Colson would indeed work with anyone working toward prison reform. Prison Fellowship works with governments around the world, non-governmental organizations--anyone.

PF has long advocated alternative sentencing for nonviolent crimes, including minor drug offenses. (I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure they wouldn't advocate going easy on hard-core dealers and drug lords.) They advocate victim restitution in cases of minor property crimes and white-collar crimes. In short, they want to do anything to cut down on the number of people behind bars.

While they preach the gospel, they also work on material needs, including education and housing for both ex-cons and their families while they're in prison. PF's Operation Angel Tree is an example of that, gathering Christmas presents to give to children who have one or more (!) parents behind bars.

Kemp, Reagan, and others of that 1980s contingent of Republicans are directly responsible for a whole host of self-inflicted social ills we suffer from today: an underfunded public sector, crumbling infrastructure and public schools -- New Deal Democrat

Kemp, Reagan and others could have had little effect on these, since with the exception of an undefined "public sector," most infrastructure and schools spending is done on the state or local level, not federal.

an increasingly unaffordable college education -- New Deal Democrat

The fastest rise in college costs occurred under Bill Clinton, not Reagan. They have continued to rise since for a variety of reasons, but none of them are attributable to either Jack Kemp or Ronald Reagan.

and the ever-widening gap between rich and poor, due largely to the huge tax cuts the rich received under Reagan. --New Deal Democrat

This is the biggest howler of all. The share of taxes paid by the "rich" actually increased under Reagan while the share paid by the "poor" actually declined. See:

http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-grwth/reagtxct/fig-1.gif

There's nothing more tiresome than Leftists spouting the same old tired cant based on no facts but just stupid, unthinking propaganda.

You'd think you'd be embarrassed, but there's one thing I've learned over the years: unthinking ideologues are incapable of embarrassment.

What are you talking about? I've watched the videos. No one is "shouting". They are making their points strongly, sure, but if you consider that "shouting", then you've lived a sheltered life.

I thought America was about the right to peacefully protest. Compare that to the left-wing loonies throwing bricks through windows at G-8 summits or threatening "no peace" if they don't get their way.

Um, you apparently haven't heard about Obama's "town hall meetings" that not only had prescreened guests but prescreened questions.

Please, give me a break.

This entire piece is one large case of the pot calling the kettle black.

Sure it is. The Constitution says nothing about whether speech is organized or spontaneous.

ACORN brags about the way it organizes protests, including at the homes of people they don't like. You're curiously selective in our outrage.

By the way, why are you not attacking all those people who throw pies in the faces of conservative speakers (see Ann Coulter and William Kristol, for starters)?

And I notice the only demonstrations that call for riot police are those by left-wingers (see G-8 summits for starters).

As someone else pointed out, Giant Bastard clearly doesn't know the meaning of fascist, since he advocates fascist tactics to silence those he disagrees with.

Disagreeing with something your government does is not the same as "hating" it, as you claim. (Besides, tell me one person who says he hates the federal government.) But more to the point, the First Amendment protects a person's right to hate his government or his country. (The Supreme Court upheld the right to burn the flag. Would you shoot such people, Giant Bastard? Probably not, since they tend to be leftists.) Until a person advocates a violent overthrow of his government, he is well within his constitutional rights.

You, Giant Bastard, are the fascist, using threats and bluster to silence those you disagree with based on a self-serving defintion of what it means to be a "patriot", which conveniently exlcudes everyone you disagree with or don't like.

Sounds exactly like the tactics of the brownshirts.

You just show your ignorance, Giant Bastard.

This is called an argument from silence, which proves nothing.

I noticed you didn't deny being an immature, incoherent, ignorant asshole. Kind of telling, isn't it?

Now go away before you embarrass yourself further.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/08/think_progress_msnbc_manufactu.asp

This man has obviously never dealt with the VA.

Just Google "medical blunders" and "veterans administration" or read the WaPo's damning series on the conditions at Walter Reed Medical Center.

That's what we're all in for if Obama succeeds.

For those whose conspiritorial mindset (which says way more about you than your targets) think that all this cannot possibly be genuine or spontaneous, read this for an excellent summary of what's happening:

http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/prairie-fire-anger/

So what's new?

Now what I want to know is why you're blogging on this nonstory but not the White House's illegal and scary attempt to stamp out dissent by asking people to rat on their friends for holding "fishy" ideas about Obama's policy and send their names and info to the White House?

That is far scarier and far more illegal than anything Limbaugh says.

Why the silence from champion of civil liberties Glenn Greenwald?

And do you follow the news?

The Democrats are at this moment forcing the Pentagon to buy two more biz jets than it wants (@ $65 million a pop) so that congressmen can use them.

And they had the nerve to excoriate Detroit executives for flying to Washington on biz jets. They at least paid their own way.