I'm not religious, let alone Catholic, but this seems like a big dealt to me (see Catholic Clergy and Scholars Present “Formal Filial Correction” to Pope Francis).

Submitted by Matt Horsley

The dissolution of the United States of America is a frightening thing to contemplate.

Is this what we're destined for? Are other alternatives not realistic? Read this short blog and tell us what you think.

The American Revolution was the triumph of Individualism over Collectivism; freedom over the tyranny of rule by a few Masterminds who purport to know best how you should live your life. The freedom established by the American Revolution and grown over time was based in a philosophy diametrically opposite to that of the neo-communism being advance by the Left, today. Radicals like Bernie Sanders are out of the closet. Idealistic, emotional, ignorant college faculty and students are part of the useful fool toolbox. That punitive, controlling ideology is now fully in our faces and getting increasingly asinine and violent.

One of the tactics of the radical Left is to create problems where they don't exist, sell them, then "fix" them with the iron fist of government. It's an Alinsky tactic that wasn't original to him. The Maoists, Soviets, Nazis every totalitarian, murderous regime in history has used the idea of telling a lie often enough, using seemingly credible sources, until it eventually became the "truth" in the mind of the average citizen.

One big lie, pushed hard by the Great Demagogue, Barak Hussein Obama, and now rolling under it's own inertia is the idea that America is full of white racists, woman-hating men, homosexual-hating heterosexuals, etc. Fabricated "outrages" like The Great St. Olaf College Racism Hoax of 2017 are corrosive and insidious. Each is another chip out of reality and the brilliant society in which we live.

Do not let these counter-revolutionary attacks pass without reacting. Every time one of these hoaxes is exposed we should publicize it. Put it on social media. Email it (if you still do that). Tell your younger relatives about it. Don't browbeat them, just plant the seed of skepticism (healthy doubt that requires substantive evidence).

Amid all the accusations, innuendo and strong emotions, we want to get to the bottom of things and know what's really going on. We heard one thing in the Zumwalt Zone (Quis) and read something else in the Haymaker [Moore County: Saul Alinsky. Screaming Mommies. School funding. (And Quis is RIGHT.)].

Are Moore County Schools officials in need of money or are they misappropriating/mismanaging what they have?

If you have a usable information, put it in the "Comments" section, or send it to [email protected] if you desire confidentiality.

After reading Daniel Horowitz's piece The merits of Trump’s Syria strike aside, we need to bring back Congress’ power over declaring war, do you have thoughts on the idea?

(Submitted by Rational Thinker)


​​Liberty. The practical meaning of the word is that you don't have to like me or what I choose to do with my property (which includes my body, thoughts, money, business, etc.), you just may not infringe on my rights; you may not dictate to me what I shall and shall not do with my property.* You may not dictate what I eat, what sex I think I am, my religious beliefs, and an almost endless list of other personal, adult decisions I make for and about myself. By extension, neither does the government that represents you.

This newest iteration of the "Bathroom Bill" still protects private citizens from the dictates of local governments as to whom may use their restrooms, changing rooms and showers. This was always the fly in the soup. Charlotte's ordinance dictated to private citizens that they must open their facilities to anyone "identifying" as a particular "gender," regardless of the sex organs they actually have. Some believe the General Assembly should have left the matter to the courts, but as this was a clear, unmitigated violation of private property rights, I don't believe the citizens of Charlotte should be forced to "fight city hall" and incur the huge legal bills that would necessarily generate. Sparring citizens from that was an appropriate and good use of state legislative power. After all, the primary responsibility of elected officials is protect the rights of citizens. That is the standard, not whether you can afford to go to and win in court.

This seems clear but if you disagree I urge you to explain your thinking in the "Comments" section.

  What are others saying on this issue?

• NC Lawmakers Cave on Principle in Face of NCAA Threat
• Did the General Assembly and Roy Cooper just put a for sale sign on our state?
• How they vote
• Statement on HB 2 Repeal
• HB2 Repeal a Classic GOP Move
• VIEW FROM THE LEFT: What changes (and what doesn't) in HB2 replacement
• LOL

*of course we're talking about competent, adult citizens and decisions that don't infringe the rights of others

Is transgenderism a real thing or just a mental illness? I don't know. Nobody actually knows because there is currently no proof one way or the other. I suspect that like most things in nature there probably are people for whom something went wrong at some point, but that is irrelevant when it come to who goes into which restroom, shower or changing room. To her credit, Ms. Quintrall was able to admit her wrong. When faced with the results of her politically correct support for letting self-described "transgender" men into the ladies room, she realized that law must depend on more than simply the honor system.
​Read Liberal Mom Aghast as Huge Guy Wearing Lakers Jersey Walks Into Ladies’ Room

This isn't a rhetorical question. This a real (non-theoretical) dilemma currently facing our Board of Commissioners that gives us the opportunity to have a philosophical discussion about the role the local government, then to act on our individual decisions by contacting the commissioners.

Read the story: Nonprofit Makes Case to County for Continued Assistance

There is no question that Friend to Friend does truly great things in Moore Co. Many of us have donated to it, personally, but does that mean we can obligate our neighbors to (partially) fund it? Well, it may! They have to pay for law enforcement, roads, etc. Are the services offered by F2F those that are proper functions of government?

Point: This expenditure is a rightful public safety role of the county and F2F is a more efficient way of providing it than county bureaucracy would be.
Counter Point: I don't have the right to obligate my neighbors—who may have serious financial challenges (sick child, disability, caring for a parent, leaky roof, etc.) and can barely pay the property taxes on to the house they outright own—to pay for part of Friend to Friend's operating costs.

​What do you think?