I continue to be amazed at Mr. Cheah's inability or unwillingness to understand the simple point I was attempting to make concerning his column of July 4th. I certainly know McNeil/Lehrer and their 30 years of production work for PBS. Their reputation and leanings are well known. We can agree on that. But why would I prefer their "discussion" of the founding fathers meaning of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" when I can easily access the writings of those founders and know for a certainty what they meant?
When completing my master's degree, I was required to prepare a thesis. The primary guideline for preparation of that thesis was that my research had to be from the original documents applicable to the subject, not the opinions of others about those documents. Similarly, in a court of law, hearsay evidence is inadmissible. It seems to me there would be a lot less trouble and misunderstanding in this world if we all adhered to that simple standard.
So "no" I don't accept second hand opinions no matter how "famous" the presenter might be. Alan does, when convenient. That was my point.
Now, regarding the teachings of Jesus, research shows they are consistent with the original texts of both testaments of the Bible. It is not fame, but the authority and verity of His teachings that fuels my belief.
I appreciate Mr. Cheah's participation in Freedom Fest. But, his misconception of the Tea Party movement remains unchanged. We are decidedly not Republicans. We are conservatives. And we will support/vote for any candidate, regardless of party affiliation, who demonstrates they share the conservative values we hold dear. Can we please agree on that?
Steve Hall, North Fork