Who do you favor in the Kansas govern...

Who do you favor in the Kansas governor's race?

There are 298 comments on the politix.topix.com story from Jun 17, 2014, titled Who do you favor in the Kansas governor's race?. In it, politix.topix.com reports that:

Brownback's voo doo tax scheme, return of appointing appellate judges based on patronage, his mishandling of Kansas education, and the impact on the poor from bad decisions on KanCare and the refusal to expand Medicaid is just too much.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at politix.topix.com.

one at a time

Junction City, KS

#168 Aug 6, 2014
dreamer wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me get this straight. Gitmo has been a thorn in America's side for years, it make sense to want it closed - but as the president and his military advisers examine the issue they realize the it may not be in the country's best interest to completely close it - and that's what you call a lie - hmmm interestingly definition of a lie
I would defer to Merriam-Webster for this one:

"lie" as an intransitive verb:

1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2: to create a false or misleading impression

Definition 2 fits Mr. Obama in this case.

"lie" as a noun:

1:
a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive
b : an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker
2 : something that misleads or deceives

Definition 1a and definition 2 fit Mr. Obama in this case also.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie

You asked what he his lies were and I gave you a site to peruse and one example for discussion. Since many voters expressed that one of their big reasons to elect and then re-elect Obama was to see the end of the torture (which continues under Obama) at GITMO, then yes...he lied. He mislead many by making the closing of GITMO one of the cornerstones of his campaign.

Obama's military advisors have been telling him it was not "in the country's best interest" to close the facility since 2009...and yet he continues to speak about it and promise to close the facility. If what you say is true, he is lying. He is taking the information from his military advisors as action but promising the opposite action to the public to garner support.

Either he is lying or he is ignorant.

Which do you think it was?
Why do you defend his actions in this case?
Do you believe GITMO should remain open and continuing to torture people?
Do you believe that it is a good policy for America to capture and hold human beings without trial and imprison them with no end in sight?
dreamer

Junction City, KS

#169 Aug 6, 2014
one at a time wrote:
<quoted text>
I would defer to Merriam-Webster for this one:
"lie" as an intransitive verb:
1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2: to create a false or misleading impression
Definition 2 fits Mr. Obama in this case.
"lie" as a noun:
1:
a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive
b : an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker
2 : something that misleads or deceives
Definition 1a and definition 2 fit Mr. Obama in this case also.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie
You asked what he his lies were and I gave you a site to peruse and one example for discussion. Since many voters expressed that one of their big reasons to elect and then re-elect Obama was to see the end of the torture (which continues under Obama) at GITMO, then yes...he lied. He mislead many by making the closing of GITMO one of the cornerstones of his campaign.
Obama's military advisors have been telling him it was not "in the country's best interest" to close the facility since 2009...and yet he continues to speak about it and promise to close the facility. If what you say is true, he is lying. He is taking the information from his military advisors as action but promising the opposite action to the public to garner support.
Either he is lying or he is ignorant.
Which do you think it was?
Why do you defend his actions in this case?
Do you believe GITMO should remain open and continuing to torture people?
Do you believe in that it is a good policy for America to capture and hold human beings without trial and imprison them with no end sight?
So, if someone, upon seeing all the evidence in a matter, changes their mind or course of action, you define that as having lied. I suppose it would be impossible for anyone at anytime to not be a liar. If I tell you today that I strongly support gun control, but as I examine the issue and learn more, and become convinced that looser gun restrictions should be imposed - does that make me a liar?

When Obama was campaigning on Gitmo he made statements that were accurate at the time. Times and opinions change. Had he gone into it knowing that Gitmo would not close by the deadlines he gave - but he went ahead and stated it anyway - that would have been a lie.

To answer your questions:
I defend his actions because I thought it was pretty ignorant of him to use closing gitmo as a platform to begin with. I am glad he did not force Gitmo to be closed on an arbitrary schedule.
Gitmo should stay open, but not torture people; I'm not sure that you're accurate when you say it is still happening.
one at a time wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you believe in that it is a good policy for America to capture and hold human beings without trial and imprison them with no end sight?

Therein lies the crux of the problem with Gitmo. Good policy? Hard to say in this circumstance. War is very different than it used to be. At the end of WWII we released our POWs, they went home, their country's accepted their loss and life went on (with the exception of a few random extremist groups). Now, our whole concept of war is different. We are not fighting a country, or a government - we are fighting an ideology - if released these prisoners will not go back to a country that has conceded. They go back to their original army or one similar to it.
Do we put them on trial - for what? You need a crime to charge them with. Some of them we did have a specific crime to charge them with, but for the most part, they are the lowly fighters who committed no crime as specified by US law.
Do we imprison them forever? I don't know - and I think that is what Obama, and probably whoever is elected in 2016 will have to keep working on - what do we do with them. We've already seen some of them return to the battlefield.

Billy Bob

Gardner, KS

#170 Aug 6, 2014
dreamer wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if someone, upon seeing all the evidence in a matter, changes their mind or course of action, you define that as having lied. I suppose it would be impossible for anyone at anytime to not be a liar. If I tell you today that I strongly support gun control, but as I examine the issue and learn more, and become convinced that looser gun restrictions should be imposed - does that make me a liar?
When Obama was campaigning on Gitmo he made statements that were accurate at the time. Times and opinions change. Had he gone into it knowing that Gitmo would not close by the deadlines he gave - but he went ahead and stated it anyway - that would have been a lie.
To answer your questions:
I defend his actions because I thought it was pretty ignorant of him to use closing gitmo as a platform to begin with. I am glad he did not force Gitmo to be closed on an arbitrary schedule.
Gitmo should stay open, but not torture people; I'm not sure that you're accurate when you say it is still happening.
<quoted text>
Therein lies the crux of the problem with Gitmo. Good policy? Hard to say in this circumstance. War is very different than it used to be. At the end of WWII we released our POWs, they went home, their country's accepted their loss and life went on (with the exception of a few random extremist groups). Now, our whole concept of war is different. We are not fighting a country, or a government - we are fighting an ideology - if released these prisoners will not go back to a country that has conceded. They go back to their original army or one similar to it.
Do we put them on trial - for what? You need a crime to charge them with. Some of them we did have a specific crime to charge them with, but for the most part, they are the lowly fighters who committed no crime as specified by US law.
Do we imprison them forever? I don't know - and I think that is what Obama, and probably whoever is elected in 2016 will have to keep working on - what do we do with them. We've already seen some of them return to the battlefield.
We should do like the French in Algeria in the 50's and 60's. Ask the questions get the answers and take them and a shovel out into the desert.
one at a time

Junction City, KS

#171 Aug 6, 2014
dreamer wrote:
<quoted text>
So, if someone, upon seeing all the evidence in a matter, changes their mind or course of action, you define that as having lied. I suppose it would be impossible for anyone at anytime to not be a liar. If I tell you today that I strongly support gun control, but as I examine the issue and learn more, and become convinced that looser gun restrictions should be imposed - does that make me a liar?
In the circumstance of Obama and Gitmo, the lie comes in when, after deciding not to close the facility, he repeatedly plied his constituency with the promise to do so. He had seen all the information and evidence in the matter from 2009 - 2013 and took the advice of his military leaders and yet continued to campaign on closing the facility.

As recently as May 25, 2014 while addressing West Point, Obama continued to promise to close GITMO. Certainly between 2009 and 2014 Mr. Obama has seen all the evidence in the matter and changed his mind.

Q: If he is taking the advice of his military advisors and gathering information and making the decision NOT to close the facility, why continue the lie?

A: The popularity with the small minded that closing GITMO is a good idea is a real vote getter and the sound byte sways the empathetic under-informed.

I agree with you that closing GITMO is a bad idea. However, that wasn't the question.

The question you asked was what lies has the president told.

That's one of them.

Shall we turn the discussion to the "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS? The rediscovered Lerner emails?
The farcical concept that the IRS doesn't have redundant message archiving?
dreamer

Junction City, KS

#172 Aug 6, 2014
one at a time wrote:
<quoted text>
In the circumstance of Obama and Gitmo, the lie comes in when, after deciding not to close the facility, he repeatedly plied his constituency with the promise to do so. He had seen all the information and evidence in the matter from 2009 - 2013 and took the advice of his military leaders and yet continued to campaign on closing the facility.
As recently as May 25, 2014 while addressing West Point, Obama continued to promise to close GITMO. Certainly between 2009 and 2014 Mr. Obama has seen all the evidence in the matter and changed his mind.
Q: If he is taking the advice of his military advisors and gathering information and making the decision NOT to close the facility, why continue the lie?
A: The popularity with the small minded that closing GITMO is a good idea is a real vote getter and the sound byte sways the empathetic under-informed.
I agree with you that closing GITMO is a bad idea. However, that wasn't the question.
The question you asked was what lies has the president told.
That's one of them.
Shall we turn the discussion to the "smidgen of corruption" in the IRS? The rediscovered Lerner emails?
The farcical concept that the IRS doesn't have redundant message archiving?
Are we not working toward closing Gitmo. I haven't kept completely up to date, but it seems like little by little we're working our way through each prisoner's case. Just because it hasn't been done yet - doesn't mean it won't be done - the work is in progress - thus - no lie.
But yes - let's move on to the IRS - what did Obama say that you believe is a lie? That there was "not a smidgeon of corruption."
Well, you almost got me on that - yeah "not a smidgeon" definitely not the best choice of words considering what has since come to light. But again, do I think when asked by Bill O'Riley about whether he thought there was mass corruption in the IRS, he did acknowledge very openly and clearly that there were obviously mistakes made and I believe his terminology was "boneheaded" decisions, but as far as corruption - no.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#173 Aug 6, 2014
one at a time wrote:
<quoted text>
I would defer to Merriam-Webster for this one:
"lie" as an intransitive verb:
1: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
2: to create a false or misleading impression
Definition 2 fits Mr. Obama in this case.
"lie" as a noun:
1:
a : an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive
b : an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker
2 : something that misleads or deceives
Definition 1a and definition 2 fit Mr. Obama in this case also.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie
You asked what he his lies were and I gave you a site to peruse and one example for discussion. Since many voters expressed that one of their big reasons to elect and then re-elect Obama was to see the end of the torture (which continues under Obama) at GITMO, then yes...he lied. He mislead many by making the closing of GITMO one of the cornerstones of his campaign.
Obama's military advisors have been telling him it was not "in the country's best interest" to close the facility since 2009...and yet he continues to speak about it and promise to close the facility. If what you say is true, he is lying. He is taking the information from his military advisors as action but promising the opposite action to the public to garner support.
Either he is lying or he is ignorant.
Which do you think it was?
Why do you defend his actions in this case?
Do you believe GITMO should remain open and continuing to torture people?
Do you believe that it is a good policy for America to capture and hold human beings without trial and imprison them with no end in sight?
Gitmo needs to be closed. The problem is we have to find another place to put the prisoners. Most probably need to be released. If they can't bring them to trial, they have inadequate evidence to hold them. The rest - locating them in another country is not a valid option. We have to find a place in the U.S. to house them. Anyplace'll do.
one at a time

Junction City, KS

#174 Aug 7, 2014
dreamer wrote:
<quoted text>
Are we not working toward closing Gitmo. I haven't kept completely up to date, but it seems like little by little we're working our way through each prisoner's case. Just because it hasn't been done yet - doesn't mean it won't be done - the work is in progress - thus - no lie.
But yes - let's move on to the IRS - what did Obama say that you believe is a lie? That there was "not a smidgeon of corruption."
Well, you almost got me on that - yeah "not a smidgeon" definitely not the best choice of words considering what has since come to light. But again, do I think when asked by Bill O'Riley about whether he thought there was mass corruption in the IRS, he did acknowledge very openly and clearly that there were obviously mistakes made and I believe his terminology was "boneheaded" decisions, but as far as corruption - no.
I think it goes deeper than that. Consider that Obama said publicly in May 2013:

“I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday. And this is pretty straightforward.”

Beyond being fuel for late-night jokes by Stewart, that statement has proven now to be a lie.
dreamer

Junction City, KS

#175 Aug 7, 2014
one at a time wrote:
<quoted text>
I think it goes deeper than that. Consider that Obama said publicly in May 2013:
“I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday. And this is pretty straightforward.”
Beyond being fuel for late-night jokes by Stewart, that statement has proven now to be a lie.
Obama came out and publicly stated that mistakes were made. He has repeated that several times.
If I understand you correctly, because Obama said there were mistakes made, rather than calling it corruption you think that was a lie.
I think that's a bit of a stretch, but the word corruption just sounds so much more nefarious than mistakes. If you have to take one little piece of an interview where the reporter was trying to get him to throw someone under the bus, in order to constitute "a lie" that's stretching it, and kinda proves that there is not pattern of lying.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#176 Aug 7, 2014
dreamer wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama came out and publicly stated that mistakes were made. He has repeated that several times.
If I understand you correctly, because Obama said there were mistakes made, rather than calling it corruption you think that was a lie.
I think that's a bit of a stretch, but the word corruption just sounds so much more nefarious than mistakes. If you have to take one little piece of an interview where the reporter was trying to get him to throw someone under the bus, in order to constitute "a lie" that's stretching it, and kinda proves that there is not pattern of lying.
I think you're on the right track. The poster's moral indignation about Obama suppoosedly "lying" about Gitmo is just a McGuffin of no importance. All that's going on with that is politics, politics, politics.

All Presidents lie. All people lie. A manichean universe is imaginary.
one at a time

Junction City, KS

#177 Aug 7, 2014
dreamer wrote:
<quoted text>
Obama came out and publicly stated that mistakes were made. He has repeated that several times.
If I understand you correctly, because Obama said there were mistakes made, rather than calling it corruption you think that was a lie.
I think that's a bit of a stretch, but the word corruption just sounds so much more nefarious than mistakes. If you have to take one little piece of an interview where the reporter was trying to get him to throw someone under the bus, in order to constitute "a lie" that's stretching it, and kinda proves that there is not pattern of lying.
“I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday. And this is pretty straightforward.”(May 2013)

You glossed over the greater point. The above statement has been proven to be a lie. Mr. Obama has known about the "mistakes" and corruption since July 2010 referenced by memos and letters with his initials and signatures.

How then did he first learn about it from the news?
dreamer

Junction City, KS

#178 Aug 7, 2014
one at a time wrote:
<quoted text>
“I first learned about it from the same news reports that I think most people learned about this. I think it was on Friday. And this is pretty straightforward.”(May 2013)
You glossed over the greater point. The above statement has been proven to be a lie. Mr. Obama has known about the "mistakes" and corruption since July 2010 referenced by memos and letters with his initials and signatures.
How then did he first learn about it from the news?
You have raised an interesting point. Do you have sources that reference memos and letters? The closest I have seen is that some members of the administration were made aware that an independent watchdog group was looking into it - but nothing of substance. I can only imagine how many things are being investigated on a daily basis by these watch dog groups.
Without really knowing what Obama signed off on, I can only speculate that someone at some point may have mentioned what likely seemed like an inconsequential investigation.

Since: Apr 13

Location hidden

#179 Aug 7, 2014
Wait. We've had our credit downgraded a SECOND time and we'll all still complaining about Obama? What was this thread about?
The Professor

Manhattan, KS

#180 Aug 7, 2014
goodtime1 wrote:
Wait. We've had our credit downgraded a SECOND time and we'll all still complaining about Obama? What was this thread about?
Sadly, this seems to be the trend around here... especially when the entity known singularly and perhaps collectively as "Scooter" gets his/her panties all bunched up because of something the Extreme Right has screwed up.

More depressing, still, is that this is what we can expect from the Brownback campaign in the coming weeks: Lots and lots of shrill catterwalling about Obama, "Washington," and how Obama and Paul Davis are, essentially, the same person.

When cornered, Brownback **might** try to pass off some poor excuse for our current economic state of despair--but for the most part, expect him and his campaign to deflect and distract.

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#181 Aug 7, 2014
goodtime1 wrote:
Wait. We've had our credit downgraded a SECOND time and we'll all still complaining about Obama? What was this thread about?
Brownback is blaming Obama for that, LOL. That's their whole campaign. Nobody with a mind buys it. They want to fool us into hating Obama so naturally we fall into their arms, tricked into voting against ourselves.
Curmudgeon

Savannah, GA

#182 Aug 7, 2014
rock bottom wrote:
The worst governor in Kansas history must go.He has turned a great state into a national laughingstock and a cautionary example of how a plutocracy hurts the average resident. You can't govern based on twisted biblical interpretations and Tea Party ideology while serving your masters , the Koch brothers. I find myself feeling sympathetic to newly reelected President Santo of Colombia because of his striking resemblance to Brownback.
You are right, I have been Laughing, and I still am...... You folks just go right ahead and Tax Cut Yourselves right into Oblivion........

Just DON"T Even Think About Asking the Federal Government to give you some of MY Tax Dollars.... When you ask for it, I am going to protest quite loudly, and I won't be alone.........
Ontopofit

Junction City, KS

#184 Aug 23, 2014
Paul Davis and Jill Docking are without any doubt the right choice to lead us out of this foolishness. We also need a large number of Democratic members in the Kansas house to turn this ship around.
response

Cherryvale, KS

#186 Aug 23, 2014
I read a piece on the WIBW website about Paul Davis. I had thought about voting for him, but he is wanting to raise our income taxes. I did get an email from a representative the other day saying that Kansas is in the black for the fiscal year. That is better than being the red, don't you think?
Kochtopial

Antioch, TN

#187 Aug 23, 2014
response wrote:
I read a piece on the WIBW website about Paul Davis. I had thought about voting for him, but he is wanting to raise our income taxes. I did get an email from a representative the other day saying that Kansas is in the black for the fiscal year. That is better than being the red, don't you think?
If Kansas is in the black , why are we dipping into reserve funds ? Why is KDOT's money getting robbed while infrastructure crumbles ? Education was funded only because of a court order. Jobs are growing slower than regional and national average. Bond ratinig lowered by two agencies. Declining population.Yeah , we're "in the black". Of course a nut case like Heulskamp is going to perpetuate Brownback's lies. He's another bad apple who can't work with anybody and has been ousted from commitees. Keep drinking that Koch KoolAid and burying your head in the sand.
response

Cherryvale, KS

#188 Aug 23, 2014
I didn't vote for Brownback the last time and I probably won't vote for him this time, so relax.
response

Cherryvale, KS

#189 Aug 23, 2014
http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-governmen... Here is the article about Paul Davis's idea on the income taxes. This was in the Wichita Eagle.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Logan Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why I hate Long Island with all my heart and soul (Jul '15) May 18 yeahok 5
Daniel Frank Entertainment - Long Island DJ Apr '16 DJLongIsland 1
Gop Establishment Thugs On The Move Apr '16 Trump Truth 1
long island, a shit hole Mar '16 jomothasass 2
News Long Islanders had big role in pension reform push (Jun '08) Jan '16 Ellen Rub 16
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Kansas (Di... (Oct '10) Jan '11 Osama bon Jovi 20
Please Pray For Bubby Frye (jerry Frye II) he w... (Aug '09) Aug '09 Pray For Bubby Frye 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Logan Mortgages