« Open Thread | Main | One Hundred Long Days »

Well, he cheated; that's why Mr. Murray's speech is so terrific. There's not a teleprompter in sight.

Adrian if you're here, I would sure like to hear a lot more from you.

Isn't that a BROWN shirt he's wearing?

Thanks, Van, for putting this up.

Anon: actually, the shirt is black. Makes me look slimmer.

Air2air: You'll be hearing a lot from me. I'm not going to let this communist freak destroy our country without a fight.

My hat is off to you, Adrian.

You are a gentleman and a scholar.

And a Patriot.

There was more substance in that speech than all of the Obama speeches and news conference.

Damnit boy, you sure can speak it!

Bless your heart for having the courage to get up there like that...good job - thanks for holding up the flame for us...ya done us proud.

Heather M

You're kidding me, right? What substance is that?

"It is a charter of negative liberties." All this means is that the constitution doesn't state your rights, it states what the government may not regulate. That seems very in line with what I hear y'all shouting about on here.

Just because Mr. Murray doesn't understand doesn't mean you should be outraged right along with him.

I've got a "who ever would have thought" statement: Who ever would have thought that the day would come when a once great Republican party would put up folks like Rush Limbaugh and this guy as their leaders?

Yes, he does have passion, but very little substance and lots of angry shouting. At 7:50 in the second speech, check him out. He sounds so much like you folks on here, and I picture you much like him ... Red faced with spittle flying out.

Talk about some actual relevant subjects. Talk about solutions, instead of name-calling with your "socialist" and "dirt-bag" and anti-American. Put up something better!

Anon is right (almost) on this one, guys. Negative liberties means philosophically negative, not "bad" negative. Obama was right when he said this, and (as usual) had no real statement to make about it other than rephrasing the obvious and then smiling at the crowd.

Adrian,


Great, great speech.


Resonating Lincoln, Ayn Rand, Ronald Reagan.

I've got a "who ever would have thought" statement: Who ever would have thought that the day would come when a once great Republican party would put up folks like Rush Limbaugh and this guy as their leaders?

The GOP didn't, Anon. Lying POS's on the left keep *trying* to paint Rush as the "Leader of the Republican Party" for political PR gain, but he's not. Dude, he's a talk show host. He's as much the "leader" of the GOP as Bill Maher is the "Leader" of the Democrats.

Oh, except that sometimes Rush disagrees with and even ridicules the GOP. Can you say the same about Maher & the Dems?

Get your facts straight.

Fantastic.

You can try to switch the conversation hiram, but I'm not biting.

The point I was making is that the speech has no substance, and is all flavor. Kind of like a big Republican Twinkie. Quite satisfying for you I'm sure, but lacking any nutritional value.

So Moonbat,
individual liberty, less intrusion of government in our lives ie... smaller government are lacking any nutritional value? Spoken like a true socialist/communist.
and Anon,
We don't need solutions we just need to let the Obamunists keep putting forward their bad ones then pound the crap out of them is that not the strategy your side has used for the last eight years? You know the it's all Bush's fault mantra? Nah just kidding the solutions are self evident you moron more liberty less government Mr. Murray and Ronald Reagan stated that indisputable fact over and over again and those of your ilk can't stand it why? Well because it's true.

Its funny that the one point you make Oldcrow, is the basis for most of his speech. His MISunderstanding of what Obama said in the first place.

You're right, Oldcrow, "we don't need solutions" ... that's what you all keep saying. Where has laissez-faire gotten us? A heap of friggin economic woes my friend. You think we're in the spot we're in because of the last 100 days do you? You think none of the blame belongs in Bush's court?

Just which of your liberties has been taken away?

I'm confused by the Republican mantra of "small government" because all it really translates to for me is bigger corporations ripping us off. Corporations practically run this country. WHether its a Dem or a Repub in office, there's corporations trying to pull their strings.

My god, I thought this day would never come.

CORP HATER! WE GOT OURSELVES A CORP HATER!

Dude, I heard your sad, sad song so many times I can repeat it word for word. Three words:
Get. A. Life.

To Dimes (with respect):

I am well aware of the debate concerning "negative liberties". I agree with the view of "positive benefits". My intention was to state that Obama believes these liberties are truly negative in that they restrict the government. Little did I know that five days later Axelrod would call the Tea Parties "unhealthy". This speaks to the One's opinion that the Bill of Rights is "negative" (bad). Just dovetail that with his views on gun control. It has nothing to do with my understanding of "negative liberties". It has everything to do with his.

To anon (without respect): It is truly difficult to wrap ones head around a criticism by an Obama supporter regarding lack of substance, considering he is the most empty-suited, unsubstantative person ever to disgrace the national stage.

Do you consider government ownership of banks to be unsubstantive?

Do you consider government ownership of private industry (GM) to be unsubstantive?

Do you consider government ownership of insurance companies to be unsubstantive?

Do you consider government intervention in secret union ballots to be unsubstantive?

Do you consider government nationalization of health care to be unsubstantive?

Do you consider government control of energy usage to be unsubstantive?

I only had 20 minutes. It's had to compress all the atrocities of the Obamanation in 20 minutes, to say nothing of coming government control of energy, transportation and education.

After four years of Obama, we will envy Cuba.

I am new to moonbattery. WOW I cried at this mans passion for all of us. I just hope and prey we can fix this infection stowed upon us all. God bless all of us..

Who is this magnificent man named Adrian Murray and why isn't he my president instead of that arrogant communist punk, B. Hussein Obama? Mr. Murray's speech had to be one of the finest speeches I've ever heard regarding the current appalling state of my country. We need to hear more from this great man and we need it now...before it's too late.

to anon
"Where has laissez-faire gotten us? "

I'm probabluy a lot older than you are and I don't remember ever having laissez-faire. Not since FDR, not since Wilson, and sure as hell not under any president since Wilson.

Hey Aiden,

Yes, I consider complaint without alternate solutions to be unsubstantive. Give me something to listen to besides whining!

I consider your wet-dreams of our current administration failing both unsubtantive and un-American. I understand disagreement, but hoping for failure is disgusting in my eyes.

Do you consider doing nothing in the face of a huge economic failure an answer? You would let the banks fail and throw us under the wheel you set in motion?

GM is a complete joke and has been for years. It should be allowed to fail.

And health care. You think government has much to gain from nationalization? What about corporations in that picture? You deny that the insurance and health industries have their hands in our pockets way more than the government?

Energy is a resource, and yes, we do all need to share it. So yeah, it doesn't seem all that crazy to legislate it. If we don't make the laws, big business will be happy to make them for you, much as banks did with their self-regulation. Look where its gotten us.

Give me more than a repetitive question that sounds like the guys speech, which I say again is lacking in any substance.

I do not want government regulating and owning everything. I want as little government muckity muck control of these things as possible. I hardly expect the feds to legislate with little old me in mind. I do however, understand that legislation is necessary from time to time. That we can't always get by assuming that our national money machine will think about us or take care of us either.

You think AIG or Lehman Brothers has your interests at heart?

I'm not surprised you're unwilling to give respect to anyone who disagrees. It would be too hard for you to swallow that an opposing opinion might have a point. I'm here because I acknowledge that and want to hear what everyone has to say.

Call me an Obamabot or one of those other cute names, but your refusal to listen merely brands you as what you're calling me. A bot who can't change his programming.

Apologies Darrel, you're right the phrase is outdated, but still applies quite relevantly I believe. No regulation. Literally translated "leave it alone" which while I make no claims at speaking for people on this site, I think most people here completely identify with the idea.

Who ever would have thought that the day would come when a once great Republican party would put up folks like Rush Limbaugh and this guy as their leaders?

The Democrat party is led by an idiot who can't order a Happy Meal without a Teleprompter, and his second-in-command is an even bigger idiot who thinks "jobs" is a three letter word and FDR went on television in 1929 to comfort Americans about the stock market crash.

Give me Rush and Adrian any day.

Don't bother with the anon troll in this thread.

He/she thinks we've had "laissez-faire" in this country in recent times. This is the mark of someone who is probably in college and hasn't done much of anything in the way of productive work. I've been two different types of businesses over the last 16 years, and I've never seen and of this mythical "laissez-faire" - unless that's French for paying about 40% of my gross income in taxes and constantly wading through regulations at multiple levels of government. Seriously, anybody who thinks our current problems are due to too much economic freedom has got to either be a young kid, a clueless academic type or an complete idiot.

And when progressives demand "solutions", they mean "government intervention" of some kind. The concept of less government being a solution will never sink through. It just won't compute, so don't bother trying to explain it.

That was a beautiful speech, Adrian. Thank you.

Anonymous here are my answers, take them as you wish:

"...I consider complaint without alternate solutions to be unsubstantive. Give me something to listen to besides whining!"

We would all agree on the concept.

"...I consider your wet-dreams of our current administration failing both unsubtantive and un-American. I understand disagreement, but hoping for failure is disgusting in my eyes."

I wouldn't bring up what our side had to listen to for the last eight years. You would agree there is no comparison whatsoever. Not even by a long shot.

"...Do you consider doing nothing in the face of a huge economic failure an answer? You would let the banks fail and throw us under the wheel you set in motion?"

Yes, actually we do. Unlike O voters, we have seen several recession and recovery cycles. We are businesspeople and are familiar with the phenomenon, not terrified by it. Check your old Econ textbooks.

What was different about this recession, however, was the media cheerleading. My favorites being CNN.com's recurring series on growing your own vegetables and daily barrage of depression-era breadline photos.

The recovery in the markets has been underway for the last month. Long before any porkulus checks or projects start underway. All programs, by the way, that were planned over 2 years ago. And during the time it will take to pay off porkulus, another one or two recession cycles will reoccur.

"...GM is a complete joke and has been for years. It should be allowed to fail."

Couldn't agree more with you.

"...And health care. You think government has much to gain from nationalization? What about corporations in that picture? You deny that the insurance and health industries have their hands in our pockets way more than the government?"

I totally support your paying for my family's healthcare. And it's my right to demand you pay for it, since it's my right to have it.

"...Energy is a resource, and yes, we do all need to share it. So yeah, it doesn't seem all that crazy to legislate it. If we don't make the laws, big business will be happy to make them for you, much as banks did with their self-regulation. Look where its gotten us."

Would it seem all that crazy to legislate energy - if you didn't agree with the legislation? Yes. You would be right to object if you disagreed.

"...Give me more than a repetitive question that sounds like the guys speech, which I say again is lacking in any substance."

As you know we are in a Golden Age for speeches lacking substance. And without a teleprompter, few of us here could hold a candle to Adrian.

"...I do not want government regulating and owning everything. I want as little government muckity muck control of these things as possible. I hardly expect the feds to legislate with little old me in mind. I do however, understand that legislation is necessary from time to time. That we can't always get by assuming that our national money machine will think about us or take care of us either."

We welcome you to the fold and hope to see you at the next tea party.

"...You think AIG or Lehman Brothers has your interests at heart?"

No. But somebody decided to send your money to AIG without asking your opinion. We call it taxation without representation, whether Republican or Democrat.

Again "don't bother trying to explain it" seems to be a common thread here. Does "don't bother" translate as "don't have an answer" in Republican-ese?

I'm a 40 year old professional who owns a small but successful company, two properties (and paying for them just fine), and overall contributes plenty, thanks. Not that it should matter. We all get our say and voice, forest.

Just another case of trying to belittle an opponent by making gross assumptions about a person, trying top de-humanize with the use of "troll" and such.

Speaking of contributing, what about your taxes? I just got my business and personal returns back, and wow, was I surprised! My tax bill was less than in any of the preceding 8 years!

And if my money is going to be spent, I'd much, much, rather have it spent here than abroad ... even if its "keeping peace" in this or that country, I don't care. Never mind a war seeking out non-existent WMD's, fighting a guerilla force in their own country costing billions, not to mention thousands of American lives.

I mean c'mon you guys are always freaking out about the liberal propoganda machine (and I do not deny its existence at all) but what about the fear monger machine of the bush years?

Oh, and I already apologized for using the outdated "college history course" term. We usually don't bother correcting each other's grammar and word usage around here too too much generally.As long as the point is relevant, know what I mean? I took the correction, now move on. We're here talking economics and politics.

Besides, I still claim it sums up the core of what honest-to-goodness (non-compund-dwelling) Republicans are about. Less government, fewer programs. Right?

"anybody who thinks our current problems are due to too much economic freedom has got to either be a young kid, a clueless academic type or an complete idiot."

Yeah, I'm the clueless one. They've had similar financial crashes in Europe due to the exact same thing. De-regulated banks investing in really crappy assets, that are essentially "market bets" based on money that doesn't really exist because its secondary.

I'm not pushing European structures as a model, but on this one, it takes a few rules. Bankers get greedy, its a fact borne out by historical repetition. You've gotta watch them, or they'll crash your whole economy.

Air2Air... nice point-by-point refutation.Your patience for anonymous trolls greatly exceeds my own. I would add one fix.

Politicians get insane with unchecked power, its a fact borne out by historical repetition. You've gotta watch them, or they'll crash your whole economy.

And to Adrian I say, WE were deeply concerned about our country for the past 8 years as well... so we took it back. That's the way it works in the country. Government for the people, by the people. If you don't like it, keep up the hard work and your guy or gal might be in office the next time around.

Again "don't bother trying to explain it" seems to be a common thread here. Does "don't bother" translate as "don't have an answer" in Republican-ese?

One person said that you martyr. Obviously you're being engaged or you wouldn't still be here, having a discussion. Get a grip.

And if my money is going to be spent, I'd much, much, rather have it spent here than abroad ... even if its "keeping peace" in this or that country, I don't care. Never mind a war seeking out non-existent WMD's, fighting a guerilla force in their own country costing billions, not to mention thousands of American lives.

I'm sorry to be the first to tell you this, but one of Obama's very first executive orders was to authorize the use of federal funds (i.e. our tax dollars) for abortions performed overseas. This stimulus money and TARP funds? Some of it is being funneled directly into foreign banks. I'm with you that it's a crock, but don't act like it's not happening under and being encouraged by Obama's administration. Also, how do you feel about his drastic escalation of the war in Afghanistan?

De-regulated banks investing in really crappy assets, that are essentially "market bets" based on money that doesn't really exist because its secondary.

And what would those "really crappy assets" be? And why would banks feel compelled to invest in them (read: they were compelled, by force of law), essentially knowing they were worthless, and then package them into still essentially worthless securities, which were sold globally? You claim to have knowledge of business, but you're not demonstrating any, especially with your random blasts at "greedy bankers."

You've gotta watch them, or they'll crash your whole economy.

Are we still talking about bankers?

"...I'm a 40 year old professional who owns a small but successful company, two properties (and paying for them just fine), and overall contributes plenty, thanks. Not that it should matter. We all get our say and voice, forest."

Anonymous it sounds like you have won and are living the American Dream; congratulations. Our side wants to make sure you hold on to it. We don't want it to turn into the Cuban Dream for you.

Nationalization of the country's auto, healthcare and banking industry - over which you had no say whatsoever - is, you must admit, unprecedented. And you know the history that has followed nationalization, over the last century.

"...And if my money is going to be spent, I'd much, much, rather have it spent here than abroad ... even if its "keeping peace" in this or that country, I don't care. Never mind a war seeking out non-existent WMD's, fighting a guerilla force in their own country costing billions, not to mention thousands of American lives."

I would ask your guy O why he is maintaining 100% of Bush's military initiatives, except Guantanamo.

On Iraq, "I don't care" is a common and perfectly acceptable opinion. Trouble is that a lot of us could not sit around watching what Saddam did to human beings. He kept fulltime doctors on staff just for the purpose of cutting out tongues. The left often talks about a utopian vision for the world. There are some that get up and do something about it.

If overseas intervention is considered by the left to be an American curse, I would ask Mia Farrow how well Darfur is going under the UN. Conversely, the day US troops show up to assist there she'll be the first to protest.

"...They've had similar financial crashes in Europe due to the exact same thing. De-regulated banks investing in really crappy assets, that are essentially "market bets" based on money that doesn't really exist because its secondary...I'm not pushing European structures as a model, but on this one, it takes a few rules. Bankers get greedy, its a fact borne out by historical repetition. You've gotta watch them, or they'll crash your whole economy."

Last I heard, bankers are not in business to crash our whole economy. But when Fannie Mae backs bad loans, and the Fairness in Lending act mandates that banks write bad loans, then we should expect the ending that Dodd and Frank denied would happen, up to the very last month.

Only three tenths of one percent of mortgages were affected by the initial Fannie Mae collapse. Thank the media for the rest.

Air2air, I believe I could drink a beer with you and happily disagree. A couple of great answers and a couple of artful dodges, all done with intelligence and class, and the only name calling you did I laughed at myself.

The main argument I have is your economic picture. Yes, the wheel will always eventually turn and recovery will happen, but surely you can't deny that what the government does in response can hamper or hasten the recovery?

And this comment: "The recovery in the markets has been underway for the last month. Long before any porkulus checks or projects start underway."

I don't know where you are located, but I definitely don't see recovery where I am yet. Markets will fluctuate even in recession. It doesn't mean its over. I'm not predicting bread lines for goodness sake, but I think its still going to be a year or two before home values and 401(k)s return to what they were.

At first it was reported that President Barack Obama wasn't even aware of the nationwide Tea Party protests that occurred on April 15. But now he's out criticizing them and the Fox News Channel.

In a town hall meeting in St. Louis on April 29, Obama was asked about fiscal discipline and entitlement reform. In his response, he took a shot at the Fox News Channel and the tea party movement, insisting he's "happy to have a serious conversation" with them.

Obama Attacks Fox News, Tea Parties at Town Hall Meeting

BRING IT ON BARRY, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO CONVERSE WITH YOU ABOUT YOUR OUT OF CONTROL SPENDING AND BIG GOVERNMENT!

Hey cowlove, read up. The banks felt compelled to invest in them because the returns were VERY HIGH, up until they crashed. So yeah, it the greedy bankers I'm talking about. You know the folks taking $20M golden parachutes as the economy sinks. These they call "performance bonuses"

No air2air, they shouldn't be in business to crash the economy. And that's not their goal. Making money more and more quickly is the goal, and that's what leads to a crash. The money in the market becomes essentially fictional. That is what "credit default swap" means.

Or will you just Chicken $h*t out and send another of your CNN attack dogs!

That speech was AWESOME

Yes, the wheel will always eventually turn and recovery will happen, but surely you can't deny that what the government does in response can hamper or hasten the recovery?

I don't mean to jump in for Air2Air, but this is pure tautology. Of course governmental action will either hamper or hasten the recovery, but the difference in our stances obviously lies in what those actions are.

I would prefer the government not spend and print trillions. I would prefer it lower both its spending and its tax collections. In doing so, the government will be lowering its consumption, as we all are, and also be leaving us with more money with which to actually spend, invest, or save. See, the government can't actually do anything with money except displace it. Whatever new bridge is built with stimulus funds? It's being built with money that's been taken out of the pockets of other people in the private sector. A new frisbee golf course? Those dollars might have been spent at a local grocery store. Of course, you can see the shiney new bridge, and you can see the frisbee golf course, so it's easy to not acknowledge that it is, in fact, purely displacement.

Government intervention in the form of spending just to spend has never worked as a recovery from recession, nor will it work this time, for the exact same reasons. It's not quite simple economics, but it's economics nonetheless.

"I am new to moonbattery. WOW I cried at this mans passion for all of us. I just hope and prey we can fix this infection stowed upon us all. God bless all of us.."

Posted by: Johnny P at April 29, 2009 5:02 PM

"Who is this magnificent man named Adrian Murray and why isn't he my president instead of that arrogant communist punk, B. Hussein Obama? Mr. Murray's speech had to be one of the finest speeches I've ever heard regarding the current appalling state of my country. We need to hear more from this great man and we need it now...before it's too late."

Posted by: Hillman at April 29, 2009 5:10 PM

Be careful Moonbatteryville... looks suspiciously like your hungry for your own messiah...

While I appreciate your concern for humanity air2air, and I believe it to be genuine, I hardly think our invasion had anything to do with human abuses. Come on! It was a nice additional plus publicly for the Bush admin that the abuses were being committed, to be sure, and much noise was made in appeasement, but it was about oil, and keeping the war/fear machine moving.

I mean, both parties have their tactics, right? The leftist tactics have been outlined here countless times. How about the keep-people-afraid-of-enemies tactic which keeps the war machine going which feeds the people's need for a party that will "keep them safe" from a country that isn't organized enough to have an organized military?

Hey cowlove, read up. The banks felt compelled to invest in them because the returns were VERY HIGH, up until they crashed.

I don't look kindly on revisionist history. Bankers are not in the business of "crashing economies." Why would they be?? However, if the government forces them to offer sub-standard loans through legislation, what do you think they're going to do? They're going to make money. Period.

What we have is a classic example of the government "fixing" a made-up problem. But it's ok, because they're going to help get us out of this, right?

Maybe I'd have the same faith you do if I could point to one, single instance of the government's ability to fix anything and not leave it in worse shape than when it started.

Thanks for the kind word Anons and the kind of quality discussion that is a rare pleasure.

"...surely you can't deny that what the government does in response can hamper or hasten the recovery?"

The answer to that is for better-informed minds. I'm sure you understand and likely agree with the Tea Party issue is about how the bailouts, debt and spending of your money was done behind your back: Without explanation, consultation or time to even read the legislation. You deserve better as a contributing, successful American and businessman. You are their meal ticket, not vice versa.

"...I definitely don't see recovery where I am yet. Markets will fluctuate even in recession. It doesn't mean its over."

Quite true, it's only that the stock market leads recovery cycles, and I believe it's commercial real estate that is the last in line.

"...I'm not predicting bread lines for goodness sake, but I think its still going to be a year or two before home values and 401(k)s return to what they were."

Absolutely true. But going back to Adrian's speech, our issue is:

1. What the hell did the spending and bailouts have to do with anything?
2. Who asked you or I where money was to be spent? Do you feel like you had any say?
3. At a cost of *(I think)* $230K per household over the next decade, how does that affect our 401k's right there? Remember the compounding interest lost as well.

"...but it was about oil, and keeping the war/fear machine moving."

Well, we will agree with you the day we see any Iraqi oil. The lefties always, always sidestep Saddam, as if he didn't exist.

Today Saddam is out of power and 45 million Iraqis are free. The murder rate in Baghdad is lower than Detroit. Saddam can't gas villages, invade Kuwait or add any more millions to those whose mass graves are dug up almost daily.

Long ago, these were the virtues that Democrats used to stand for.

"...How about the keep-people-afraid-of-enemies tactic..."

I remember when you complained that Bush had not yet got Osama.

"...which keeps the war machine going which feeds the people's need for a party that will "keep them safe"..."

I assume "keep them safe" is in quotes because GWB did exactly that?

The tea parties didnt interest SLIME or NEWSREEK becuase they were orderly and peaceful with no arrests no rioting no looting no vandakism no attacks on the police or pedestreans by thugs after the RODY KING verdict which can be blamed on those rotten journalists

"I'm a 40 year old professional who owns a small but successful company, two properties (and paying for them just fine), and overall contributes plenty, thanks. Not that it should matter. We all get our say and voice, forest."

I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt by assuming you were a young student. I used to have similar opinions when I was 19 or so.

If you are 40 and a legit entrepreneur, then I don't understand how you could think we need more rather than less taxation and regulation. I don't know any self-made people who think like privileged suburban wannabe intellectual youths.

If you inherited what you have, or your "small but successful" business is actually more of a hobby, or if your "properties" were the result of a divorce settlement, or something similar, then I can completely understand why you hold your opinions. I've known plenty of trust-funders who make a good show of being entrepreneurs, but they can never quite pull it off.

Wow -- what a speech. Thank you Adrian, for saying what so many in this country have longed to hear.

I know it's painful to bring up the memory, but compare Adrian's speech to any public appearance John McCain made last year. Hands down, no comparison.

And there was plenty of substance too. Some of the commenters here apparently can't tell the difference between style and substance. Give me a dose of Adrian Murray any day and spare me the insipid vacuousness of that empty suit in the White House.

Mr. Murray, ZING! You hit it right on the spot and very eloquently at that. Well done! Those who don't "get" his speech need to go study some HISTORY.
We have an inexperienced, immature, passive-aggressive, snotty, condescending adolescent in the White House who got there because he promised the vast ignorant majority of entitlement-minded citizenry a lot of free ice cream ... well, that plus all of the activities involving criminals, terrorists, racists & liars, : ACORN, Ayers, Rezko, Wright, etc. Thank you for putting into words what we feel and why we were all so driven to participate, some for the very first times in our lives, in an event of such magnitude. The LEFT can DENY it's meaning all they want, we, however, know the reasons which they, sadly, are unable to understand (whether it's the limbic system/synapses misfiring or plain denial) that we are indeed at a crossroad. We Conservatives are going to HAVE to MATCH the level of ACTIVISM of the left and we are going to have to educate (as the school systems obviously haven't) the masses in regards to what "Socialism" TRULY IS. What "redistribution of wealth" REALLY IS. The definitions and consequences of the cults of ignorance: "Collectivism," "Multiculturalism" & "LIBERALISM." This is something the "educated" and "enlightened" already KNOW.
So, thank you once again!! May we all show such passion and intelligent and integrity as we fight the malignance that is "liberalism" which will be the ruination of our country if we allow it's leader and his minions to insinuate themselves into all aspects of our lives, destroying our rights, freedom and liberty.
P.S. Do you know the genius, LUDWIG VON MISES? He also had it right.
Blessings!

A hearty thanks to Mr. Murray. Much luck and adventure to you on many follow up rounds.
I've never seen anything like this either, and it is indeed a dark foreboding and display of how bad it has already become. The communists never went away, they hid and integrated instead, and kept pumping their deranged system of failure into all the public institutions.
I do believe it's much worse than we even now concieve. The brainwashing is far and wide and deep - I am aware of what was done to me without my knowledge growing up - I was told a string of lies over and over again - subtly, through media.
The internet has exposed many of those lies.
A few I found on my own - for instance, the Shah of Iran had a Father, who was guess what ? The Shah of Iran before his son was. The Shah of Iran was also the Shah of Iran before he fled for his life for a full year - after the Islamists slaughtered the Prime Minister and couped the military with Mohammed Mossadeq - yes that's right a Mohammed - installed by the parlaiment under threat of death. The democommies told me the Shah was installed, and Mohammed was elected - lol
They lied - bigtime.

That was beautiful!

btw......I was wondering if Adrian is single, lol

;)

Nice work! Look forward to MORE from you!

Hey forest, You can keep hoping I'm something that conforms to your "loser ideal" of liberals, but you're wrong again. I've owned my business for 10 years, and it has been supporting me and my family, and my business partner and her family for that time. Hardly a hobby.

And I have no inheritance, or divorces, to my name. Although I say again, none of these personal issues really have any bearing. You want to turn the conversation into something personal, and this isn't personal.

Take a tip from air2air, and keep the conversation where it belongs. On topic.

PS - yes GWB kept us sooo safe. This is the guy who sat on his butt listening to a story being read to kindergartners while planes were crashing. We are talking about the same person, right?

Anon if Bush had gotten up immediately and scared alll those kids you would be bitching as well. Also Lord knows every President before him had to handle a crisis like 9/11. Of course you being all knowing and all seeing you would have done a much better job. I look forward to you running on the libacrit ticket in 2012.

Farmer, one doesn't have to jump up and scare kids to get moving. When lives are at stake though, I don't think anyone would object to startling a few kids.

A person doesn't need to be all knowing and all seeing or even have experience in order to respond to an emergency like the country being under attack. I wouldn't have objected if he had jumped up and said "Oh, sh*t!"

So tell me oh great anon what could have Bush done in 60 secs. that would have saved lives? Nobody was fully aware of the scope of the attacks at that time. Plus he had to go off of what he was told in a ten second converstaion. I'm still looking forward to you running for prez because with your massive intellect and know how this country would be safe from evil.

This is the guy who sat on his butt listening to a story being read to kindergartners while planes were crashing.

My memory must be playing tricks on me. Hmm, I seem to remember news anchors describing that event by saying he was stunned. Who wasn't on that day? When there was a another report; he left, he knew we were under attack. Later, Michael Moore framed it differently. I suppose I could wade through videos and find proof of that, but would it really convince those who want to believe otherwise?

Say, anon; how hard is it to make up a handle? If you're half as creative as you are willfully self-deceiving it shouldn't be a problem.

I like being anonymous so I can deny my more snarky comments.

I don't understand why this video hasn't gone viral. I mentioned it to some major bloggers but there are no new trackbacks.

What's really strange, though, is that even though the videos are on Youtube, you cannot find them by searching for "Adrian Murray" or anything else. What's that about? Is it because they were just added and they will get indexed later? It has been two days. I wouldn't put it past Google to censor something that didn't suit their lib sensibilities (and I use that term loosely).

The substance is simplistic, probably too simple. Sadly, if we long for eloquence and rhetoric, we're disappointed when the message is so simple, that it passes right over our heads. Just like when Jesus was performing miracles, raised Lazarus from the dead, did awesome "proofs" of who he was, the religious leaders and scholars missed it. Today, the new religion is atheism, socialism, collectivism, etc., everything except what has been defined for us in our constitution. This was Adrian's main point in the first part of his speech. We are redefining what has already been defined for us. We are transferring our trust from a document that sets our nation apart as "one nation under God" and redirecting our trust into "one nation under Obama". Now, regardless of where you stand right now, ask yourself: are you really surprised? The same forces marked by ignorance, self-interest, evil, etc. are at work re-defining marriage, banning the use of the word "sin" in the same sentence as the word "gay", etc. Step back for a moment and just decide on which side of the fence you are on. Do you really think that there is no such thing as right or wrong? For those who are able to discern the difference, pray for those who are blind and therefore, are unable to see. Yet, I prefer to see this day that we live in, similar to the day of Nehemiah. We need to rebuild this country. May we carry our sword in one hand and rebuild with our other hand. May we protect our families and ourselves from the deceit, filth and other evils that abound in our schools, our media and at work while living out the truth and accepting the responsibility of being an American.
What are these responsibilities? Let's start with reading over and understanding the reasons why our forefathers are of such value to our nation. Why our money states "In God we Trust". Ask our local government to answer exactly which of the ten commandments they particularly find offensive. Adrian makes a good point. We allowed the current situation to unfold. The day we found ourselves (personally, yours truly did it) justifying that Clinton's affair with Monica via the "it's none of our business" or "OK because that's acceptable in other parts of the world" was, I think in my generation, the day we sank to a new depth. We have continued to fall since then. I have realized how foolish my thinking was and how I allowed my own self interests to trample over that of the greater good. Right now, we are conceding and giving our selves away, not for the greater good, but for the selfish few. The facts are speaking for themselves right now. Mr. Murray did a fine job in pointing them out.
As far as picking on GWB for the 60 seconds during the attacks, how pathetic to even go there. Obviously you must be one of those who has already forgotten what happened on that dark day. Thankfully, Mr. Murray and many, many others meant what they said when the words "NEVER FORGET" were spoken. I have been to ground zero. I have seen the faces of the firemen who lost their lives to help their fellow countrymen and women.
I know for certain what the future holds for me. We shouldn't worry the least bit about what's going on right now. I already know how it ends and you know what, those who are deceived will have no excuse as they chose to ignore the facts that were laid before them. Now, for those of us who do know the truth, we see that clearly one of the substantial points in Adrian's message was to "get involved". Take the five thousand and turn it into five mllion. Just like it only took a few of the blind to lead the blind and ruin and re-define what the greater good is, it will only take a few of us to make some noise and get the attention of those who do want to do what is right. Adrian, thanks again. I sure do hope that there is more where this came from.

Adrian - I've been trying to comment on your Youtube page directly - but it's not letting me - I would recommend you start "tagging" those videos....ASAP - this could go viral, but it's gonna need just a little leg work from ya...

I'm southgapassion on youtube...find me and I'll help ya out.

RDub - Thank you. If you want to hear more, go to www.ksky.com Saturday at 3:00 pm central time. I will be interviewed by Vicki Middleton. You can listen to the stream.

Heather - I didn't post the video, someone else did. If you have suggestions email them to me at ajmurray2004@sbcglobal.net and I'll forward them to the OP. And thank you for your support

Thanks RDub, for a picture of totalitarianism as it would be under the religious right. This country was founded on religious FREEDOM, not your religion imposed on everyone.

You love the constitution and say we need to rebuild, I suppose it means throwing out the window that pesky part about separation of church and state. If you want a religious state, that's fine, go find yourself an island and make one.

But don;t kid yourself that its what our founding fathers were searching for. Pick up a history book and read it.

And no RDub, I have not forgotten what happened on that day. Like the fact the he sat on his ass, for seven full minutes after the SECOND plane hit. Doesn't take a genius to figure out that we are under attack at that point. But by all means, continue with a photo op with little kids.

I say again what facts? You provide none.

Like this one: "We are redefining what has already been defined for us. We are transferring our trust from a document that sets our nation apart as "one nation under God" and redirecting our trust into "one nation under Obama"."

Is that one of your facts? Or maybe this one:

"banning the use of the word "sin" in the same sentence as the word "gay", etc." Is this one of your facts? Because I don't think anyone has tried to stop you from saying being gay is a sin. Your speech is free RDub. And as foolish as much of it is, I'm here to listen.

Anon, there is nowhere in the Constitution that mentions "separation of church and state". It does say that the state will not establish a church (like the Anglican church under the British monarchy/parliament). The founders had no problem with references to the Divine in the public arena -- "we are endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights". If we tried to draft the Declaration of Independence now, the ACLU and the anti-Judeo-Christian left would be up in arms over that statement.



The boogeyman to the left which is the "religious right" is a straw man. No one is seeking to establish a theocracy -- only that religious views can be freely expressed in the public arena.



Your religious bigotry is showing. Oddly enough, no one on the left seems to have a problem with Islamists wanting to establish Sharia law on our shores. I guess they figure they'll probably vote Democrat.

If you read the post I was responding to, I think you'll find plenty of fervor for religious rule, cubedweller. Its perfectly plain.

I have no religious bigotry, and absolutely no problem with faith of any kind, RDUb is free to think and speak whatever he feels, ah but there's the real rub, huh? Because so am I free to think and say what I'd like.

As for your article, it is interesting, but while you try to link it to liberals, there's absolutely no link. Just more religious freaks trying to impose their cultural world view on others. Just as I say that RDub is doing.

You love the constitution [sic] and say we need to rebuild, I [sic] suppose it means throwing out the window that pesky part about separation of church and state.

Citations, please, for the following:

1. Conservatives desiring to "rebuild" the Constitution.
2. The Article or Ammendment in the Constitution that mentions "separation of Church and State."

If you read the post I was responding to, I think you'll find plenty of fervor for religious rule, cubedweller. Its [sic] perfectly plain.

If it's perfectly plain you should have no trouble also citing a reference to religious conservatives who desire installing a theocracy.

Happy hunting.

FOr conservatives wanting to rewrite the Constitution, please see RDub's post. If you can't hear it in his first paragraph, then there's no discussing it. RDub would like nothing more than a country built on his religious principles. Likely outlawing all others, I have no doubt.

It fairly sickening that on the one hand you say that a theocracy is not what you want, and then on the other hand dare me to name that it is against the law. But here ya go:

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." That's pretty darned clear right there.

Although the actual phrase "separation of church and state" is mentioned in a letter of Jefferson's, he mentions it specifically as deriving from the first amendment, and it has been quoted in several Supreme Court rulings.

Religious freedom is the biggest principle this country was founded on. Hence, the FIRST amendment.

Anon, hear what? My quoting of Jesus does not equate to "religious fervor". I love to quote him, because he is absolute truth. Is there a better source of truth? Similarly, Thomas Jefferson states "...by our creator...". What are the facts? The facts are that there is such a thing as right and wrong. Anon, are you willing to be intellectually honest? If so, I would like to ask a fair question: who establishes authority?
I will be honest and state that I see a shift in what we as a nation are accepting as right and wrong. The line that seperates the two is being eroded. Now if right and wrong is basically a product of each and every persons own worldview, then we have a problem. I will also add another fact that Adrian stated: "...we were a government formed by the people, for the people..." This is a fact, unless of course your history book says otherwise. The facts are, if you are able to interact with others outside of a college campus or university who maybe has a job or maybe runs a company, pays taxes, has children in school, pays their own families medical bills, etc., more and more issues affecting us, collectively, appear to be a shift to "....government formed by the government for the government...". Adrian did a splendid job in laying out plenty of facts for us. I have also not only read my fair share of history books but I have also read a fair share of biographies, historical accounts via authors such as David McCollough and other historical background works including the basis for the founding of our US Navy. My father served in Vietnam and paid a heavy price and I have family members who have given their "full measure" in the current conflict and still others who are currently serving to preserve our freedom established under the authority that, as a matter of fact, is printed on our currency. If a dollar bill says "In God We Trust", is this observation not a fact or am I just imagining that my dollar bill says that?
By the way, our founding fathers weren't "searching", they knew exactly who establishes authority and they knew in whom we are to trust. They counted on "divine providence" and boy did God provide. This is not totalitarianism. You've just had a bad experience with overzealous religious fanatics. I think we all have. It's not about religion Anon, it's about relationship. Peace be with you Anon. You are my fellow countryman (or woman??? anonymous right?). Shalom.

Correction regarding the author cited above: It's McCullough, not McCollough. I spelled it wrong. Sorry.

May I?

Anon, you know not of what you speak. By simply ackowledging the existence of God, Congress is not making a law "respecting the establishment of religion." If you believe otherwise, could you please advise us of the name of the bill and its designated number? Perhaps you could tell us which committee from whence it came. Simply allowing for the free expression of religion is not the establishment of one. You think the founders were opposed to religion? Listen to the fathers.

Listen to George Washington: “It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favors.”

Listen to Thomas Jefferson: “The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time. The hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them.”

Listen to James Madison: “The belief in a God all powerful, wise and good, is…essential to the moral order of the world and to the happiness of man.”

Listen to our second president, John Adams: “It is the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons, to worship the SUPREME BEING, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe.”

Listen to Joseph Story, who at age 32 became the youngest Supreme Court justice in history: “It yet remains a problem to be solved in human affairs, whether any free government can be permanent, where the public worship of God, and the support of religion, constitute no part of the policy or duty of the state in any assignable shape.”

Listen to John Jay, who was the first chief justice of the Supreme Court: “The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.”

Just a bunch of athiests, eh?

Now listen to Vladimir Lenin: "Atheism is a natural and inseparable portion of Marxism, of the theory and practice of Scientific Socialism."

Atheism is a religion as well. It's worship of the power of the state.

If you weren't so determined to cement your feet into whatever ideological corner you have painted yourself and actually LISTEN for once you might one day learn something.

One more:
Theodore Roosevelt once observed "A thorough knowledge of the Bible is worth more than a college education". I have a college education. Sadly, I didn't always agree with Teddy. Now, I see and understand what he meant and couldn't agree more. Thank you Adrian.

Adrian, would you agree, therefore, that a large portion of our problems we face today are not the result of our constitution or bill of rights, but in fact self-evident dangers of post-modern thinking? I think everyone who has responded on this page has seen a 'fact' presented over the past 30 years that point to what happens, as Josh McDowell puts it: ["when there is no objective truth, then there is nothing that is wrong". "What most people would consider abhorrent(i.e. murder, stealing, lying) must now be accepted because it is acceptable to some people."]? I think we can all agree that there have been incredible abuses by people within our government, our corporations, our educational system, our judiciary, churches, etc. Maybe it would be worthwhile for you to perhaps elaborate on what solution would be appropriate to handle corporate abuse. Would you entertain or have you, in a previous speech, provided a potential solution to the cancerous problem that is a contributing menace to our current state of affairs: greed?

RDub,

I've written a speech for the next round of rallies (June 14, Flag Day). In it, I observe that our current condition is due to our drift from our faith in God. Our founders believed faith was the lynchpin of representative government. Once people lose faith in God they place their faith in government. Marxists like Obama want people to lose their Godly faith so that they become dependent on government. As noted above, Lenin believed that atheism is inseparable from Marxism. Marxism cannot compete with God so it must abolish Him. Hence Obama's covering of the name Jesus Christ (even in Greek!) at Georgetown last week. This correlates with the left's relentless assault on anything Christian the past few decades (Catholic priests, evangelicals, Christmas, Ten Commandments, etc.). It's all designed to destroy people's faith in religion and replace it with the state.

I also note that Congress has to continually debate ethics legislation. Why? I run a business and we don't have to perpetually revise our ethics standards to keep our employees from devising new ways of looting us. If these people in Washington have to keep passing laws to control their own avarice, perhaps they are not the right people for the job.

To win, we need to restore faith, bind ourselves with the power of God and retake the American dream. We have the numbers. We just need to awaken the masses.