiously-themed. Even the religious figures portrayed in the Chamber on the friezes are there for their role in the heritage of U.S. law, not for their religious roles (Mohammed is portrayed, for example, and so is Confucius; would you be offended were to call this a Moslem nation? A protected-civil-service-realist nation? The case isn’t good to leave those guys out.

    Your site still says:

    DID YOU KNOW?

    There are Bible verses etched in stone all over the Federal Buildings and Monuments in Washington, D.C.

    That’s just pure fantasy. There are a half-dozen, perhaps a dozen, quotes from the Bible painted or engraved in the Jefferson Building of the Library of Congress, but that needs to be in perspective that there are way over 100 quotes from many, many sources in that building. While a few recognize freedom of belief, no one can honestly argue that the images or quotes represent any serious lean towards Christianity, especially in context.

    In the decade-plus that I lived in and near D.C. I purposely sought out Biblical quotations on public buildings and monuments, or anywhere. They do not exist, for the most part — not even at the National Cathedral nor Catholic churches, nor other churches. Someone has sold you a bill of goods, a huge lie — and you should not trust them further. If they’ll sucker in people trying to be good Christians, they’ll lie to anyone about anything without pause. They are not advancing religion, certainly not Christianity, and certainly they are not patriotic.

    Your site still claims:

    DID YOU KNOW?

    James Madison, the fourth president, known as ‘The Father of Our Constitution’ made the following statement:

    ‘We have staked the whole of all our political institutions upon the capacity of mankind for self-government, upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to control ourselves, to sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God.’

    James Madison did not say that. He didn’t say anything particularly close to it. It’s contrary to Madison’s philosophy of government, religion, and life. It’s contrary to the Constitution and Amendments Madison wrote. It’s contrary to what he wrote in the Memorial and Remonstrance, and it’s contrary to the Virginia Statue for Religious Freedom, for which passage Madison wrote the Memorial and Remonstrance.

    In short, it’s a crude and crass lie.

    Who told you that? Shouldn’t you ask that they wash their pen and mouth with soap?

    Jesus said that those who mislead are doubly condemned. You’ll adjust your website, again, I hope.

    Use accurate history this time. The real story of America is much better, much grander, much more moral, than the false claim that our nation was founded by fundamentalist, Christian zealots.

    Like

  31. Just wanted Ed to know I updated my website. Sorry to hear that you don’t know any truthful Christians. I make mistakes daily, glad to know you guys on the left do not lie or make errors. I can sleep better tonight knowing the left is in charge. By the way The Supreme Court is supposed to interperet law, not write it. Also, real personal freedom and “big government” cannot coexist. Can’t believe that people reallty think the bigger our government, the better off we are.

    Like

  32. Jim Stanley says:

    Well done, Ed.

    This is the m.o. for most conservative Christians. Lying is always acceptable, if one is lying for Jesus. I’ve heard some real whoppers from the pulpit, on Christian radio and from individual conservative Christians over the years. And, of course, I’ve read no small number of “lies for Jesus” on conservative Christian blogs and in conservative Christian publications.

    I really don’t understand what motivates this pathological behavior. I love Jesus, too. But I don’t feel any compulsion to lie in order to advance His holy agenda. Indeed, I am fully aware that He doesn’t require my help at all. I’m just glad He invited me to the party!

    I’m hoping that Mr. Barton’s lie for Jesus is corrected on his blog. One certainly CAN be a conservative Christian and still be truthful. I’ve met a few, like my in-laws. I just wish they weren’t such a rare breed.

    Thanks for being there, Ed.

    Like

  33. Ed Darrell says:

    Robert Barton, I notice that on your website you tell whopping false tales about the artwork on the Supreme Court. It’s clear you’ve never been there and that you’ve never bothered to look at a photograph of the building.

    You claim Moses is depicted at the front door of the Supreme Court. But here’s what’s really there:

    Atop the long cheek blocks of the staircase James Earle Fraser’s stern seated figures, the Authority of Law (on the south) and the Contemplation of Justice (on the north), guard the temple entrance. Sixteen columns (and eight pilasters) are Gilbert’s American variant of the Corinthian order where heraldic eagles are set between splayed volutes. The frieze of braziers hung with garlands (symbolic of the plenty existing in an ordered society) is particularly lavish. In the pediment, Robert Aitken’s central sculptural figures represent Liberty Enthroned Guarded by Order and Authority. They are attended by six allegorical figures symbolic of Counsel and Research who were modeled after Americans responsible for bringing the Supreme Court and its quarters into being, although they are all shown in Roman garb. The muscular reclining figures at the edges of the composition are Chief Justice William Howard Taft on the north and Chief Justice John Marshall on the south, both shown as young men. Next to Taft, the architect Gilbert converses with Secretary of State Elihu Root while the sculptor Aitken attends to Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes. The inscription in the frieze, “Equal Justice Under Law,” helps to explain how portraits of the architect and sculptor appear with those eminent jurists: the sculpture proclaims equality in American society while it reflects the artists’ optimistic attitude concerning the emerging role of the fine arts in America.

    Is that the standard of accuracy you hold to, whopping falsehoods?

    Like

  34. Ed Darrell says:

    Reality bites hard if you don’t expect it, or accept it.

    Pritchett is a lot closer to the truth than some of you can accept. President Obama is a left wing, radical, Chicago thug politician.

    Only to the same extent that Dick Cheney goose steps to salute his picture of Benito Mussolini every morning before saying prayers to Attila the Hun.

    Keep calling “wolf!” if you’re bent on self-destruction. We have serious issues in this nation. Sticks and stones may not break bones, but name calling encourages violence and distracts from the issues at hand. We have unemployment way too close to 10%. But you, you fear the “socialist” you imagine under your bed.

    No wonder this nation’s in trouble.

    He was grossly underestimated by people on the right, and is in the process of destroying the America I know and love.

    We don’t need a lily-white America. We never did. Obama stands for hard work, good education, family, sticking together, and support of veterans. If you oppose those things, frankly, your own mother doesn’t support you. Wake up.

    We may not survive 4 years of Obama.

    We survived eight years of Reagan, though he was dotty much of the second term. We survived eight years of Bush, though he was dotty through his first term and much of his second. We’re a lot tougher than you think. Now, quit sitting on that shovel and get to work. The old road is rapidly aging. Get out of the new one if you can’t lend a hand. Go home if you won’t lend a hand.

    I pray to God we do not have to endure 8 years. The stimulus package, healthcare, the financial reform bill signed just today, as well as his associates in the past and his appointments to key positions, are all examples of the government takeover under Mr. Obama.

    Rip van Winkle, you’re about eight years late with your criticism.

    How was the inadequate stimulus package a “takeover?” Takeover of what? Health care reform, small as it is, changes only one big thing: Health insurance companies will no longer get big dollars for barring the door of the hospital past the emergency room — everybody gets care. That’s the single biggest cost-control measures used successfully by every freedom-loving democratic government on Earth, except ours, until now. Takeover? Of what? Hospitals run the same, with the same ownership. Physician practices run the same, huge bastions of “free enterprise” private business. Pharmaceutical manufacturing and sales run the same. Health insurance even runs the same, just without the power to deny care to anyone the companies choose.

    How is that a “takeover?” My students don’t right well and often don’t think things out well in essays, but I expect them not to make wild, completely-at-odds-with-reality, evidentiarily unsupported statements like that.

    If health care reform was a “takeover” of anything, Iran is the world’s greatest democratic republic.

    If you are going to be a leftist, at least be big enough to admit it. I am a Christian,right wing, conservative, and I make no bones about it.

    If you’re going to try to run politics by pigeon-holing others, you’re late. You’re short of the entrance fee, and I’m not sure you can pass the driving test.

    My conservative credentials, staffing politicos on the right wing, Reagan administration appointment, put me on firmer ground on the right than you. Politicking by labels isn’t going to cut it.

    Stick to the issues, but please get your facts straight.

    I believe in personal, individual freedoms, the greatness of America, and smaller government.

    The greatness of America was established by powerful and decisive government, and because of the size of our nation, that has usually meant “big” government. If you’re for personal freedom, we need a Supreme Court powerful enough and brave enough to tell the hotel owner in Atlanta that he doesn’t get to kick you out because he doesn’t like white-skinned people. We need regulatory agencies to be sure that huge, international corporations bargain fairly with you about your job. We need a fast, nimble and highly-educated FDA to be sure you’re freedoms aren’t left to suffer from the effects of bad drugs and poisons in your foods, and a tough USDA to be sure you don’t get tainted food and drink.

    Freedom is wonderful. You don’t have the money to assure your freedom against modern-day Robber Barons, nor does anyone else. Being against “big government” is a great bumpersticker. It’s no philosophy for protecting freedom.

    I believe we live in the greatest country ever. We need to close our borders to illegals, stop printing fiat money and spending money we don’t have, quit taking over private business and industry, and get back to a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Bravo Mr. Pritchett!

    You don’t have a clue how Pritchett made his money, do you.

    Like

  35. Pritchett is a lot closer to the truth than some of you can accept. President Obama is a left wing, radical, Chicago thug politician. He was grossly underestimated by people on the right, and is in the process of destroying the America I know and love. We may not survive 4 years of Obama. I pray to God we do not have to endure 8 years. The stimulus package, healthcare, the financial reform bill signed just today, as well as his associates in the past and his appointments to key positions, are all examples of the government takeover under Mr. Obama. If you are going to be a leftist, at least be big enough to admit it. I am a Christian,right wing, conservative, and I make no bones about it. I believe in personal, individual freedoms, the greatness of America, and smaller government. I believe we live in the greatest country ever. We need to close our borders to illegals, stop printing fiat money and spending money we don’t have, quit taking over private business and industry, and get back to a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people”. Bravo Mr. Pritchett!

    Like

  36. Ed Darrell says:

    Ed, your words are just about as slanted in support of a president you obviously support as Pritchett’s are against one he does not. My observation is that the truth lies somewhere in between.

    Rick, forget your experience: Read the documents. Try to find evidence to back Pritchett’s claims.

    Don’t take my word for it — look for yourself.

    But don’t take Pritchett’s word for it, either. Look for yourself.

    I don’t believe that we can spend our way out of it. Whether that notion is systemic, unchangeable, and ultimately dooming us all to failure and hard times to come is anybody’s guess.

    We can’t get out of it by spending nothing, by cutting taxes, and by doing nothing, either. We’re in a crisis. The boat is taking on water. Now is not the time to wait for the sun in hopes evaporation will save our ship. It’s time to bail the boat out.

    History tells us we need a massive government stimulus to avoid catastrophe. But then, Pritchett isn’t concerned about lessons from history — he can’t even find a newspaper to figure out what day it is.

    But logic tells me that the course this country is on is not the “right” direction and simply asking Americans to “go along for the ride” is not going to make them feel any better about the destination.

    That’s right. Hoover kept promising better times were “just around the corner.” Republicans today think we can Do Nothing, and things will be okay in time. Keynes noted that this focus on the long-term is often the wrong way to go. “In the long run, we’re all dead.”

    Doing nothing, just “going along for the ride” as you put it, as Mitch McConnell and the Republicans demand, is exactly the wrong thing to do. In whitewater, the boat that makes it is the boat that paddles.

    To those of my fellow Americans who are convinced that this president and this Congress are leading us to better times, I hope the koolaid tastes good. I don’t think things are going to end up like you thought they would.

    And to anyone who claims we can’t “go along for the ride” and then advocates exactly that, I ask you study the history of the Great Depression. Get a good biography of FDR and read it. The conservative, crabby economist “wisdom” that Roosevelt “did too much” is dead wrong. Japan went through this just over ten years ago — have you forgotten already? They waited for the markets to right themselves, and they sank their once-certain hopes to be the biggest economy in the world. We should not repeat that error. China wasn’t waiting to pounce, then. China is waiting to pounce, now.

    Like

  37. Rick says:

    Ed, your words are just about as slanted in support of a president you obviously support as Pritchett’s are against one he does not. My observation is that the truth lies somewhere in between. Personally, I’m sick of all the blaming by both parties. In truth there is plenty of blame to go around and it crosses party lines all the time. Bottom line is that we’ve got a huge mess in this country…and I don’t believe that we can spend our way out of it. Whether that notion is systemic, unchangeable, and ultimately dooming us all to failure and hard times to come is anybody’s guess. But logic tells me that the course this country is on is not the “right” direction and simply asking Americans to “go along for the ride” is not going to make them feel any better about the destination. To those of my fellow Americans who are convinced that this president and this Congress are leading us to better times, I hope the koolaid tastes good. I don’t think things are going to end up like you thought they would.

    Like

  38. Greg Popove says:

    They’re both wrong. The real enemy is the hyper-polarization that is paralyzing the political system in gridlock; while the ship is sinking, each side cares less about stopping the leak than figuring out a way to keep the other side from getting any of the lifeboats.

    Like

  39. Steve says:

    Lou,
    I’d expect to hear something like what you wrote from an entertainer like Michael Savage or Rush Limbaugh. Someone who makes a lot of money by whipping up the passions of the small-minded masses. Not from an educated guy like you who should be showing some degree of dignity and decorum.
    In a country largely controlled by big business, the fact that a CEO of one of our largest corporation sounds like a crude and uninformed talk radio host, scares me the most of all.

    Like

  40. Anne B says:

    I’m a moderate Republican who has voted for Democrats in my state a few times. A friend emailed Lou Pritchett’s open letter to me this morning. Because I was skeptical that a former Proctor & Gamble exec would write this, I looked it up on snopes.com. Wow, he really did write it! I thought much of what “scared” Lou Pritchett about President Obama was silly stuff. And I can see the many good qualities Obama possesses. But he’s very far from perfect. In fact, that’s one of the things that really bothers me about him. No one is that perfect. I’m bothered that most of the news media (written and televised, except Fox) idolize and fawn all over him. If they can’t report ANY missteps by Obama, then I’m afraid I can’t trust what they have to say. On the ohter hand, according to Fox, he can do nothing right. If only we could have a news media that just reports the FACTS…with no political agenda at all. The Nobel Peace prize was only more evidence of fawning over a man who had not earned it.

    Like

  41. Steve Flower says:

    Thank you for your response. You said it more concisely than I could have. You also respond to the opposition better than I could.

    It scares me that we no longer have to educate or communicate with people, just scare them. This is evidently how the McCarthy years got their start – but what do we do without Ed Murrow?….

    THAT, more than anything else, scares ME: that people like Sam Ervin and Ed Murrow aren’t here to stop the slide into insanity. And I don’t see anyone capable of filling their shoes – either individually, collectively or corporately.

    Like

  42. Ed Darrell says:

    Vic, P.S.:

    These two statements from Mr. Pritchett are false:

    You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.

    You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.

    Please don’t claim to be a truth teller while defending errors like those.

    Like

  43. Ed Darrell says:

    Vic Marsh said:

    I will just say that being a democrat all my life, I am now ashamed to say that I am.

    I don’t recall having seen you at any conventions. What has been your involvement in the party?

    Like

  44. Vic, for a supposed former Democrat, you do spout a lot of Republican talking points. Are you sure you’re not a Dixiecrat?

    Like

  45. Vic Marsh says:

    Your site is shameful, Pritchett told the TRUTH, and denying it all you want will not change the FACTS….O IS trying to use the office of President to take over America, he DOES slam this country when he goes abroad(this has been reported in newspapers and on tv), he HAS not served in the military-and IS trying to undermine it, he makes promises he doesn’t keep or will even talk about, he has put us in the deepest debt we have ever been in just to make himself look good, he IS trying to make this country GOVERNMENT CONTROLLED, he SUPPORTS the backhanded way Congress is passing bills that are not good for this country (referring to behind closed doors deals and decisions and leaving the OTHER party out of it) I could go on and on, but I know it matters not to you, so I will just say that being a democrat all my life, I am now ashamed to say that I am. The Democratic Party is now more progressive than Democratic, and is no longer recognizable. Progressives are trying to destroy this country and you trying to say it isn’t so won’t make it so.
    Everything I have said is true and provable. What is scary is that many of those who voted for him still cannot see the forest for the trees, they are mesmerized by words and not seeing all the ‘lack of’ action behind them.
    Thank God people like Lou Pritchett have the balls to speak up. Obviously you have none

    Like

  46. Nick K says:

    James, I’m going to address what you spout in no particular order so do try to keep up.

    You say that over 50% of Americans didn’t want the health care reform. CNN did a poll the week the health care reform bill was passed. It found that 43% opposed the health care bill because they thought it went too far. 15% opposed it because they thought it didn’t go far enough. 38% supported the bill. And not even 8 months earlier, James, 60+% of the country wanted health care reform. And you do remember that quite a lot of George W Bush’s decisions went against public opinion as well? Despite whatever delusion you are living, James, we don’t run this country by opinion poll. Especially opinion polls that only show the numbers they do because you and your precious Republicans lied over and over again in a arrogant attempt to scare the people of the United States.

    Now let me point out that 15% is the important figure here. Because it means that if the bill had done more..a majority of the country would have supported it. But see..the people at ClusterFaux and the rest of the right wing morons didn’t want that little tidbit to get out there.

    Secondly, your nonsense interpretation of the 10th Admendment and commerce clause is that..nonsense. Where was your concern for the 10th Admendment when Bush was violating it in the Terry Schivao case? Or when he blocked California from enforcing stricter auto emissions then the feds? As for the Commerce Clause..health care is an interstate thing. The United Health that sells health insurance in California isn’t a different company then the United Health that sells health insurance in Minnesota. In fact your precious Republicans wanted to take away the states rights to regulate the health insurance companies.

    And here is the justification in the US Constitution for what Congress did: US Constitution, Article 1 Section 8: First paragraph: The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States

    Now do you really want to pretend that health care doesn’t fall under the definition of “health care”? It’s not like Congress hasn’t mandated that health care be provided for people. They did it way back in the late 18th century when it required that employees of the merchant marine have health care. At the time the merchant marine was the largest industry in the country.

    As for your allegations aobut “nefarious things” you mean like all the nefarious things that the Republicans have engaged in? Like purposly suppressing the black vote in areas? Like falsely registering people as Republicans in Congress?

    And you really shouldn’t bring up Jeri Ryan’s ex husband. You do know why he is her ex husband right? She divorced him because he wanted to have sex with her in public..including in various “clubs” in Paris, New Orleans and New York. One of those “clubs” as she described it had “cages, whips and other apparatus hanging from the ceiling.” That by the way would also be why he ended his campaign. It wasn’t Obama who stopped his campaign..it was Jack Ryan’s own sexual perversion.

    He’s not exactly a credible witness for your accusations.

    Like

  47. Ed Darrell says:

    James,

    In exercising your Constitutionally-protected right to dislike your commander-in-chief, do you think you (the generic “you,” meaning Mr. Pritchett in this case) have the license to lie like a rug about him? Do you think Mr. Pritchett should have a free pass to tell whopping lies about Obama, just because he also doesn’t like Obama?

    What are your criteria? May I tell whopping lies about you, your origin, your mother’s morals, your birthplace, and your actions, if take a disliking to you?

    I’m assuming you didn’t attend West Point. Our military academies have a standard they ask cadets to adhere to, that is, paraphrased, like this: We will not lie, cheat or steal, nor tolerate among us those who do.

    How much of that are you willing to sacrifice to carry out your personal, unholy vendetta? How much of that may we sacrifice before the Army becomes a festering hole of amorality, or immorality, and can no longer perform its Constitutional function?

    Just curious.

    Like

  48. [citation needed]

    Like

  49. James says:

    I am an Black Army Officer and I don’t like Barack Obama as Commander in Chief.

    I was told by my Brigade Commander that I needed to respect BO and not express my concerns openly in front of troops, Art 89, UCMJ (True).

    But as a leader, BO happens to be the CIC, but he does not inspire me as he does you.

    I see you trying to destroy Mr. Pritchett, but no constructive arguments for BO.

    As a constitutional lawyer, I believe he studied it to understand how to get around it. Health Care for all is not part of Article 10. And the interstate commerce clause can be perverted again as in the Black boxer Jack Johnson. And if you need to know, the clause was used to strip Johnson of his boxing title because he crossed interstate borders with a willing white woman.

    Over 50% of Americans do not want Obama Care, but Nancy Reid and Harry Pelosi gave it to us.

    Mr. Pritchett is right because in the two previous elections that Obama won, there was some nefarious crap going on. Ask the former husband of Jerri Ryan and the 3 opponents in his state senate run.

    LTC Barb

    Like

  50. An excellent reply to a hate mail full of lies and just distorted “facts”. I suspect that people who agree with Lou Pritchard’s views never get to read any rebuttal of his claims.

    Like

  51. […] confesses scare tactics, shows lunacy I sent my response to Lou Pritchett.  [Free Republic folks:  Be sure to read that response to Pritchett.  A typical corporate […]

    Like

  52. Roy Turner says:

    I find this e-mail while very long and won’t be read in it’s entirety very interesting, It is a fine example of people having wide and divergent views.

    To agree to disagree and have the right to do it.

    Intellectual snobbery leaves very little for the common man to agree with. I find the views expressed in this e-mail to be indicative of intellectual snobbery pro and con.

    The ability to make one’s decisions based on current actions of a person is probaly more valid than comparisons made with other persons or what is written by someone else.

    I agree with reading and I agree that it educates people. There is truth and fiction and sometimess the line between the two are blurred’

    Like

  53. Nick Kelsier says:

    Whoever wrote:
    . . . you will not agree with me on the point that the majority of our so called unbiased news agencys are in fact biased and liberal in their political views.

    *chokes while laughing* Oh boy, boy are you deluded. Most of our news agencys are biased liberal? Then pray tell…exactly how did George W Bush get the larger share of newspaper endorsements in his two elections? Exactly how did he get treated with kid gloves for 8 years? Exactly how did Dan Rather lose his job reporting the fact that W’s military record was shady at best?

    Tell me then…how did the supposed controversy over Obama’s birth certificate get to be such a large thing? How did the whole manufactured brouhaha over the “Czars” come to be?

    Gee, I don’t remember Palin’s cavorting with a witchdoctor getting much play in the press. I don’t remember the fact that McCain was born in Panama getting much play in the press. But boy do I remember a lot of accusations that Obama is secretly a Muslim and was born in Kenya getting play in the press. I don’t remember that a lot of those protestors at those Democrat town hall meetings were being shipped in by insurance companies, their lobbyists and republicans being played in the press. But boy do I remember those protestors getting a lot of play in the press. I don’t see much brouhaha in the press over Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh calling a sitting US senator a “prostitute and a whore” getting played but boy did some taken out of context comment by then Judge Sonia Sottamayor getting played in the press. I don’t recall Beck getting in much trouble for calling the President a racist getting play in the press. I don’t remember a columnist for NewsMax calling for a military coup to “take care of the Obama” problem getting play in the press. But boy did the past assocations of Van Jones get played in the press.

    Sorry little one, criticism of a Republican in a media source is not “liberal bias.” Unless you’re asinine enough to pretend that the only way a news media source is unbiased is if they never report critically on any Republican ever.

    The biases the news media, excusing Fox from this, is a bias towards violence, sex, scandal and oh please all three at once. Plus a bias towards flash over substance.

    Whereas Fox News is operating from a “We’re going to kiss the asses of the Republicans and the conservatives” bias.

    And boy oh boy did the press just salivate over Clinton’s affairs and the whole impeachment thing. But gee…they’ve been rather quiet about Senator Ensign’s affairs, Senator Vitter’s dalliance with a prostitute and boy did Governor Sanford’s affair disappear off the media radar screen rather quick.

    And tell me…when was the last time you heard about Erik Prince being on trial for murder, attempted murder, gun smuggling and hiring underage prostitutes? You do know who Erik Prince is right? He’s the founder of Blackwater.

    And there’s Carrie Prejean going on at least a dozen media shows and a half dozen channels trying to explain how her first admendment rights were abridged.

    Oh please. You think there’s a liberal bias? Then I think you’re a fool.

    Like

  54. Ed Darrell says:

    . . . you will not agree with me on the point that the majority of our so called unbiased news agencys are in fact biased and liberal in their political views.

    Reporters read a lot. They tend to be college graduates. They tend to have heard pious politicians try to explain away their golf vacation trysts with women hired to “entertain” (Dan Quayle, for example), their taking of huge donations “on principle” (c.f. Phil Gramm’s hunting properties in Eastern Maryland), Ronald Reagan’s revelation that he sold drugs in Los Angeles to finance missile sales to Iranian terrorists, to finance guns to Nicarauguan terrorists, on top of having negotiated with Iranians to hold Americans hostage longer to aid Reagan’s election in 1980 (today’s the anniversary of the missiles-to-Iran revelation in 1986).

    Reality has a well-known and well-established liberal bias. Journalists are biased toward telling the facts regardless where the chips fall. Is that a liberal bias? Then maybe you should listen more carefully and thoughtfully to liberals, since that seems to be closer to where the truth lies (or more accurately, lives).

    The New York Times gets a few hundred letters to the editor every day, and they publish perhaps a dozen on a good day. Any expectation that this bizarre, fact-challenged screed would be published when it has no relation to anything appearing in the newspaper is pure hubris, or phantasm. You wouldn’t stand for such arrogance from anyone else, and you don’t deserve special consideration, nor does Pritchett.

    Therefore it stands to reason that the NY Times wouldn’t publish this letter. What is undeniable in this whole situation is that the man writting the letter is a man who assisted in the successfull running of a very large buisness and knows that the running of this country takes a lot more than words and grand ideas.

    He was a soap salesman. His company is well known for lobbying against regulations that protect asthmatic kids from allergens, and against disclosure of ingredients that may be harmful, and against making products that don’t grossly foul our waterways and water supplies. His experience in government doesn’t equal that of a dogcatcher or Congressional intern.

    He’s entitled to his opinions. As the late great Daniel Patrick Moynihan noted, however, he does not have a right to claim a set of facts different from reality. He’s grossly ill-informed. I think he has a patriotic duty to offer his president the courtesy of checking his facts before impugning the man’s reputation.

    Pritchett’s behavior falls short of the Four-Way Test of the Rotary Club, the ethics suggestions of the Lions and Elks, is way out of bounds of the ideals of 4-H, well outside the Girl Scout Law and contrary to the Boy Scout Law. There is nothing virtuous or of good report in his rant, so it also runs afoul of the Mormons’ Thirteenth Article fo Faith. It’s ruder than a loud, obnoxious drunk at a wedding, and it’s less informed than the drunk in the stands at the baseball game who is told by everyone to sit down and shut up.

    Running the country takes more than words and ideas. Pritchett’s rant is rude words, no good ideas and will such the information right out of your news broadcast. It contains no DDT, however. Had Pritchett figured out some way to put DDT in there, I’m sure he would have done that, damn the damage to the babies and bald eagles. He has no use for American symbols.

    Ideas, mind you, that many Americans are afraid of. So sir I put to you and your liberal friends that you prove all that was questioned and we will all have to wait and see if his grand plan if fact can right our now ailing country. Of course we should require that before we give this man (the President) credit that we are certain that it was in fact because of his policies that thing got better and not because of some other natural economic influence.

    If you had any information to confirm any of Pritchett’s wild ravings, you would have posted them.

    I may not have voted for the man, but I owe respect tot he office of the president, and to the man or woman who holds the office. I can criticize, but I shouldn’t criticize aimlessly, wildly, and without any good reason.

    I don’t care how much soap Lou Pritchett sold. He has no right to slander, and I wish he would stop. Pritchett has no right be obnoxiously ignorant of the facts. He has no authority to speak without citation on the issues he writes about. He deserves no more attention than the drunk hebephrenic on the corner giving an good, in-tune operatic rendition of “We Three Kings of Toilet Bowls” to Christmas shoppers.

    I’d have to flunk Pritchett if he handed that rant in for any reason in my high school history class. Most of my poorly-performing students have more respect for America than Pritchett, and know more about Obama. I think Pritchett owes it to you to do better than a failing high school student in such endeavors.

    Like

  55. I am sure you will agree that Mr. Pritchett is a conservative and has some biases. However what I am also sure of is that you will not agree with me on the point that the majority of our so called unbiased news agencys are in fact biased and liberal in their political views. Therefore it stands to reason that the NY Times wouldn’t publish this letter. What is undeniable in this whole situation is that the man writting the letter is a man who assisted in the successfull running of a very large buisness and knows that the running of this country takes a lot more than words and grand ideas. Ideas, mind you, that many Americans are afraid of. So sir I put to you and your liberal friends that you prove all that was questioned and we will all have to wait and see if his grand plan if fact can right our now ailing country. Of course we should require that before we give this man (the President) credit that we are certain that it was in fact because of his policies that thing got better and not because of some other natural economic influence.

    Like

  56. The letter makes sense to me and yes, I read. I also am painfully aware of how Obama seems to be pulling off the biggest Ponzi scheme ever and is robbing all of America. Fortunately, some of us have “hedged” Obama’s fiscal shell game, by owning Real Estate, Gold, Silver and Oil. I feel for the ignorant who don’t really understand the reality we now live in. Get ready for higher interest rates, taxes and inflation. Remember Carter? History does repeat itself.

    ps. LNG is the way to go not “clean coal” or more Arab Oil. Please tip off your President.

    Like

  57. Ed Darrell says:

    Actually, the letter makes a great deal of sense to a number of people.

    Only people who don’t read newspapers and can’t get to a library.

    It’s ironic: So much information available every day for less than a dollar, newspapers desperately need the readers, and Tom insists there are people who willfully avoid becoming informed.

    As Twain noted, the man who can read but does not has no advantage over the man who cannot read.

    Like

  58. Mike says:

    I call Poe on Tom; nobody that stupid can be real.

    Like

  59. Tom Stone says:

    Poor Nick……blogging away and tossing condescending darts. Your reference to another as “child” seems to indicate that you are possessed of a superior knowledge, and that the other person’s opinion is by comparison, infantile. So, do you need to denigrate others to boost your own self esteem? Hmmm, so, you have a certain arrogance, apparently mediocre knowledge and a need to diminish others…..

    I say he’s a unemployed graduate student student going bald! Your votes?

    Like

  60. Tom Stone says:

    Actually, the letter makes a great deal of sense to a number of people. Your fawning admiration of Obama’s keynote speech is creepily similar to the famous Chris Matthew’s comment about getting a tingle down his leg when he hears Obama speek.

    Listen, I know making a Messiah obliges one to put on blinders, but even simple things, like the book (Dreams of My Father) Obama claimed to write has been exposed as having been ghost written by Bill Ayers, with Ayers himself having publically admitted Oct 6 2009 that he wrote it. Oi! Tough blow!

    Obama is a control freak who believes in arm twisting rather than cooperation. Why else would a person who professes to believe in “dialogue” try and ram a 1000+ page proposed health care bill through congress in 72 hours? Why the push to have people pass incredibly important legislation rather than understand it and ask legitimate questions?

    In order to advance his agenda to “fundamentally change America [his words]”, he has done an unprecedented end-run around the Constitution by having more “czars” appointed than any other president in history. The czars have huge power, but who are not cabinet members nor are they vetted by the Senate. His “manufacturing czar”, who would ostensibly be in favour of manufacturing goods in order to develop a market-trade economy (is there any other kind outside of government bureaucracies in Belgium that run off of the tax money generated by manufacturers?), has said on air that the free trade system is a failure and that “we kind of agree with [chairman] Mao, that power comes from the barrel of a gun…” So his “manufacturing” czar agrees with a man who was responsibnle for more deaths than Hitler and Stalin combined?!? Classic!

    Besides a cabinet of tax cheats, a huge home in Chicago beyond his pay grade to afford at the time (except for his hastily covered up association with corrupt Chicago land barons and a corrupt govenor) and a huge host of other inconsistencies about his past, sure, he’s a great guy….as long as you don’t piss him off apparently.

    He said he’s beyond racial politics, but he publically sided with the Professor Gates in the Cambridge Police issue and made appalling statements of generalisation, even though he had to eat crow when it came out that black and Latino officers had been at the scene and said that Gates was being irrational and that the white officer had acted correctly.

    So, you have a president who smokes who is pushing a health care bill that is being written by a committe, the chairman of which has publically admitted he doesn’t understand it, overseen by a Surgeon General who is obese and who was a former lobbyist for Burger King (I thought Obama was steering away from lobbyists and the “old” politics?!?!) foisted upon a congress given no time to read it for a population who statistically doesn’t want it.

    Sounds like change you can believe in.

    Like

  61. Nick Kelsier says:

    The problem with your saying “That case is in the courts now” michael is the same with the birther case. madame birther Orly Taitz got her “case” in front of a judge too and the judge laughed it out of the court. In other words you don’t gain any credibility by it being in the courts.

    Like

  62. Ed Darrell says:

    That case is in the courts now.

    Which case is that? Got a citation? What court?

    Like

  63. Nick Kelsier says:

    Oh I’m not angry, Michael. I’m actually bemused. I’m bemused that you’re as gullible and as stupid to believe the drek you spout. I wasn’t being angry in what I said, Michael, I was being blunt. I don’t suffer fools like you for long.

    No, child the federal government is not a corporation. It’s a government. A democratic republic to be exact. Nowhere in the Constitution does the word “corporation” appear. Nowhere in the Constitution does it say an income tax is unconstitutional or that medicare or social security or all the rest is unconstitutional. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it say you’re right.

    And by definition, child, an act of Congress is considered defacto constitutional unless the Supreme Court rules otherwise. That by itself shoots down 99% of your blather. Your claim regarding the 16th Admendment is absurd since it was ratified by the following states: 1909: Alabama
    1910: Kentucky, South Carolina, Illinois, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Maryland, Georgia, Texas 1911: Ohio, Idaho, Oregon, Washington, Montana, Indiana, California, Nevada, South Dakota, Nebraska, North Carolina, Colorado, North Dakota, Michigan, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Maine, Tennessee, Arkansas, Wisconsin, New York
    1912: Arisozna, Minnesota, Louisana
    1913: West Virginia, Delaware.

    Delaware would be the 36th state on that list and hence the requirement to pass by an Admendment is met.

    Your desire to get rid of the income tax would bankrupt this country. Your desire to get rid of the safety net that is in place would bankrupt, destroy and kill people. My dad worked 55+ years at the farm and made very little money doing it. He should have to suffer in abject poverty because you don’t like Social Security? He shouldn’t have medical care because you don’t like Medicare? Go to hell you misanthropic and morally depraved ass.

    If you really want to maintain your position, Michael, then you owe me, Ed and all the rest of the taxpayers in this country all the money we have paid that has gone to your benefit. So I, and the rest of the 300 million plus rest of us will be expecting your checks. You will then stay off the highways, any public land, any government building, you will not avail yourself or your children of the public school system or any public university. You will not draw social security or medicare. You will not get unemployment benefits if you lose your job. You will not be protected by the police, the fire department or any other police agency in the country. If some foreign country decides to invade your house..hey you’re on your own. And I would suggest getting your money out of any financial institution in the country because you’re money won’t have the FDIC, or similar, insurance on it. Oops..guess that also means you won’t be able to use any legal currency in the United States. You will also not be able to avail yourself of the court system in this country so if someone or say a business screws you over you won’t be able to sue them. And when your parents grow too old to work you will be totally responsible for their care. And when you grow too old to work your children will be responsible for your care. But I doubt your children will be able to since they won’t have an education, won’t be able to get a job and you, your parents, and your children will most likely die penniless, destitute and in the kind of abject poverty reserved for countries like Somalia.

    It’s very easy for morons like you to sit there and armchair quarterback/criticize. But I have yet to meet any person who thinks like you who is actually willing to go through with all the consequences of the position you hold. Sure, you can say you’d have no problem with it. But in the end when you actually had to live up to your word you would chicken out and prove yourself a hypocrite.

    Kindly quit pretending that you know what the Founding Fathers intended. You don’t. You’re just a self absorbed greedy fool.

    Like

  64. Ed Darrell says:

    You know, Mike, the Federal Reserve Act was worked on for most of the previous decade. Ten years of hearings, two recessions — and you think it was secret? Is that book your only source on this bit of history, or are there more than one wildly inaccurate author out there? Have you bothered to Google the history, or check it out at the Fed’s site, or Findlaw.com, or the National Archives, or any reputable website?

    So, what mentality is it that bothers you, the mentality of studying history, or the mentality of getting facts straight?

    It ain’t what we don’t know that gets us into trouble; it’s what we know that ain’t so.

    Like

  65. Nick, you really have some serious issues and should seek some professional help. You letter reaks of the hostility and apparent pent up emotions. Seriously, you need to get some help before you have a stroke or heart attack.

    Like

  66. With all due respect Ed I appreciate your response and the way it was presented, however I beg to differ on all fronts. The federal government IS a coproation and the 16th Amendment did not carry two-thirds vote as you indicated, in fact it did not meet the standards for one approval (Read the Law That Never Was by Bill Benson). That case is in the courts now. The Congress under President Wilson convened on December 23rd, 1913 and ratified the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Income Tax (The Creature From Jeykle Island).

    Like

  67. Nick Kelsier says:

    I’m the fraud? Oh don’t make me laugh. You’re the fraud and you’re also the idiot. You say you wouldn’t mind getting rid of most of those things. The thing is, moron, you’d have to get rid of all of those things according to your interpretation of the constitution. You don’t get to pick and choose. And the second you needed any of those things you’d so cheerfully get rid of is the second you’d prove yourself a fraud and a hypocrite. You’d have the blood of millions on your hands. Your position would have had us lose WW1 and WW2. Your position would have absolutely destroyed this country, Michael. You are the threat to this country, your position is the threat to this country. You are an idiot and thank god you view is a minority view. Shut up now, Michael, you have no damn idea what you’re talking about. You’re not even intelligent enough to think through the consequences of your position.

    You simply and bluntly have no damn idea what you’re talking about, you’ve been brainwashed into believing a bunch of horse manure and idiotic claptrap. You don’t even have the slightest understanding of the US Constitution or even what’s moral, ethical and right. The measure of a country, child, is how it treats its people. You would have this country be nothing more an than an bunch of amoral jackasses only concerned with themselves. You would throw this country and it’s people to the wolves.

    And as for your apparent hatred of Muslims, you should be aware, dim wit, that there are people in our military who are muslims. You just spat in their faces.

    Like

  68. Nick Kelsier says:

    Michael writes:

    . . and I am not the least concerned with Iran’s nuclear arsenal if he has one. And if you studied the world population growth statistics, believe me, it would not concern you either. At the rate the Islamic population is growing and spreading across the globe compared to the rest of the world, the Islamic population will have total and absolute control in another 30 to 40 years. Enjoy a happy life my friend!

    Total and absolute control of what? We Christians outnumber Muslims by a billion right now. Do we have total and absolute control of the world? No. So what makes you think they’d have total and absolute control of the world? Other than your racist garbage.

    Like

  69. Ed Darrell says:

    Michael Kashouty said:

    The United States Federal Government is a corporation with, according to the Constitution, very LIMITED powers.

    The United States of America is not a corporation. Whoever told you that was not trying to make you informed, but was instead trying to mislead you.

    While our government is a government of limited powers delegated to it by the people, as opposed to a government of unlimited powers who grants liberty and rights to the people, not all of those powers are enumerated. As your friend John Marshall noted in McCulloch v. Maryland, Congress possesses unenumerated powers, too.

    Those limitations were put into place to protect we the people from a tyrannous government. Those limitations have over the past generations, been seriously breached. Beginning as early as December 1913, when President Wilson and a select group of congress secretly convened, while the rest of congress was enjoying the Christmas holidays, and enacted the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Income Tax, both treasonous acts against these United States.

    There was no secret convention of Congress, nor could there be. The law authorizing the Federal Reserve was passed in public session, and you can look up the proceedings in the Congressional Record. President Roosevelt had no power to convene the Congress in any case.

    The 16th Amendment authorizes our income tax. It was passed by two-thirds majorities in both Houses of Congress and duly ratified by the required three-fourts of the states — plus two more.

    Since the passage of an amendment requires a supermajority in both Congress and among the states, the claim that it was secret or “treasonous” departs from reality.

    The results of these two acts has brought the United States to it’s knees. And you cannot see that?

    The Fed failed to prevent the Great Depression, but there is no doubt from any living economist that the Fed’s stabilizing force drove the great economic strides this nation has made since 1930 — so much so that almost every other industrialized nation on Earth except Russia has tried to duplicate the Fed in their own nation.

    I don’t regard the world’s greatest economic power as “on its knees.” By what measure could that be? GDP? Standard of Living? Certainly not there.

    Tinfoil hats currently in use? Maybe by that standard, you’d be right. But then, I fear you’d be a part of the problem, too.

    NAFTA and CAFTA, sending US manufacturing and technical jobs abroad, two more acts of treason. Can you justify these acts? The signing of the North American Alliance in 2005 by George W. Bush, integrating the United States with Mexico and Canada, another act of treason. This does not bother you?

    I think a lot of liberals agree with you on NAFTA. In conservative economic theory, it should have worked much better than it has. Certainly it needs a lot of tweaking.

    But that is not a call for a return to destructive protectionism of the sort you appear to advocate.

    And you ask me what my concerns are? As an American, it is my DUTY to question. It is my duty to CHALLENGE, just as it is. All wars combined, over a million and a half young men and women surrendered their young lives so that I, as well as you, could enjoy the freedoms we have enjoyed for so many years. Did they sacrifice their precious lives for nothing?

    According to Lou Pritchett’s paranoia, yes, they sacrificed for nothing.

    The rest of us have brains to use, I hope.

    The question is, will you be gripped by the paranoia that strips the value of sacrifice from those honorable dead, or will you stand up for reality and call out Pritchett’s letter for the false document it is?

    Millions of Americans are questioning the origin of Barack Obama birth.

    No, we’re not that short of Prozac, nor is Alzheimer’s and other dementia that serious. Very few people are seriously concerned, and fewer when they read the facts.

    Read the facts here, Mr. Kashouty — there are six solid, legal ways to determine Barack Obama is exactly who he said he is in his two books, and exactly who we know him to be from hundreds of newspaper and magazine profiles and his years of public service. Several agencies in the federal and state government have looked at that issue seriously and thoroughly over the years, and they have all drawn the same conclusion: Barack Obama is a very accomplished kid from Hawaii who would make any mother proud.

    Barack Obama and his cabinet brush these concerns aside as if they are of no concern. According to the reports I receive, Obama has retained not one, but 3 law firms to stave off all challenges to his origin of birth. WHY?

    There you go getting all tinfoil hat and batshagging crazy on us. “Reports you receive?” I hope you’re not paying good money for such whopping lies.

    You are aware, I hope, that those reports are an April Fool’s prank, yes?

    Don’t tell me, let me guess: Your source is Americans for Freedom of Information, right?

    Why wouldn’t a man who ran on the platform of transparency merely put these fears to rest and show America his birth certificate.

    How could a man like you, privy to such accurate information sources, have failed to see the birth certificate posted on the web for more than a year? You have the gall to lecture us about the Constitution, while you urinate on it? The Constitution requires you to give that document your full faith and credit. Why do you refuse your duty under the Constitution on this one?

    You don’t get to pick and choose, claiming one fool thing the Constitution requires, and then ignoring the non-fool things it actually does require.

    And please do not belittle my intelligence with the C.O.L.B placed on his website. Does this not concern you?

    Does it concern me that you offensively refuse to recognize facts? Yes. I’m looking up your ip address right now, to make sure you’re not within hailing distance of my children or my wife. You make me fear for the safety of my republic with your unholy, unlegal, and irrational complaints — and then you say “do not belittle my intelligence.” I’m not belittling your intelligence. I’m calling you out on your honor. Americans should not act so crazy without cause, and you, sir, have no cause.

    A man holding the most powerful office in the land who has reportedly used 5 different aliases throughout his life, does not concern you?

    Yeah, I’m concerned that you think you need to tell whopping lies about America’s elected officials. Yesterday here in Dallas the FBI arrested an official Jordanian terrorist, a guy in the country illegally trying to blow up a building where my wife and I used to share lunches, a building where I have dozens of friends laboring on issues your life depends on that you denigrate under the rules you don’t like under that Constitution you disrespectfully wet.

    I wonder if you’re on that Jordanian guy’s side. Are you?

    An administration that spends trillions of dollars that is backed by absolutely nothing trying to shore up a failed economy does not concern you?

    You never studied the Great Depression? Where is Bernanke wrong in his famous paper? What part of saving your life are ungrateful for now?

    Not to mention the confusion you show and sow. It was George Bush who triggered most of those trillions of bailouts — did you know that, or are you just anti-all-government?

    If not, then you live in a different world from me my friend, because I can assure you, it concerns literally millions of other Americans in this country. And for that matter, concerns the rest of the world.

    I wish I lived in a different world than you — it’d be a lot easier to fix things if the lunatics were on another planet.

    Yes, most of the world is concerned, and most of them are grateful to have Obama where he is. We’re making real progress in reining in Iran, in reining in nuclear proliferation, in fixing the world’s economic woes, and in fighting terrorism and resolving the Middle East Chronic Crisis.

    Your complaints about Obama’s provenance, bizarre and false as they are, detract from economic rescue and the fight for world peace. You and Lou Pritchett are like two peas in a pod, two peas well past their expiration date and now threatening the whole bushel.

    Oh! One more thing, I do not read newspaper’s, or participate in any form of major media . . .

    That’s painfully (to me) obvious. Knowledge is the glory of God, the Mormons say — they’re right about that. You should try some, some time.

    . . . and I am not the least concerned with Iran’s nuclear arsenal if he has one. And if you studied the world population growth statistics, believe me, it would not concern you either. At the rate the Islamic population is growing and spreading across the globe compared to the rest of the world, the Islamic population will have total and absolute control in another 30 to 40 years. Enjoy a happy life my friend!

    I suspected it all along — you really are with that Jordanian jerk, aren’t you.

    Like

  70. Nick, you are a fraud! However correct in some of your assertions. I would welcome seeing most of what you listed abolished. It is those americans with your mentality that I really fear and so should all of America.

    Like

  71. Nick Kelsier says:

    *Yawns* In other words, Michael, you’re nothing more then a right wing nut who is pissed off that your side is a dying breed even among Republicans. Your charge of “communism” is as stupid as if I charged you with wanting fascism.

    You’re not an expert on the Constitution, don’t even pretend otherwise.

    45,000 people should die a year because of health care insurance companies? 1 million families should go bankrupt because of them? 50 million people should not have insurance in the richest most powerful country on the planet? You would get rid of the FDIC, the SEC, the IRS, the CIA, the NSA, the FCC, the FAA, the CDIC, the FBI, the Secret Service? You’d get rid of the US army, navy, marines, coast guard and air force? All those highways and interstates you drive on you’d get rid of? You’d just throw everything to the wolves that inhabit the business world? You’d let them screw you over when they want and how they want?

    You’d destroy the US military because there would be absolutely no way to pay for it without the income tax?

    Oh and by the way your claim about NAFTA being a treasonous act..don’t be absurd. It’s a treaty and last time I checked the US Constitution allows treaties.

    Everything you want, michael, would weaken this country and divide this country. The founding fathers did not want a weak central government. The founding fathers already had experience with a weak central government. It was called the Articles of Confederation and they quickly realized it didn’t work. Your position, child, would let the states run rampant and nullify the federal government at whim. Lets see..when was the last time the states tried that..hmm..oh yes..now I remember…the civil rights movement when the southern states got it once again in their head that they could tell the federal government to go screw themselves. And before that was the denial of women the right to vote. And before that was one of the twin biggest moral depravities that this country has instituted.

    Like

  72. Nick Kelsier says:

    Michael writes:
    The United States Federal Government is a corporation with, according to the Constitution, very LIMITED powers.

    According to your interpretation. According to the US Supreme Court as well as the interpretation that 99% of constitutional scholars and political scientists, including Ed and myself, your interpretation is a bunch of bunk. The 10th Admendment doesn’t say what you think it says.

    And as for your questioning where Barack Obama was born..tell me..do you question where John McCain was born? Do you question if he was qualified to be President? Care to guess what country he was born in? I’ll give you a clue…it wasn’t the United States.

    And as for your claim that we’re tottering towards Communism oh please get real. You can’t point to a single thing that is actuall communistic. And as for your claim about the Income tax you really should read the US Constitution. Have you read Article 1 section 8? Specifically the first paragraph.

    You want to claim that Obama isn’t a valid President and all the rest of your claims it’s up to you to prove your claims. And that he’s hired 3 law firms isn’t proof of it. And your charges of treason are spurious at best. If I were you and I was looking for a traitor..I’d look a little closer to home.

    Like

  73. Mr. Darrell,

    If, as you say, you have studied the Constitution for years, wrote papers on the subject, and staffed a Constitution Subcommittee for the Senate Judiciary Committee, then you of all people should know that the Congress, as well as the Executive Branch derive their authority solely and exclusively from the Constitution of these United States and can write no laws that would be in violation of the Constitution (Marbury v Madison, “anything repugnant to the Constitution is void“). You would also know that most elected officials violate their oath of office the minute they take the oath to preserve and protect that Constitution.

    The Constitution sets the framework for which the government could be structured and has always been regarded as the Supreme law of the land. If you can honestly sit there and tell me that the administrators of this government, save few, have adhered to the Constitution then you to, need a mental evaluation.

    My concerns, as yours should be, pertain to the preservation of the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Rule of Law under the REPUBLIC that this country was founded under, and if you have no concerns in this regard, you my friend, do NOT know the Constitution.

    The United States Federal Government is a corporation with, according to the Constitution, very LIMITED powers. Those limitations were put into place to protect we the people from a tyrannous government. Those limitations have over the past generations, been seriously breached. Beginning as early as December 1913, when President Wilson and a select group of congress secretly convened, while the rest of congress was enjoying the Christmas holidays, and enacted the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Income Tax, both treasonous acts against these United States. The results of these two acts has brought the United States to it’s knees. And you cannot see that?

    NAFTA and CAFTA, sending US manufacturing and technical jobs abroad, two more acts of treason. Can you justify these acts? The signing of the North American Alliance in 2005 by George W. Bush, integrating the United States with Mexico and Canada, another act of treason. This does not bother you? And you ask me what my concerns are? As an American, it is my DUTY to question. It is my duty to CHALLENGE, just as it is. All wars combined, over a million and a half young men and women surrendered their young lives so that I, as well as you, could enjoy the freedoms we have enjoyed for so many years. Did they sacrifice their precious lives for nothing?

    Millions of Americans are questioning the origin of Barack Obama birth. Barack Obama and his cabinet brush these concerns aside as if they are of no concern. According to the reports I receive, Obama has retained not one, but 3 law firms to stave off all challenges to his origin of birth. WHY? Why wouldn’t a man who ran on the platform of transparency merely put these fears to rest and show America his birth certificate. And please do not belittle my intelligence with the C.O.L.B placed on his website. Does this not concern you?

    A man holding the most powerful office in the land who has reportedly used 5 different aliases throughout his life, does not concern you? An administration that spends trillions of dollars that is backed by absolutely nothing trying to shore up a failed economy does not concern you? If not, then you live in a different world from me my friend, because I can assure you, it concerns literally millions of other Americans in this country. And for that matter, concerns the rest of the world.

    Oh! One more thing, I do not read newspaper’s, or participate in any form of major media and I am not the least concerned with Iran’s nuclear arsenal if he has one. And if you studied the world population growth statistics, believe me, it would not concern you either. At the rate the Islamic population is growing and spreading across the globe compared to the rest of the world, the Islamic population will have total and absolute control in another 30 to 40 years. Enjoy a happy life my friend!

    Like

  74. Ed Darrell says:

    Michael Kashouty said:

    Does this country really want communism? Does anyone even understand what a communistic society will mean to their way of life? Are American’s so willing to surrender their sovereignty and Bill of Rights guaranteed by the Constitution of these United States? Has anyone on this forum even taken the time to read the Constitution, or remember what the Constitution is? For anyone out there still interested, this country was founded as a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy and yes, there is a distinct difference between the two.

    I’ve studied the Constitution for years, Michael. It’s required in law school. I staffed the Constitution Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and wrote speeches for the members there for years. I’ve sat through dozens of hours of hearings on these issues.

    What in the world are you talking about? Your paragraph makes little sense, but shouts of paranoia.

    The American people better open their damn eyes and take a big dose of reality, and while they are at it, Google the name Barry Soetoro so they can really get to know their president.

    We all did that, early in 2008. Many millions of us read the newspapers, and read his books, too. That’s why we elected him.

    I’ll wager you’ve not read either of his books.

    Your rant against the president is wholly unconnected to your paranoia about communism, and also completely unconnected to your concerns about the Constitution, so far as I can see.

    Do you have a point? What is it you’re concerned about, specifically?

    Yesterday President Obama led the United Nations Security Council to beef up nuclear weapons non-proliferation efforts. Today he’s already led some major NATO nations in a condemnation of a secret uranium enrichment project in Iran. Surely you don’t disagree with either of those stands.

    Have you read a newspaper since 2005?

    Like

  75. Nick, I did not respond earlier because frankly, your response was not worthy of response, but since you are so hell bent on your attempts to insult someone you do not know, I will respond with what came to mind when I read your response. On first impression I would have attributed your response with simple ignorance, however on second thought, I have come to the realization you wear stupidity like a badge of honor.

    Get a life you idiot

    Like

  76. Nick Kelsier says:

    Michael, since you seem to be so against “socialism” and “communism” even though I doubt you actually know what either is you should have no problem signing the pledge found at the following link, right?

    http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/18/783895/-The-Teabagger-Socialist-Free-Purity-Pledge

    Like

  77. Nick Kelsier says:

    Michael, your first paragraph contradicts your second one. You bemoan the stupidity and demise of this country and yet your second paragraph is so incredibly stupid and supporting the demise of this country.

    Obama is a communist? Only if Bush is a Nazi. And where was your concern for the Bill of Rights when Bush was running roughshod over it and the rest of the Constitution? Where was your concern for sovereignty when the Republicans used the Congress to meddle in the medical affairs of Terry Schviao? Do you want me to list all the rest?

    Let’s face it. You don’t honestly think Obama is a communist and all the rest of that crap. You’re simply trying to justify your irrational hatred and fear over the fact that a Democrat won. Get over yourself. You are not the decider of what is proper for this country…not by yourself.

    Like

  78. I am sorry, but as I read the responses to the Pritchett letter and realize just how ignorant my fellow Americans are, I am no longer amazed to see the demise of this once great country. We literally border on stupidity!

    Not that I believe it was the voters, or even the electoral for that matter, that was responsible for putting Obama in office, nevertheless to read from those that seem to idolize this man that they no absolutely nothing about, nauseates me. Does this country really want communism? Does anyone even understand what a communistic society will mean to their way of life? Are American’s so willing to surrender their sovereignty and Bill of Rights guaranteed by the Constitution of these United States? Has anyone on this forum even taken the time to read the Constitution, or remember what the Constitution is? For anyone out there still interested, this country was founded as a REPUBLIC, not a Democracy and yes, there is a distinct difference between the two.

    The American people better open their damn eyes and take a big dose of reality, and while they are at it, Google the name Barry Soetoro so they can really get to know their president.

    Like

  79. Jim says:

    Wow…Lou sounds a little scared.

    Moving on…

    Let’s get to work America building new international relations and a new alternative energy economy!

    Sorry Lou, you can’t play. Why? Because you are going to be dead soon. But, thanks for yelling “Fire, Fire!” before you exit. That is really going to help out with things a lot.

    Remind me to never be on a sinking boat with you.

    Like

  80. Nick Kelsier says:

    To quote:
    “You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others.”

    Like the Republicans blamed Clinton for everything that happened between 2001-2008?

    Like

  81. Tom Degan says:

    “Dear President Obama: You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.”

    Woooooh! The Big Black Boogieman is gonna get’cha!

    “You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.”

    I’m sorry, Lou, but the question is just screaming to be asked: Have you been reading the papers in the last three years? I was just curious

    “You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.”

    Lou? You caught us red-handed! His education was founded by Democracy Now, The American Communist Party and Ed Asner. Not that it’s any of my business, but who paid for your education, Lou?

    “You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.”

    Sure, Lou, he’s a Kenyan born Arab terrorist. Medications, please!

    “You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll”

    You’ve got a valid point here, Louie boy! The same could be said of John F. Kennedy, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, Thomas Jefferson and George Washington – and we all know how disastrous their administrations turned out to be. NEXT….

    “You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don’t understand it at its core.”

    True. We need a man in there with the military experience of George W. Bush. You’re a scream, Lou!

    “You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others.”

    This statement is so unbelievably moronic, I’m not even going to bother commenting on it.

    “You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.”

    Radicals who wish to see America fail? Who are you talking about, Lou? Oh! You must mean Teddy Kennedy and Arlen Specter! Good point, Lou. Let’s move on, shall we?

    “You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America’ crowd and deliver this message abroad.”

    Are you referring, perchance, to Obama’s official apology for the CIA-fueled overthrow of the sovereign, democratically elected government of Iran in 1953 which heralded the birth of the organized Islamic extremism that is our major headache today? You’re absolutely right, Lou! Obama should not have apologized for that shameful chapter in our history. That apology should have come from President Eisenhower a half century ago.

    “You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.”

    Yeah, Lou, and he’s going to force our teenage daughters to marry BLACK LESBIANS! Be afraid, Lou. Be very afraid.

    “You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.”

    Just like the ones in England and Canada that have worked pretty well for over fifty years? OH, MY GOSH! HEAD FOR THE HILLS!!!

    “You scare me because you prefer ‘wind mills’ to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.”

    Again, this one is just too damned nutty to even dignify with a comment.

    “You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.”

    Wrong again, Lou. Like FDR in the thirties, he is trying to save capitalism by “tempering it’s excesses”. Nice try, though.

    “You scare me because you have begun to use ‘extortion’ tactics against certain banks and corporations.”

    You mean the same banks and corporations that have been looting the American economy for almost thirty years now? SHAME ON YOU, BARACK OBAMA!

    “You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.”

    An ironic statement if ever there was one, Lou. His political party scares the hell out of me for their failure to challenge wild and irresponsible clowns like you.

    “You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.”

    Are you speaking of his failure to consider the opinions of “intelligent people” like yourself, Lou? What is he thinking?

    “You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.”

    Omnipotent and omniscient??? Have another sip, Lou.

    “You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.”

    Obviously you don’t watch FOX Noise or listen to AM radio, Lou. That’s a very good sign.

    “You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O’Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.”

    When has he demonized any of these fools, Lou? How has he tried to silence them? Give me one example. I’m waiting.

    “You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.”

    How has President Obama attempted to control you, Lou? Forgive me for pointing this out in so public a forum, but you sound just a wee bit paranoid, Buster.

    “Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years. -Lou Pritchett”

    Yeah, Lou. Just keep it up and I promise you this: you’ll end up in the Left Wing Gulag that we’re building at President Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s orders at this very minute. Please, try to get a good night’s sleep, Lou, and have a lovely day!

    I will offer no further comment. Lou Pritchett’s silly comments speak for themselves.

    http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com

    Tom Degan
    Goshen, NY

    Like

  82. Nick Kelsier says:

    To quote:
    Hitler and the Nazis rose to power, and snuffed out German democratic institutions, with a series of easily-refuted falsehoods, claiming that opposition politicians were “scary,” “unknowns,” and “elites with Ivy League educations,” or the equivalent.

    Hitler and the nazi’s also accused their opponents of being traitors, immoral, socialists and communists.

    Gee…that does sound familiar. I seem to recall that is the hat and trick of a certain political party in this country. Now what was their name…ah yes…the Republicans.

    The problem the idiot who think Obama is going to pull of a Hitler thing is that he’s conveniently ignoring the fact that Hitler was right wing.

    Like

  83. Ed Darrell says:

    A better answer on how Obama financed his schooling (scholarships and student loans), at Snopes.com:
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/money.asp

    Like

  84. Ed Darrell says:

    Personally I applaud Mr. Pritchet for taking a public stand and if I were scared of anything, it would be the response from those who did not like what he had to say.

    Please look at my criticism. I said nothing against Pritchett’s speaking out. I speak only to his obligation of citizenship to not stick to foolish opinions, to fail to avail himself of information that is freely available. I fail to understand his — and your — fear of knowledge.

    That is really the scary thing and it may be the trigger that leads this country into another civil war.

    South Carolinians seceded from the Union despite Abraham Lincoln’s statement that he would not pursue any policy to end slavery. If there is another civil war, I fear it will be caused by others who refuse to pay attention to the facts, and who choose war over learning and understanding. Tragic, no?

    Obama is no one to be feared. He can do great things for the nation. He can do great things for America no matter how hard you, Lou Pritchett or others try to sabotage our national interests.

    It is not only an Americans right to question who holds the highest office in the land, but their DUTY to question.

    I fear you can’t tell the difference between serious questioning and drunken heckling. American citizens have a duty to know what goes on, or to learn about it, and to act. Pritchett’s hallmark in his letter is stuff he doesn’t know that would be easy to learn, or things he claims he doesn’t know, which ignorance he could only protect by blindfolding himself, plugging his ears, and screaming “LALALALALALALALALALALA.”

    Had the German’s questioned Hitler before he got his foot hold, we may have been able to avert the Second World War.

    Banality of Evil. Hannah Arendt. You should read it. Or While England Slept by Winston Churchill and maybeWhy England Slept, by John F. Kennedy.

    Obama’s read it. He’s working to avoid exactly such disasters here — his election, getting Dick Cheney out of office and out of influence was a major step toward preventing a Hitlerian subversion of our nation. Pritchett, who should know better according to his age, apparently never read Arendt, and didn’t read much of history, either.

    Hitler and the Nazis rose to power, and snuffed out German democratic institutions, with a series of easily-refuted falsehoods, claiming that opposition politicians were “scary,” “unknowns,” and “elites with Ivy League educations,” or the equivalent.

    I’ve read that, recently . . . oh, yeah — in Pritchett’s letter. Did you recognize the tactic? Don’t accuse Obama of doing what Pritchett is blatantly trying to do to Obama, please. In America, it’s not normal to be ignorant. It’s not normal not to read the memoirs of the people running for president. It’s not normal to fail to read newspapers. It’s not normal to shout one’s ignorance from church steeples, and then attack those who provide the information to cure the ignorance.

    Frankly I have a few questions for the man sitting in the Oval office that ran on a transparency platform myself. Where’s the birth certificate and I do not mean the copy of the questionable C.O.L.B that anyone born in or out of the country can acquire?

    There you go, urinating on the Constitution and pretending to be a patriot. The legal birth certificate sat on the internet for over a year, and yet you claim not to have seen it. The Constitution requires that we honor it, but you dismiss the Constitution as one would a soiled rag. Here, you can read the legal reasons why we know your fears are unjustified. No, I don’t expect you to be persuaded. I’d be surprised if you bother to read the facts (why not leave a comment there while you’re there, just to prove my prediction wrong?).

    Why did you find it necessary to retain not three attorney’s, but more than three legal firms and spend over a million dollars of taxpayer’s to block anyone from seeing it? Where are you school records ?

    That claim came from an April Fool’s prank — why do you still act the victim of an April Fool’s prank in September?

    There is as yet no evidence of how much Obama has spent fighting the heckling lawsuits ignoramuses and cranks have filed against the Federal Election Commission and state secretaries of state — Obama is a named defendant in one that I know of, and the costs there are probably well under $100,000, maybe way under $1,000.

    You know that in federal court in Washington, D.C., the judge issued Rule 11 sanctions, right? That means that he found the case against Obama’s eligibility to be a complete fabrication, false, and consequently contrary to the rules of federal courts that lawyers not bring silly, nuisance suits.

    Why do you continue to argue silly nuisances? There’s that fear of knowledge rearing its ugly head again.

    Do you have a library in your town, Mr. Kashouty?

    Will they show you borrowed a foreign student loan under the name of Barry Soetoro?

    Another claim from that April Fool’s prank. You are aware, I hope, that Fulbright Scholarships to foreign students are for graduate study, right? So undergraduate Barack Obama, at Occidental, would not be eligible for one, were he a foreign student. You are aware that such scholarships are accompanied by press releases and public release of recipients — where is there any evidence of such a scholarship?

    [Here’s a much better answer, from Snopes.com.]

    Why are you heckling a kid who studied hard and did well? Do you hate all students? Do you hate all students who do well? Do you hate only students with dark skin? Do you hate all Hawaiians and claim their births illegitimate, or only the haolies, or only the dark-skinned ones, or only those who leave the islands to attend Ivy League schools? Do you hate all graduates of Ivy League schools, all college graduates? What is the motivation for your animus? And, shouldn’t you be ashamed of it, once exposed?

    In other words, unless you have some unholy bias against Obama, you should welcome the information that he attended Occidental on an Occidental scholarship, and had scholarships at Columbia and Harvard, as a citizen of the U.S. and product of the Great State of Hawaii. We will watch for your reaction.

    Speaking of Barry Soetoro, is that your real name, or did you have it legally changed. And lastly, who are you Mr. Obama?

    Do you have any indication that his name was ever changed to Barry Soetoro? Why do you make an allegation with no evidence? And what difference does it make? John Wayne’s work under an assumed name doesn’t make “Stagecoach” any worse, “The Cowboys” any less shocking, nor “The Conqueror” any better. His real name was Marion Morrison. Who was John Wayne?

    A guy with a name like Kashouty has a lot of gall to complain about Barack Obama’s name. In fact, all of us on this continent, except we have a name like “Billie Tsosie” or “Running Bear,” have no right to complain.

    Who in hades are you, Mr. Kashouty, that you have access to the internet, and yet apparently are unable to figure out Google? Where do you live that there is no library available? What impairment could possibly hold you in the grips of disproven April Fool’s pranks of the past?

    And why are you defending the heckling of the president? Don’t you have something better to do?

    Like

  85. Nick Kelsier says:

    Michael writes:

    Frankly I have a few questions for the man sitting in the Oval office that ran on a transparency platform myself. Where’s the birth certificate and I do not mean the copy of the questionable C.O.L.B that anyone born in or out of the country can acquire?

    It’s been proven. The Hawaii department of health verified it, the Republican Governor of Hawaii did. Hell even WND did. It’s been verified.

    It’s your claim that it’s false. It’s up to you to prove it.

    But I have a question for you, Michael. Are you going to question John McCain’s birth certificate? Did you question Bush’s? Palin’s? Are you going to say that McCain was not eligble to be President? After all..he was born in Panama.

    Michael, under US law you are a natural born citizen as long as you are either born in this country…or born to a citizen of this country.

    So claim that Obama wasn’t born in the United States all you want. All you’re doing is being a racist fool who is trying to deligitmize the President all because you’re pissed off that a Democrat won and *gasp* it was a black man.

    By all means, question the President all you want, you have that right. Just bother to be intelligent and rational about it. And so far…you’re not even close.

    And if you think Obama is out to become dictator and that he’s like Stalin or Hitler then congratulations…you’re an idiot.

    Like

  86. Personally I applaud Mr. Pritchet for taking a public stand and if I were scared of anything, it would be the response from those who did not like what he had to say. That is really the scary thing and it may be the trigger that leads this country into another civil war. It is not only an Americans right to question who holds the highest office in the land, but their DUTY to question. Had the German’s questioned Hitler before he got his foot hold, we may have been able to avert the Second World War.

    Frankly I have a few questions for the man sitting in the Oval office that ran on a transparency platform myself. Where’s the birth certificate and I do not mean the copy of the questionable C.O.L.B that anyone born in or out of the country can acquire? Why did you find it necessary to retain not three attorney’s, but more than three legal firms and spend over a million dollars of taxpayer’s to block anyone from seeing it? Where are you school records ? Will they show you borrowed a foreign student loan under the name of Barry Soetoro? Speaking of Barry Soetoro, is that your real name, or did you have it legally changed. And lastly, who are you Mr. Obama?

    Like

  87. Max Slegers says:

    The last comment of Pritchett’s letter is the most significant:
    “..if you serve a second term I will probably in writing a similar letter in 8 years.”
    I read this as follows:
    :…he will have established a dictatorial government and in the style of Stalin and Hitler will forcibly remove all those who disagree with him.”
    I find it inconceivable that Obama, who spent years studying and teaching constitutional law would discard all that and become a dictator.

    Like

  88. Rick Downs says:

    Ed… Thank you for that very thoughtful, and well thought out response. I just saw Pritchett’s letter over the weekend, and wanted to respond to each of his claims. Your words eclipse anything I could have written or articulated. I only hope your response will be sent along with the original as a rebuttal, as so many people’s knee-jerk reaction to letters like Pritchett’s – they just forward it along without proper due diligence.

    Thank you again, for your words – not only to the letter, but as encouragement to many.

    Rick

    Like

  89. […] that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. It's happening right now. https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2009…lou-pritchett/ Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 16 Hours Ago at 03:57 PM. Reason: adding quotation bubble for […]

    Like

  90. […] that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing. It's happening right now. https://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2009…lou-pritchett/ Last edited by O'Sullivan Bere; 3 Minutes Ago at 03:57 PM. Reason: adding quotation bubble […]

    Like

  91. Ed Darrell says:

    Dave, please point me to the comments you made asking Bush to stop spending us into the ditch. Can you?

    You’re amused by your own lack of action, it seems to me. Go heal thyself.

    Obama’s trying to save your nation from Bush’s profligate spending. Wake up, man.

    Like

  92. Dave Samson says:

    As an Independent I wonder why, when making an argument supporting a Democrat or a Democratic cause there always has to be the predictable attack on George W. Bush? Personally I didn’t like the presidency of Bush any more then I currently like the presidency of Obama so saying our guy isn’t as bad as your guy is kind of a laughable argument to me. It’s kind of like saying cancer isn’t as bad as a fatal heart attack. My wish for President Obama would be one for now….quit spending so much of our (the taxpayers) money!!! You’re driving the country into a financial ditch! Thank you.

    Like

  93. snarla says:

    Thank you for taking the time to write this. Bookmark.

    Like

  94. Randy Johnson says:

    I’m glad to see other people fighting back against this absurd letter. I saw it for the first time yesterday via email, and returned it to sender as follows:

    AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT OBAMA
    Written by Lou Pritchett
    **Rebutted by Randy Johnson

    Dear President Obama:
    **So far so good…

    You are the thirteenth President under whom I have lived and unlike any of the others, you truly scare me.
    **Translation: “you’re black!”

    You scare me because after months of exposure, I know nothing about you.
    **That’s Pritchett’s fault. He could have known plenty about Obama months before he was president if he wasn’t so lazy. Obama’s biography is much more complete than the official George Bush Biography, and Obama’s book The Audacity of Hope explains his political philosophy quite extensively. Also Obama actually wrote both books himself. Since he was elected he’s been under a microscope like no other president in history. Bigots “don’t know” because they choose to not know. They’re too busy being afraid to actually learn about what they criticize.

    You scare me because I do not know how you paid for your expensive Ivy League education and your upscale lifestyle and housing with no visible signs of support.
    **Barack attended college on student loans and scholarships. He only recently completed paying off his student loans after 2005 with proceeds from the two books he wrote. Barack’s housing situation in New York, Chicago, and while attending college were quite modest. After graduation he made good money for awhile at a law firm (big surprise considering he earned his way academically to become head of the Harvard Law Review) but he left that law firm to become a community organizer during which time he lived a very modest life just a couple blocks from the poorest neighborhoods of Chicago. Only after his books became best sellers and he got into politics did he begin to live an “upscale” lifestyle.

    **I think when people like Pritchett say “no visible signs of support” they mean “You don’t come from a rich family like George Bush and you didn’t marry a multi-millionaire beer heiress like John McCain, so you scare me.”

    You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.
    **Barack was born and raised in Hawaii until he was 6, then his stepfather (who was working for a US oil company until his visa ran out) moved him and his mother to Indonesia where he was very much an outsider. His mother tutored him there daily so he wouldn’t get behind his American schoolmates, and primarily because she wanted him to have an American education she sent him back to Hawaii when he was 10. He was primarily raised by his Kansas born white grandparents after that. It’s all in his biography for anyone interested enough to read it.

    You scare me because you have never run a company or met a payroll.
    **Ohhhhh he got Obama with that one! Once again Barack, you need to be more like George Bush. George ran two companies (right into the ground, with daddy’s money.) Note: Running a company doesn’t qualify you to run a country, unless of course you believe in the wonderful teachings of Fascism.

    You scare me because you have never had military experience, thus don’t understand it at its core.
    **WHOLLY CRAP! Are you kidding? After “six deferment” Cheney, and reserve deserter Bush Pritchett dares to criticize Barack for not serving in the military?

    You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others.
    **I can list several times where Barack has apologized for the smallest of mistakes and times where he’s taken the blame for the actions of others in his campaign and administration. I don’t think Pritchett can site many if any examples to back up this ridiculous personal attack.

    You scare me because for over half your life you have aligned yourself with radical extremists who hate America and you refuse to publicly denounce these radicals who wish to see America fail.
    **If by “aligned” Pritchett means “lived in the same city as” “went to the church of” or “attended the same fundraiser as,” and if by extremist you mean an angry old preacher, a professor who over 40 years ago did something terrible, or a bum in Chicago politics who every Chicago politician has had to deal with at some point then he has a point, except that Obama has publicly denounced the immoral, unlawful and angry actions of every one of those people.

    You scare me because you are a cheerleader for the ‘blame America’ crowd and deliver this message abroad.
    **See 2 sections up: America has lacked humility and ‘class’, and has been blaming and attacking other countries for years now. The world rightly distrusts our government. Barack is simply and very smartly re-earning that trust across the globe, making Americans at home and abroad safer. Hey, we don’t have to pretend to be Canadians to travel anymore!!

    You scare me because you want to change America to a European style country where the government sector dominates instead of the private sector.
    **The private sector has never been more unchecked than during these past 8 plus years (Halliburton, Enron, Blackwater, etc) Our tax dollars have been going to pay private contractors trillions of dollars, and private companies have pirated what were once public utilities to the point of decimating many of them. The private sector has brought us to the brink of economic collapse, and now only the government can fix it. Unfortunately however that private sector has squirreled away most of the “lost” money, and now the middle class must replace it little by little until we get out of this mess.

    **By “European style country” Pritchett means a country that doesn’t legally recognize corporations as “people” as we do here in America. This small difference between us and our European friends allows corporations to dominate American politics with their “free speech dollars” dwarfing actual peoples voices in Washington DC.

    You scare me because you want to replace our health care system with a government controlled one.
    **Pritchett and many like him fear that if we do what every other modern industrial country has done and provide health care to all our citizens average people will have access to health care and as a consequence billionaire insurance and pharma CEO’s will have to go back to being mere millionaires. We do not by any measure have the best health care in the world, we only have the most expensive health care in the world.

    You scare me because you prefer ‘wind mills’ to responsibly capitalizing on our own vast oil, coal and shale reserves.
    **Another Ohhhhh! …..Clean renewable energy is truly scary! It’s funny how he says “Our own vast oil, coal etc….” as though the wind is owned by some other country. Or maybe that’s his problem – You can’t own the wind.
    You scare me because you want to kill the American capitalist goose that lays the golden egg which provides the highest standard of living in the world.
    **Golden egg? I think Pritchett means golden parachute for all those CEO friends of his.
    You scare me because you have begun to use ‘extortion’ tactics against certain banks and corporations.
    **”Extortion” to Pritchett maybe, but most of us would call it “Regulations.”
    You scare me because your own political party shrinks from challenging you on your wild and irresponsible spending proposals.
    **Remember Pritchett and the Republicans screaming for Bush to stop spending all that money between 2001 and 2008? Oh you don’t? Me neither. I guess trying to save the economy just isn’t as “responsible” as blowing sh– up, and giving tax breaks to the filthy rich.
    You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.
    **This one doesn’t even pass the laugh test.
    You scare me because you falsely believe that you are both omnipotent and omniscient.
    **Another one that doesn’t even pass the laugh test. Bush and Cheney sure thought they were omnipotent (having complete and unchallengeable authority) but they sure weren’t omniscient (having total all encompassing knowledge) were they?
    You scare me because the media gives you a free pass on everything you do.
    **The “liberal media” claim is getting old. Conservative talk radio dwarfs liberal talk radio across the country, and the corporate TV stations make sure that liberal views are kept in check. Only MSNBC is pushing the liberal envelope. The others cower benieth the corporate machine, while FOX (Faux) “news” actually fired 2 reporters for “refusing to lie as directed by FOX on the air” and then FOX won in court the “right to lie” over the public airways.
    You scare me because you demonize and want to silence the Limbaughs, Hannitys, O’Relllys and Becks who offer opposing, conservative points of view.
    **See above: FOX won in court the “right to lie” over the public airways. And Rush is a proven liar (see Al Franken’s book Rush Limbaugh Is a Big Fat Idiot.)
    You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.
    **I haven’t seen a more conciliatory and compromising president since Jimmy Carter.
    Finally, you scare me because if you serve a second term I will probably not feel safe in writing a similar letter in 8 years.
    **Ah, just as I suspected Pritchett is paranoid and delusional.

    Lou Pritchett
    **That part’s true his name is Lou!

    TRUE – CHECK: http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/youscareme.asp
    **Yes, Snopes confirmed that Pritchett wrote the letter. Political hacks write false accusations to newspapers every day. Reputable newspapers like the NY Times throw them in the garbage. I have to ask why he didn’t send his to other newspapers. I expect the answer is that they all would have rejected him, but the NY Times rejection gives him more publicity. Also and most importantly while Snopes confirmed that Pritchett wrote the letter, Snopes does not say that even a single accusation in the letter is true.

    Like

  95. Ed Darrell says:

    Pritchett is trying to create a revisionist present.

    That’s a keeper.

    There are some fine history teachers in Minnesota, too . . .

    Like

  96. My admiration grows for you each post, Ed. I now wish that I had stayed in the Dallas area so that my kids could have had a history teacher like yourself.

    After having read your response, and taken a bit of time to go back to Pritchett’s letter one thought has occurred to me:

    In Texas, the new SBOE head has invited “experts” in to develop a revisionist history based on a shoddy understanding of our past. Pritchett is trying to create a revisionist present.

    Like

  97. Tsu Dho Nimh says:

    “You scare me because you did not spend the formative years of youth growing up in America and culturally you are not an American.”

    Good grief … if this guy thinks that spending age 6 to 10 in a foreign country as a child is enough to make up for the 40 or so years of living in the USA.

    Culturally … he’s not the American you m

    Like

  98. Not to mention that a good number of these claims could be said about most presidents.

    “You scare me because you lack humility and ‘class’, always blaming others.”

    “You scare me because you will not openly listen to or even consider opposing points of view from intelligent people.”

    “You scare me because you prefer controlling over governing.”

    Any idea what percentage of “real” Americans have run a company and served in the military?

    Like

Please play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes. While your e-mail will not show with comments, note that it is our policy not to allow false e-mail addresses. Comments with non-working e-mail addresses may be deleted.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: