FIGHT (We will not go down without a fight)

[imzameer]

Some delusional Fed funded, Wall street Dick "JoeDanMedia", sleeping duck u'll wake up to the Pissing marines on your face, just then u'll know what You actually Are !!! :)

[nord98]

Inspiring. We must throw out the marxist/socialist idiots marching us down the path to euro-bankrupt do nothing socialism. We are not Greece. (BTW Throughout this mess in Greece - not a single union government employee has been fired. Think about who they are taking care of first.)

OTP!

[Christiangal39]

Excellent, Joe Dan! We're not going down without a fight! As for the pathetic, name calling trolls on here, get a life!

[Irislogu12]

AWESOME WE WILL NOT BOW!

WE WILL NOT BE SILENT!

[tjwdraws]

Not only is this pitiful little song really bad it is also a shining example of Teabagger, Christian Taliban extreemist racism, religious intolerance, homophobia, and basic lack of understanding of history beyond what Fox "news" tells you to believe. Sad.

[01foolishworld]

hey man..fuckin' GreatOne...not only do I love these words,that guitar feedback fuzztone &the fact the vocals are dynamic really does it for me.THX again bro

[vodooooooooooo]

not a good job ....!

[rjjstephan]

smooth JoeDan ;-)

[Italman45]

HAHAHAHAHA,......ARE YOU KIDDING ME WITH THIS SHIT ......YOU CAN FIGHT ALL YOU WANT , YOU'RE FRIED.....TRUE AMERICANS SEE YOU FOR WHO YOU ANIMALS REALLY ARE

[whiteleyphd]

" We will NOT go down WITHOUT a FIGHT!! AMEN!!

[Gwindybrown]

Joe Dan, another great effort and its so true. I'm so sick of the people who comment here trying to whitewash Communism, Marxism, atheism, and Radical Islam into some misunderstood, altruistic movement . Whenever a country goes down those roads it is a death sentence. We will not go down in America! We are stronger than they think we are...

[mfooz]

It's ironic that Martin Luther KIng is featured in this horrible 'video'. He was reviled by the right as a communist and he certainly was a socialist and anti war.

Pat Tillman (an atheist) was killed by friendly fire and the Army covered up the circumstances. His family is PISSED! .

[bluesingincat]

@mfooz Martin Luther King was a conservative. He was reviled by all kinds of people, but he was used by the left for political gain. He did not share the progressive's world view. The left use him still today, and they denigrate his memory and his cause with their distortions and disregard for God. Pat Tillman isn't here to speak on his own behalf. He isn't the first, the last, or the worst case of a soldier being killed by friendly fire. His family is dealing with their loss in their own way.

[yabruf]

This song is extremely politically incorrect! They bash Muslim's, homosexual's, illegals, and worst of all display the American flag without regard to anyone else's feelings.

I love it!!

[angf117]

@TheGeneralCritic i have a few words to you...from the South....FUCK YOU MAN...get the hell out! its because of people like you that our Country is in the shape its in!

[joydbrower]

Very moving, JoeDan - you've got the message!! And pay no heed to little people like "General Critic" (name says it all, emphasis on "General!") - he likes to mix monikers and, in ignorance, gives all equal weight. Obviously, he never lived in the FSU or what was once the Eastern Block (esp. Roumania & E. Germany); and he never lived in Asian countries formerly or still under the Communist yoke. When he has a little more experience in life, let him check back with us...

[jimmcmahon351]

Outstanding my Brother........outstanding!

[mary13531]

Great message, Joe Dan. I'm proud to have had a hand in it

[JohnnyAmerica1327]

@JohnnyAmerica1327 I meant GOD created all land animals on the 6th day...not Me. Simple typo. hahaha

[Novacsify]

Hey Joe.......Dan ! You've done it again !!! Good job brother.

[danichristine]

lovin' it, JoeDan! Great job! The image of the soldier who was carrying a flag while walking on his prosthesis brought me to tears.

[TheGeneralCritic]

Being Marxist or Muslim and also being an American are not mutually exclusive properties. Being American is as simple as being Mexican or being Canadian: you're American if you were born in the United States, or have become naturalized. Cut, print, end of story.

This song is bad and everyone involved should feel bad.

[JoeDanMedia]

@TheGeneralCritic And we are all mammals...Kubaya.

[JohnnyAmerica1327]

@JoeDanMedia simple typo there. I didn't mean to say I CREATED ALL LAND ANIMALS! LOL I clearly meant God...hahaha

[JohnnyAmerica1327]

@JoeDanMedia simple typo there. I didn't mean to say I CREATED ALL LAND ANIMALS! LOL I clearly meant God...hahaha

[battleregina35]

@TheGeneralCritic Being Marxist or Muslim and also being a patriotic American are mutually exclusive properties. Being born in the US may make one an American by law, but if the raising does not include a healthy respect for the constitution and the principles on which this great nation were founded it does not necessarily make good citizens.

This critique is bad and everyone involved should feel bad.

[66USPatriot]

@TheGeneralCritic Just because one is born in the United States of America does not make them a Good American, just like going to church doesn't make you a good Christian. Supporting Islamunism is a bad Domestic/Foreign Policy no matter what country you are....just look at history

[AZFederalist]

@TheGeneralCritic "Being Marxist or Muslim and also being an American are not mutually exclusive properties" When one means by that, a liberty loving, free person, then yes, those are mutually exclusive properties. If you want to be a communist or a muslim and live under the tyranny that entails, you are most welcome to do so. The world is full of countries that have such systems of government in place. Pick one with the degree of tyranny you desire and hie yourself there. We choose liberty

[TheGeneralCritic]

@AZFederalist

Islam does not promote tyranny. I'm an atheist, but I'm currently reading the Qu'ran, their holy book. There's no more tyranny within Islam than in the dietary laws of Judaism, the covenants of Protestantism, or the sacraments of Catholicism. I have read the Talmud, the Qur'an, the teachings of the Buddha, the Holy Bible, and countless other religious texts, and I'm here to tell you: they all involve submitting oneself to a modicum of tyranny.

[skb0rzn]

@TheGeneralCritic NAILED IT! And they all call any faith/belief that teaches free thought, questioning and not bowing to authority as "evil" or "demonic". The proof is in the pudding. The religions FEAR a person with a sense of SELF WORTH AND DRIVE.

[TheGeneralCritic]

@skb0rzn It's simply hard for people to break away from something they have been indoctrinated into since their birth. It was hard for me to break away from Christianity and examine it with a critical eye; it took me 5 years to fully come to terms and be comfortable with my lack of belief in magical or divine beings.

That's why I am against child religious indoctrination. A child is no more a member of a religion that he is a worker's union or a political party.

[bluesingincat]

@TheGeneralCritic Then you are against a child being indoctrinated in the theory of evolution, right? And we mustn't influence a child to believe there is no God, right? We are incapable of examining faith with a "critical eye". You either decide you do not believe, and look for signs to support that view, or you decide you do believe, and seek to know God. You cannot prove a negative. You can never know for sure. You have simply stopped looking. Do you find this disconcerting?

[TheGeneralCritic]

@bluesingincat That is a false dichotomy; there are hundreds of different viewpoints concerning a divine being. I have no belief about god or gods, and I don't say that they can't possibly exist. I simply state that I've yet to be presented with sufficient evidence to believe in any one religion's god or pantheon of gods.

As to 'indoctrinating' children in the theory of evolution, I have no problem with teaching children about the theory of evolution, and I'll tell you why in my next post.

[bluesingincat]

@TheGeneralCritic That is incorrect. Faith is not susceptible to critical thinking. You have examined RELIGION with a "critical eye", and it's not surprising you came away an agnostic. The theory of evolution is flawed, and cannot be proven. It would be fine to teach evolution theory to our kids if those flaws and untruths were also taught, but they are not. Should we also teach them the theory of a "Flat Earth"? Thermodynamics is a proven science, as is computer science. No comparison.

[TheGeneralCritic]

@bluesingincat Incorrect. You cannot separate the sciences you find uncomfortable from the sciences you are fine with. They are ALL science, under the same general dome. Evolutionary science is the same science as the ones that are allowing you to type on your keyboard and send those messages thousands of miles to my computer.

And faith IS susceptible to critical thinking. If you're arguing that it shouldn't be, that's a completely different issue.

[bluesingincat]

@TheGeneralCritic Can you separate proven science facts from theory? Evolutionary science is built upon 2 concepts, one fact, one fiction. Variation is a fact. Mutation adding genetic material is not. In the evolution theory, scientists try to convince us we all came from one life source, mutating through millions of years, and the variation fact is used with the mutation theory, which negates the whole theory. Faith is the reliance on things unseen. Faith's antithesis is critical thinking.

[TheGeneralCritic]

@bluesingincat If you're trying to argue that faith and religion should have some kind of special shield against critical thought, I'm afraid you are wrong. Everything is susceptible to critical thinking, and to suggest that in order to believe in your religion or any religion I must turn off my critical thinking is absurd. We use our critical thinking skills in every part of our lives, for every conceivable purpose. Why is it here, at the foot of religion, do we sacrifice our very minds?

[bluesingincat]

@TheGeneralCritic No, I am saying faith cannot operate under critical thinking. Faith is what happens when all critical thinking has failed us. Our "critical thinking" is so limited. We have yet to even understand the purpose of 95% of the human brain, for example. When it comes to our belief in a higher power, our human intellect cannot even start to comprehend the mind of God. Your assertion that the faithful "sacrifice their minds" at the foot of religion is a flawed perception.

[TheGeneralCritic]

@bluesingincat The theory of evolution does not speak to any system of morality; it simply describes the theory of how animals can change over time. That's it. Teaching it is the equivalent of teaching about thermodynamics or computer sciences or hundreds of other different branches of science.

Indeed, we musn't influence a child to believe there is or is not a God. That is a decision they must come to themselves, through experience and study.

[bluesingincat]

@TheGeneralCritic I disagree. In order to have faith in the theory of evolution, you have to suspend your belief in God. It is a system of morality in that it requires one to choose God, or man. Either the word of God is true, or it isn't. And we both know most evolution supporters are agnostics or atheists. A child should be taught about God if you have know that He exists. Not teaching a child about God, who is after all the Creator, is the same as teaching a child there is no God.

[TheGeneralCritic]

@bluesingincat If we tell them that there is only one true religion, that will color their worldview possibly for the rest of their life, and I feel that way about teaching a child that Atheism is the only true viewpoint, as well. Doing so inhibits their critical thinking skills and ability to examine their own beliefs with an objective view.

[bluesingincat]

@skb0rzn The religions do, but God does not. Religion is merely a word to describe one's faith in God. If you follow religion you will be disappointed. Believe me, people of faith who know God have no fear of free thought, questioning, or people with a sense of self worth or drive. They just trust God more than those people.

[skb0rzn]

@bluesingincat I really like that thought. Something to ponder.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat "No fear of free thought". I didn't know free thought was such a scary thing to some people. It's a shame we're not robots like everyone else.

[bluesingincat]

@ZeroPointAlpha I agree. It is a shame that some are fearful of it, and even a worse shame that many more are fearful of others finding it.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat The problem with that statement is that "free thought" means the capability of questioning God. Free thought could be interpreted as critical or analytical thought, both of which could potentially cause one to question wether God does or does not exist, like myself for example. And from what I've seen, people who believe in God aren't afraid of free thought so much as they ignore it at any given oppurtunity.

[bluesingincat]

@ZeroPointAlpha What a bigoted view. People who believe in God ignore free thought at every opportunity? I would agree with that sentiment if we are talking about radical Islam, or the Westboro Church, but religions were the major force in fostering discovery of new revelations many areas of science, art and biology. The Renaissance was crucial to humankind's exploration and enlightenment. I would argue just the opposite. People who believe in a higher power use free thought more liberally.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat Free thought means having the capability to undermine anything that God has allegedly done, and free thought will eventually lead to discovering that some divine being did not, in fact, create everything. Free thought would also imply free choice which, according to the Bible, we have very limited amounts of. The things that we are allegedly required to do are apparantley condemning if we don't, hardly sounds free to me. Enjoy your "freedom".

[bluesingincat]

@ZeroPointAlpha To come to a belief in God, one must suspend one's own perceptions, and reach beyond the 5 senses. This relies on free thought more than merely accepting what science or biology has taught. You insinuate a belief in God causes rejection of all concrete evidence of science fact. If believers question those theories that have not been proven, are they absent of free thought? Accepting any theory popular to our culture, that has yet to be proven, is a lack of free thought.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat Theories are meant to be questioned, that's the entire point of science and why it has evolved over the centuries. Theories exist to BE speculated, questioned, disproven. It's part of the centuries-long process of elimination that has brought us here today. Accepting theories as fact at the time do not insinuate free thought because you're not required to believe in it, in fact it's a challenge to disprove it, and doing so only betters science. Disproving God on the other hand...

[bluesingincat]

@ZeroPointAlpha Yes, theories should be challenged. Did I say they should not? The fact is, evolution theory is not being challenged by mainstream science. Those that try to challenge it are demoralized and punished by the science community. You cannot "disprove" God. Man will never disprove God, no matter what man discovers. It is impossible because you cannot prove a negative. You argue your points with fallacies. Fallacies of Irrelevance, Fallacies of Ambiguity, and Fallacies of Presumption.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat Those that challenge it and are demoralized are those who support intelligent design, which as said they can provide no proof of that. There's greater evidence supporting evolution over intelligent design (in fact there is an "intelligent design" theory that IS being worked on), and as such evolution has garnered greater support. The same thing happened with Einstein until more and more proof started pouring in, and even then Einsteins theories are being un-done by newer theories.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat That and you said theories had no solid basis. And that's true, that's why they're THEORIES and not PROOFS or LAWS. People who treat faith as proof or law are relying purely on interpretation from dusty old books with no basis other than "the book said so". Before you retort using the same argument from science books, you can, with the right tools and materials, replicate the experiments to see for yourself. I've yet to see the faithful today summon locusts or part the Red Sea.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat And you got your argument backwards: It's not that we can't disprove God, it's that we shouldn't disprove God. The burden of proof lies within the faithful, you're never REQUIRED to prove a negative. That's like me asking you to disprove dragons. I mean, even the bible says that dragons were real. I've never seen one, neither have you. Do you believe in dragons? You believe in an omnipotent omnipresent invisible man, so why wouldn't you? And yet there's no proof of them either.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat ...Would only mean that everything that millions of people believed in and stood for would have been a lie.

[bluesingincat]

@ZeroPointAlpha And if that were to happen, what would be the consistent, logical, and moral propellant for mankind?

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@bluesingincat While I find it strange that you'd use "logical" to describe "moral propellant" when you're arguing over wether or not a sky-wizard is real, I'd say the obvious choice is basically the good ol' "Man, that shit would suck if someone did it to me, so maybe I ought to not do it to someone else" routine. You might know it as the "do unto others" rule, which is not a uniquely Abrahamic ideal.

[dct1700d]

@TheGeneralCritic I have read them as well, and more beside... and if THAT is the conclusion you've reached then you sir, are a simpleton...stick to Family Guy.

[TheGeneralCritic]

@dct1700d Ad hominem attacks will get you nowhere, sir. Argue the point or kindly leave mature discussion to those who can handle it.

[Gondring]

@TheGeneralCritic - - Which translation are you reading--one of the whitewashed ones, or one of the representative ones?

[TheGeneralCritic]

@Gondring The $0.99 Kindle Version

[TheGeneralCritic]

@AZFederalist

Marxism is an entirely different ball of wax; Marxism is simply another version of Communism, that old Cold War scare word. Communism is not despotism; it has been linked with despotism and tyranny, mostly because the countries/factions that could not get support from the U.S. turned to the USSR.

[ZeroPointAlpha]

@AZFederalist The only liberty we're entitled to is the false sense of choice when electing a new leader, which as we all know by now is determined by the electoral college rather than popular vote. After that, people lose control over what laws their elected officials pass/don't pass with no input from the populace other than "they elected me so I'll be what I wanna do". Not that it matters, most people are so ignorant of the laws that having them vote on them would be no more productive.

[tjwdraws]

@TheGeneralCritic Now this is a simple truth the teabag and Christian Taliban crowd don't want to admit. they are scared of the "other" and need to have a monster to point their chubby little fingers at -- never realizing that in doing so they are no better than the caricature they have made out of their imaginary foe.

[NateSmooveMedia]

Great Song JD.

[ThePatriotmike]

Pretty powerful Joe Dan, you are definitely getting better and better each time.

[CharSanFran]

This is Absofreakinlutely Joe Dan's best video (so far). Very ins[riring....:)

[sbrawsm]

This is probably Joe Dan's best project yet! Positively AWESOME!