Tag Archives: Blonde sagacity


Paul Mirengoff at the Power Line blog disputes the presumptions of Harvard historian James Kloppenberg who has written a book called Reading Obama: Dreams, Hopes, and the American Political Tradition, in which Kloppenberg compares Obama favorably to the founding fathers. Mirrengoff’s post is a very interesting read.

I don’t know where she got it, but Blonde Sagacity posted this photo with the suggestion – CAPTION IT. Click the image and study each ones eyes.

From  Charlie Daniels‘  Soapbox
“It happened in Greece, it’s happening in France and it will happen anywhere the ugly serpent of socialism raises it’s head, including the United States of America.

Socialism is flawed by design. It discourages competition, over taxes the productive, and in its feverish effort to bring all society down to the lowest common denominator, eventually destroys everything in its path.”


For something that will warm the cockles of your heart,Random Thots recommends you spend some time with a certain Sagacious Blonde. Click here and then here for uplifting experiences.

For something different in a book,The Crowd, by Gustave Le Bon. Originally published in France in 1895, is such a classic that paperback editions are readily available today. Be forewarned, it was written over 100 years ago at atime when one could say that crowds behave emotionally and illogically, like women. But even a feminist might nod with approval when reading Le Bon’s conclusions gleaned from his study of crowd behavior and how it differs from the way its members would behave individually.

For helping the poor,
Poor Richard’s Almanac   November, 1766
Topic: Poverty
On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor

I am for doing good for the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good for the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.                       Benjamin Franklin