Alternatively, it supports the assertion that the country enjoys one party rule--The Progressive Party. Those understanding that this route only leads to European-style collapse, and opposing it, will be crushed.

For you, 'comprehend' == 'agree', it seems.

Oh, so I don't agree with you, and thus I'm being disingenuous?

In theory, schools can act as a crap filter for workers.
"The difference between theory and practice is greater in practice than in theory."--some C++ Users Journal article

I reject your logical operator, the premise of your first statement, and mostly buy the second one.
I did too read ~2/3 of the Communist Manifesto, and thought it pure propaganda.

For some purely subjective definition of 'conservative', which actual conservatives would reject, sure. It's your 1st Amendment right to be daft, and you do exercise it with flair.

Great question. It's not clear that mortal terminology applies much, but I await some news in eternity.

You've misunderstood. The Creator created 'is', and affords a scope in which the universe can execute.

Alternately, unable to make the faith leap that the universe "just kinda is".

And scientists aren't doing that constantly? Look at the groovy symbols, man. All that could well be true, or turn out to be a big, fat brontosaurus.
These are the conjectures of the day. Are they so much phlogiston? If we're going to allow that Jesus Christ may not be the Messiah (and we should, lest we fall into fanaticism) then we should fall equally short of fetishing science as though these squishy theories couldn't be overturned next week.

. . .beyond that, all bets are backed up somewhere on the spectrum of realipolitik from gentle encouragement to gun-barrel-up-the-nose.

. . .and make way for Her Majesty.

It's all about feeding d_r's }={ fetish.

I was being sarcastic.

Only if you're going to be naïve, and claim that the Democrats somehow represent the 1% in any lesser way than the Republicans.

My point is that "following the rules of God" is the object this leads to the maximizing of individual liberty. All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. There is a whole spectrum of non-sinful opportunity for me; the question is how to maximize the glory of God. But the "common good" is achieved in passing, in the passing of the need to fear God and walk humbly in His ways from one generation to the next.
"Common good", on its own, is such an amorphous, conjectural notion as to seem a campaign slogan of the "Forward" or "Hope and Change" variety. We're born individuals, and derive a notion of "common" from the population. We certainly do NOT move from the group to the individual, sorry. Christ died for each individual person's sins in all of time. "God so loved the world," yes, but remember that "whosoever believeth" is an individual, not corporate, requirement.

Ja. The dork also does something at Georgetown that he calls "teaching".

Actually, I had already blogged about your boy Hunter. All I can say is that I'm deeply grateful that BHO ran against the 1%. I mean, if Those Awful M0rm0ns had taken over, the river of hookers and blow running through the capitol would've been wider than the Potomac, I daresay.