The public debt of the Union would be a further cause of collision between the separate States or confederacies. The apportionment, in the first instance, and the progressive extinguishment afterward, would be alike productive of ill-humor and animosity. How would it be possible to agree upon a rule of apportionment satisfactory to all? There is scarcely any that can be proposed which is entirely free from real objections. These, as usual, would be exaggerated by the adverse interest of the parties. There are even dissimilar views among the States as to the general principle of discharging the public debt. Some of them, either less impressed with the importance of national credit, or because their citizens have little, if any, immediate interest in the question, feel an indifference, if not a repugnance, to the payment of the domestic debt at any rate. These would be inclined to magnify the difficulties of a distribution. Others of them, a numerous body of whose citizens are creditors to the public beyond proportion of the State in the total amount of the national debt, would be strenuous for some equitable and effective provision. The procrastinations of the former would excite the resentments of the latter. The settlement of a rule would, in the meantime, be postponed by real differences of opinion and affected delays. The citizens of the States interested would clamour; foreign powers would urge for the satisfaction of their just demands, and the peace of the States would be hazarded to the double contingency of external invasion and internal contention.
Ted Nugent | Let The Big Dogs Run
As much as I dearly respect this great warrior, the good Gen. Stanley McChrystal forgot one of the fundamentals of leadership: The pace of the pack is set by the lead dog.
I read the Rolling Stone piece at an airport bookstore. When finished, I put the ultra-leftist hippie magazine back on the rack for some dreadlocked wandering idiot wearing a Che shirt to purchase. Indeed, a fool and his money will soon part.
One has to seriously question the otherwise brilliant Gen. McChrystal’s judgment to allow an anti-war, biased reporter from the Rolling Stone magazine access to him and his staff for 30 days. Th bulk of writing in this goofy magazine is at the best suspicious and more often than not simply hardcore leftwing propaganda.
Gen. McChrystal had to know the hack from Rolling Stone would portray him and his staff in a negative light. For McChrystal to believe otherwise is analogous to me believing that Rolling Stone magazine would give me or the National Rifle Association a fair shake. Not happening.
David Limbaugh | ‘What Would Saul Alinsky Do?’
Remember the popular motto “What would Jesus do?” which was invoked by many Christians as a moral guidepost for daily living? President Barack Obama more likely adheres to “What would Saul Alinsky do?” as most recently evidenced by his apparent defiance of a federal court order on his moratorium on offshore drilling.
Politico reports that the drilling companies who secured the court order blocking the moratorium say the administration indeed is going to defy the court order. I’m quite sure that Alinsky would applaud this move: If at first you don’t succeed through proper legal channels, proceed anyway, because nothing is more important than the radical ends you seek, including the means that must be trampled in the process.