'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate

Oct 1, 2010 | Posted by: Top Mod2 | Full story: thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com

"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Comments
60,081 - 60,100 of 146,285 Comments Last updated 4 min ago
OBAMIES ZOMBIES

El Monte, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65874
Nov 26, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm "proud" you are here!
Wish we had more like you :)
Think I'll call it a night.
Talk to you tomorrow :)
The rest of you Guys too ...^_^
Goodnight A/L...pleasant dreams!
OBAMIES ZOMBIES

El Monte, CA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65875
Nov 26, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

2

KYMI wrote:
<quoted text>
The rest of the world isn't that stupid, although they are in pretty rough shape, they don't take oblamer seriously, many leaders are laughing at the U.S. for being so self absorbed for electing such a loser 2 x, even the Russians can see what a loser the American people chose to lie to them, they don't take us seriously anymore and who can blame them, as a country we don't take ourselves serious to put a marxist community organizer who never worked a day in his life in that office, we are very fortunate though that the Congress has equal power to block his constitutional destruction.
People use to envy you when you said you're from America. Not anymore ...it's very sad.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65876
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Jay wrote:
<quoted text>
**********
Yeah!!
Been on a shopping rampage with my daughter today and am just catching up. But lots to read here in a short time. Can't believe the people on here who are so ill informed about the new bills signed by the president - all of which are quite infringing on American's 4th Amendment protections: search and seizure.
Obama signed into law in December of 2011 on New Year’s Eve, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and then, in March of 2012, Obama signed the National Defense Resources Preparedness Executive Order (NDRP). All fancy titles which nobody pays much attention to but are huge violations of our freedoms.
Basically the right to detain an American citizen indefinitely and even assassinate them, if they are suspected of terrorism—without due process.
And...peacetime martial law, giving the President authority over food and water, production, fuel, transportation, livestock and more.
Now you tell me why the president feels the need to such laws unless they have reason to fear the citizenry of this country. And why do you suppose that is?
Too much FAUX?

NDAA Expansion of the President's power to declare martial law under revisions to the Insurrection Act, and take charge of United States National Guard troops without state governor authorization when public order has been lost and the state and its constituted authorities cannot enforce the law was a bill passed in the United States Congress on September 29, 2006 and signed by President GEORGE W. BUSH on October 17, 2006 becoming Public Law 109-364. House Vote - 396 Ayes (168 Democrats/1 I) with 31 Nays and 5 present not voting.
According to The International Business Times, "The bill affirms and codifies the U.S. President's authority to indefinitely detain in military custody anyone, including U.S. citizens, suspected of terrorism or supporting terrorists."
In a statement released after the signing of the bill, Obama says, "I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation."
Even though Obama signed the bill he does not agree with everything that's included in the bill.
"I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists," Obama said.
CBS news reports, "If Mr. Obama violates any of the provisions in the bill, Congress could challenge the White House in court, which would have the final say in any dispute."
The $662 billion bill also includes tough sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program and allocates money for the military.
NDAA was sponsored by Howard McKeon REPUBLICAN Representative from California. The bill was introduced on April 13th.

The Constitution, as of September 2001, does allow for the use of military force against United States citizens. The Supreme Court ruled the Authorization for Military Force (AUMF) Constitutional:

“(a) IN GENERAL&#8208; That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”- Authorization for Use of Military Force (P.L. 107&#8208;40) Enacted: Sept. 18, 2001
democrat

Glasgow, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65877
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

im voting republican
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65878
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

American Lady wrote:
Remember THIS:
Obama to Congress:
I’ll decide what’s constitutional
Congress placed a provision in the $1 trillion omnibus spending bill for 2012 designed to bar the National Institutes of Health (NIH) from using any of its $30.7 billion taxpayer funds to “advocate or promote gun control.” However, upon signing the bill into law, President Obama issued a caveat of his own:
I have advised Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.
In other words:“Congress may pass laws, but I decide which of its laws are constitutional and which I can simply choose to ignore.”
Of course, the Constitution doesn't actually give the president this power, but Obama won’t allow a little thing like the U.S. Constitution get in his way.
http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/05/obama-to-co...
allenspidey • 11 months ago &#8722;
The fact that there are still Americans that still like this fool blows my mind. If you are a gun owner or someone that actually works for a living, vote this tool out of office.
529 •Reply•Share ›
truebearing allenspidey • 11 months ago
Everyone who cares about the constitution, or country, needs to realize that we need unity and commitment to run Obama's ass out or we'll have the asshole for a true dictator for the rest of our lives. White people on the right will be an endangered species if that happens.
"If you are a gun owner or someone that actually works for a living, vote this tool out of office".

September 8, 2005

NEW ORLEANS, Sept. 8 - Waters were receding across this flood-beaten city today as police officers began confiscating weapons, including legally registered firearms, from civilians in preparation for a mass forced evacuation of the residents still living here.

No civilians in New Orleans will be allowed to carry pistols, shotguns or other firearms, said P. Edwin Compass III, the superintendent of police. "Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons," he said.

But that order apparently does not apply to hundreds of security guards hired by businesses and some wealthy individuals to protect property. The guards, employees of private security companies like Blackwater, openly carry M-16's and other assault rifles. Mr. Compass said that he was aware of the private guards, but that the police had no plans to make them give up their weapons.

Nearly two weeks after the floods began, New Orleans has turned into an armed camp, patrolled by thousands of local, state, and federal law enforcement officers, as well as National Guard troops and active-duty soldiers. While armed looters roamed unchecked last week, the city is now calm. No arrests were made on Wednesday night or this morning, and the police received only 10 calls for service, a police spokesman said.

Didn't hear a peep from teabaggers on this but they whine about Obama's "imaginary" threats.

Poor teabaggers

Since: Dec 11

.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65879
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Wall Street Government wrote:
<quoted text>
Too much FAUX?
NDAA Expansion of the President's power to declare martial law under revisions to the Insurrection Act, and take charge of United States National Guard troops without state governor authorization when public order has been lost and the state and its constituted authorities cannot enforce the law was a bill passed in the United States Congress on September 29, 2006 and signed by President GEORGE W. BUSH on October 17, 2006 becoming Public Law 109-364. House Vote - 396 Ayes (168 Democrats/1 I) with 31 Nays and 5 present not voting.
According to The International Business Times, "The bill affirms and codifies the U.S. President's authority to indefinitely detain in military custody anyone, including U.S. citizens, suspected of terrorism or supporting terrorists."
In a statement released after the signing of the bill, Obama says, "I want to clarify that my Administration will not authorize the indefinite military detention without trial of American citizens. Indeed, I believe that doing so would break with our most important traditions and values as a Nation."
Even though Obama signed the bill he does not agree with everything that's included in the bill.
"I have signed this bill despite having serious reservations with certain provisions that regulate the detention, interrogation, and prosecution of suspected terrorists," Obama said.
CBS news reports, "If Mr. Obama violates any of the provisions in the bill, Congress could challenge the White House in court, which would have the final say in any dispute."
The $662 billion bill also includes tough sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program and allocates money for the military.
NDAA was sponsored by Howard McKeon REPUBLICAN Representative from California. The bill was introduced on April 13th.
The Constitution, as of September 2001, does allow for the use of military force against United States citizens. The Supreme Court ruled the Authorization for Military Force (AUMF) Constitutional:
“(a) IN GENERAL&#8208; That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”- Authorization for Use of Military Force (P.L. 107&#8208;40) Enacted: Sept. 18, 2001
Citizens From Over 30 States Submit Secession Petitions to White House

Seventy-seven thousand seven hundred and thirty-two people have signed the petition created by a citizen of Texas to secede from the union.

The petition, posted on the White House website, lays out the signatories' reasons for seeking to separate from the United States and form its own independent government:

The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government's neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it's citizens' standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government.

Since: Dec 11

.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65880
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

irearm Sales Skyrocket in Election's Aftermath
Written by James Heiser
font size Print

Although gun-control advocates wish President Obama would act more quickly to curtail the Second Amendment rights of American citizens, gun owners have found his reelection to be sufficient motivation to increase their stockpiles of firearms and ammunition.

As reported previously for The New American, the days immediately following Obama’s reelection witnessed a significant increase in the value of the stock of several firearms manufacturers, and online ammunition retailers found that they were swamped with orders. As a writer for MSN Now wittily observed:“Those folks Obama once famously talked about as clinging to their guns are apparently expected to cling to more of them now that the president has been re-elected.”

Now, three weeks after the election, it is becoming clear that the post-election stockpiling is continuing. Erin Mulvaney wrote for the Houston Chronicle that post-election shoppers include not only long-term gun owners, but also those who have never owned a firearm:

Owners of some Houston gun shops say they have noticed an increase of gun sales since President Barack Obama's re-election, and attribute the rush to the president's reference in a debate to renewing an assault rifle ban.

Jim and Joy Pruett, who have run Jim Pruett's Guns and Ammo for 11 years, said sales have gone "through the roof" since Election Day. "We haven't been able to keep up with it," Pruett said. "It's beyond our wildest imagination."

Matthew Swan, a firearms associate at Gander Mountain on Hempstead Road, said he's also noticed an uptick in gun sales and ammunition since Obama's re-election.

"People come in here with opinions," Swan said. "There are people coming in that have never even been interested in firearms."

An article for the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review noted that it was not only fears concerning the president’s views on gun control that were motivating firearm sales; fears of a widespread economic collapse and civil unrest drove others to prepare for the worst:

“There’s enormous concern about what’s going to happen and any kind of potential bans,” said Debbie Schultz, the owner of Schultz’s Sportsmen’s Stop in Kiski Township.

“It’s been a real significant increase. It’s handguns and black guns like AR-15s ... not weapons related to hunting, but personal security,” said Mark Boerio, owner of the Army & Navy store on Ligonier Street in Latrobe.

“It’s not just Obama’s re-election. People say they are concerned with the way the government is headed and where it’s going to lead with issues like the rising debt,” Boerio said.

Schultz said she hasn’t seen a big increase in sales since Obama was re-elected, but many of her customers speak of their fears.

“Listening to my customers, it’s twofold,” she said.“Half of them are worried about a ban on semi-automatic weapons, large clips, and that sort of thing.

“The other half is worried about the direction of the country and want to be able to protect themselves if something would happen,” she said.

The marked increase in gun and ammunition sales in the aftermath of the November elections is one more indicator of the fundamental divide in the American body politic. Although ostensibly a small majority of the voters believe the country is on the "right track," a significant proportion of the rest of the electorate believes that the elections are a signal of a coming time of even worse economic and social conditions and further attempts to curtail fundamental liberties.
Wall Street Government

Sebastian, FL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65881
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

KYMI wrote:
Oblamer built this!
Obama actually offered to reimburse them severance costs if they waited until after the election, no way this is legal.
Boeing announced a major restructuring of its defense division on Wednesday that will cut 30 percent of management jobs from 2010 levels, close facilities in California and consolidate several business units to cut costs.
The company told employees about the changes on Wednesday, in a memo obtained by Reuters and confirmed by Boeing.
Boeing, the Pentagon’s second-largest supplier, said the changes were the latest step in an affordability drive that has already reduced the company’s costs by $2.2 billion since 2010, according to the memo.
The measures come as U.S. weapons makers are under pressure to cut costs and preserve profit margins amid dwindling defense spending in the U.S.
In a message to employees, Dennis Muilenburg, chief executive of Boeing Defense, Space & Security, said the company aimed to cut costs by an additional $1.6 billion from 2013 through 2015.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/08/boeings-de...
Now teabaggers are worried about workers rights?

Union at that.

What about hostess?

Hypocrite teabaggers.

Since: Dec 11

.

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65882
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Voter Fraud?
Nah The Lame Stream Media has assured me...No Such Thing...right?

WRONG!

http://www.libertynewsnetwork.tv/index.php/vi...
thirdwurldmeika

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65883
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

i tild you before turdburglar the reason they were not allowed to carry guns in new orleans was the crazy bpwstids were shooting at aid workers, you leftwingers are so stoopid it unbelieveable
borlung

Rockholds, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65884
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

OBAMIES ZOMBIES wrote:
<quoted text>
Older Americans understand what is going on, but younger generations just to uninformed with to much of today's technology and their private lifes, that completely lost common sense.
To many don't know names and faces in our government or what those individuals stand for ...
If you ask anyone of those voted for Obama...when he said ...
"Fundamentally we are going to transform America", what does it mean? No clue...
Obama hates this country, capitalism, rich, what happened in the past with slavery ...all his life Obama was associating with anti whites and anti Americans....Obama divided people more than ever. You feel hate among people ...Obama is very arrogant and that's why he talks down on America and makes me angry.
I love this country ...when I arrived in America years ago, I understood what FREEDOM was all about...I'm affraid we are loosing our country ...
people who love something generally invest their time and money in it, they don't invest it somewhere else.

uncle sam wants you!!! invest in the us. pay your taxes instead of tax evading loop holes.

those who have more, more will be given.
those who have not, even that will be taken away.
domba

Rockholds, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65885
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KYMI wrote:
<quoted text>
The rest of the world isn't that stupid, although they are in pretty rough shape, they don't take oblamer seriously, many leaders are laughing at the U.S. for being so self absorbed for electing such a loser 2 x, even the Russians can see what a loser the American people chose to lie to them, they don't take us seriously anymore and who can blame them, as a country we don't take ourselves serious to put a marxist community organizer who never worked a day in his life in that office, we are very fortunate though that the Congress has equal power to block his constitutional destruction.
maybe you'd be interested in relocating to another one of those countries; since you hold their opinions and economies in such high esteem?

like russia; which isn't a republic.
Uncle Tab

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65886
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aristocles son of Ariston wrote:
Voter Fraud?
Nah The Lame Stream Media has assured me...No Such Thing...right?
WRONG!
http://www.libertynewsnetwork.tv/index.php/vi...
Haven't seen Romney say a word about it.
Guess they're both wrk g?
LMAO
Hmmm

Rockholds, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65887
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

American Lady wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks KYMI :)
WE have GOT TO stop this runaway train ...
and how are you going to do that watching faux news all day and living in a world where facts aren't allowed?
GhostofRaygun

Morgantown, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65889
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Republican Honey wrote:
<quoted text>
In a 75-minute meeting Sunday night, President Obama once again demanded that more than $1 trillion in tax increases be part of any deficit reduction package attached to a vote on the debt ceiling. In the session, Obama rejected a Republican proposal to seek $2.5 trillion in spending cuts and reforms, and insisted on higher taxes on businesses and wealthy individuals.
It’s a curious position, given the anemic economic growth and rising unemployment. And it’s even more curious considering that Obama himself has warned about the deleterious effects of raising taxes in a struggling economy.
In August 2009, on a visit to Elkhart, Indiana to tout his stimulus plan, Obama sat down for an interview with NBC’s Chuck Todd, and was conveyed a simple request from Elkhart resident Scott Ferguson:“Explain how raising taxes on anyone during a deep recession is going to help with the economy.”
Obama agreed with Ferguson’s premise – raising taxes in a recession is a bad idea.“First of all, he’s right. Normally, you don’t raise taxes in a recession, which is why we haven’t and why we’ve instead cut taxes. So I guess what I’d say to Scott is – his economics are right. You don’t raise taxes in a recession. We haven’t raised taxes in a recession.”
Todd reminded Obama that he had promised to raise taxes on “some of the wealthiest” Americans.
If raising taxes in a recession would be “the last thing you want to do,” wouldn’t raising taxes in a struggling economy teetering on a double-dip be the second last thing you’d want to do?
Obama made a similar argument in December, when he signed the bipartisan tax relief agreement – a deal that maintained Bush tax rates (even for the wealthy) and included additional tax breaks for businesses.“Millions of entrepreneurs who have been waiting to invest in their businesses will receive new tax incentives to help them expand, buy new equipment or make upgrades – freeing up other money to hire new workers.”
If Obama was right and the tax breaks in that deal freed up money for job creators to hire new workers, isn’t the reverse true? Isn’t it the case that new taxes on entrepreneurs and other job creators will leave them with less money to hire new workers? And wouldn’t raising taxes on the “wealthiest” just “put business further in a hole,” as Obama believed just two years ago?
His economics were right. So why the change?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-vs-...
NO, what is strange is there's proof from the 1990s that rising taxes does NOT cause job lost. Bush in 2001 and again in 2003 lowered the US tax rate. The rates since that time, 10 years plus, have NOT created ONE job. Do you Repubs NEVER learn anything from history?
wtf

Benham, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65891
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

KYMI wrote:
Oblamer built this!
Obama actually offered to reimburse them severance costs if they waited until after the election, no way this is legal.
Boeing announced a major restructuring of its defense division on Wednesday that will cut 30 percent of management jobs from 2010 levels, close facilities in California and consolidate several business units to cut costs.
The company told employees about the changes on Wednesday, in a memo obtained by Reuters and confirmed by Boeing.
Boeing, the Pentagon’s second-largest supplier, said the changes were the latest step in an affordability drive that has already reduced the company’s costs by $2.2 billion since 2010, according to the memo.
The measures come as U.S. weapons makers are under pressure to cut costs and preserve profit margins amid dwindling defense spending in the U.S.
In a message to employees, Dennis Muilenburg, chief executive of Boeing Defense, Space & Security, said the company aimed to cut costs by an additional $1.6 billion from 2013 through 2015.
http://weaselzippers.us/2012/11/08/boeings-de...
You stupid pos make up some more crap.
Nerd Rage

Chambersburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65892
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

If there is no deal on the "Fiscal cliff" who do you think will suffer? It certainly won't be the politicians. I think it will probably be the people who depend on the govt. the most. I think it will be a large population of people who don't work at all. I don't believe it will be the elderly people who depend on SSI or Medicare because I think it would lead to mass rioting in the streets but those people who depend on extended unemployment benefits will be hurt, those who are the middle class will be hurt because spending will come to a halt which forces massive lay-offs and those of us who are in the higher income will either lay people off or go out of business but we will most certainly NOT change our way of life to accommodate the Fed Govt. In a lot of ways a part of me wants this to happen because I think it will force Americans to stop depending on the Govt. to survive it’s just unfortunate that the politicians will still go on "Business as usual" but no matter what happens the Republicans will be to blame if we go off and the Decepticons will accept full credit if it doesn't.
whitehair

Eminence, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65893
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

wtf wrote:
<quoted text>You stupid pos make up some more crap.
The problem is--this is what the news tells us as the truth.Just because you love Obama ,does not change that,it just indicates politics is strange and you have sucked up what your Party said for you to believe.Being of no Party sometimes is better than being of any Party if one has to follow with out seeking the truth.
Nerd Rage

Chambersburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65895
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

GhostofRaygun wrote:
<quoted text>NO, what is strange is there's proof from the 1990s that rising taxes does NOT cause job lost. Bush in 2001 and again in 2003 lowered the US tax rate. The rates since that time, 10 years plus, have NOT created ONE job. Do you Repubs NEVER learn anything from history?
When you got your check from the Bush tax cut did you spend it or did you send it back to the IRS? Because that check that you say didn't create jobs is typically spent at a store that buys goods which creates jobs.

So please tell me where it did NOT help to create jobs? Show me where you read that by posting a link for us all to read.
thirdwurldmeika

London, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#65896
Nov 27, 2012
 

Judged:

1

the fiscal cliff is obamas model but they will blame boosh if theres no deal he cant lose in the minds of the dolts

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

78 Users are viewing the Barbourville Forum right now

Search the Barbourville Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
KY Woman's head stepped on by Rand Paul supporters (Oct '10) 8 min Ashby 26,189
jon h 33 min Resident 17
Truddy 1 hr John Deer 4
Anthony Smith 1 hr Childish 3
Maggie Mills is on meth really bad she has sore... 1 hr John Deer 12
whats wrong with stephanie Mills from gregory l... 1 hr just curious 2
Stivers Center fixes 2 hr smokejumper 49
•••
•••
•••
•••

Barbourville Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Barbourville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Barbourville News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Barbourville
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••