Barack Obama, our next President

[sonicfilter]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
Most of the critics of Hagel come from the left. For those on the right, Hagel is as much as could be expected from an Obama determined to destroy the American military.

The Campaign Against Hagel Isn’t Just About Policy

The Post story on the politics of Hagel’s confirmation makes a point I’ve touched on before:

There have been fights in the past over presidents’ nominees, but longtime observers say the attacks on Hagel’s policy positions are unprecedented.

“I have never seen anything like this,” said Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense during the Reagan administration. He and others recalled the clash over former senator John Tower’s nomination to be defense secretary in 1989. But the objections in the Texas Republican’s case turned on questions of morality and character, not policy.

That’s true, but it’s worth adding that the smear campaign against Hagel isn’t just focused on policy differences. Instead, this campaign is aimed at using policy differences to tar Hagel’s reputation either by grossly distorting his views into something they’re not or drawing wild, fantastical conclusions about what his views must imply. Hagel’s loudest critics have sought to vilify him in the most scurrilous way possible by imputing prejudices to him that he doesn’t have and by trying to cast his legitimate policy disagreements as moral failures. All of these things are baseless attacks on Hagel’s character.

The attacks on Hagel’s views are unprecedented in a Cabinet nomination process, but they’re only too familiar from the foreign policy debate of the last twenty years. The purpose of the attacks is to limit the range of foreign policy views that can be held, cow would-be dissenters (especially those inside the GOP) into keeping quiet, and reinforce the exceedingly narrow boundaries of what views are considered acceptable. Fortunately, these tactics have been so overused in the last ten years that their effectiveness has diminished considerably.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/lariso...

[DBWriter]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
that was a pretty good excuse.
try this one....Nixon. Fema. E.O. 11490.

Here it is:

http://www.disastercenter.com/laworder/11490....

I don't see anything in it that is a directive to the population. The closest thing I see to that is:

"Local law enforcement. Upon request, consult with and assist the Department of Defense to plan, develop, and distribute materials...." (no edicts issued here)

"Assist the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in planning a national program and developing technical guidance for States...." (no edicts issued here)

"Develop programs and encourage the exploration, development, and mining of strategic and critical minerals...." (no edicts issued here)

I can't find a single edict directly issued to the population in that executive order.

Can you specifically identify it? Since that was your reference, it is assumed that you are familliar with it.
Please provide text from that executive order that is an edict issued to the population, and not an instruction given to a functional part of the Executive Branch.

... nice try, idiot.

[OzRitz]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Hitler, Stalin and Mao would never have been able to commit their mass murders against an armed population.
How's that?

Please tell us one DEMOCRATIC country where the government was elected that has overrun it's people with force ?

Let's just say one of you hot heads formed an overthrow of Obama and took the whitehouse. What do you think would happen ? Would the Military take orders from them, or would it split into another Nth vs Sth civil war. It doesn't matter wtf senerio you guys come up with it still makes a mum n pop with a gun of any sort totally useless against any of that force. So you are kicking a dead horse that belongs back in muzzle loader time.

[John Galt]

RealDave wrote:

<quoted text>
Each person enlisting in an armed force shall take the following oath:
"I, XXXXXXXXXX, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God."
Note the "I will obey the orders of the President of the United States "

The UCMJ provisions are all qualified by reference to "lawful" orders.

Of course, dumbass Dave would shoot the supermarket clerk if ordered to do so by Obama. Stupid lemming.

[mdbuilder]

Stephen Waxman wrote:

Hey, Roy, I wonder what the Chamber is going to say when they discover how you spend your days? Probably they'll rally behind you, son, Yankees are well known for their tolerance towards ignorant greedy racists. Naomi's likely to be disappointed in you but heck that's been on a downhill slide for years now. Good God, I killed a man near you long ago... Bob somebody.... oh well, suffice it to say he was just trying to run a business and get ahead. Looks to me like the old place is falling apart, Roy? Maybe Muddy can help you fix it up, you figure?

You may have killed a half-rack of Tombstone but a man?? That'd require a face to back confrontation, something you're a little squeamish about and ill equipped to do, killing a man is harder than you imagine. And like I said before, I'm retired, no more construction, but that doesn't preclude destruction, come on by, I'll show you what I mean.

[DBWriter]

OzRitz wrote:

<quoted text>
The man gave you a slam dunk answer and you still did not comprehend. Why, because those same filters in your brain which dismisses climate science, gun control and anything else that makes sense engages anytime some facts comes your way.
It was known for at least 20 yrs the boomers hitting retirement was going to break the back of the economy model. Yet NOTHING was done about it, Obama had to drag you lot kicking & screaming on health care to try and address some of it.
Next the taxes to pay for all this extra demand on the government to pay for that as well. Same idea, same response from your lot.
Put on top of that a World economic collapse cause by the very same people you vote for then I'd say he is more than dealing with the forces of evil. He has the dark side right here in his own backyard. Like that idiot who came on to the Piers Morgan show ranting on about gun control. Then your lot want him deported lol
This is your idea of free speech, as long as i agree with it.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/07/us/piers-mo...

Since you seem to recall that answer, can you post it here?
The answer to the first question is simply a location.
The answer to the second question is simply a source of money.
It can't get any simpler than that.

Please remind us of what the answers were.

Where exactly was Obama during the 7-hour battle between Al Qaeda and the stripped-down American security detatchment while it was being watched real-time in the White House?

And;

Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?

Location?
Source of money?

[DBWriter]

OzRitz wrote:

<quoted text>
Please tell us one DEMOCRATIC country where the government was elected that has overrun it's people with force ?
Let's just say one of you hot heads formed an overthrow of Obama and took the whitehouse. What do you think would happen ? Would the Military take orders from them, or would it split into another Nth vs Sth civil war. It doesn't matter wtf senerio you guys come up with it still makes a mum n pop with a gun of any sort totally useless against any of that force. So you are kicking a dead horse that belongs back in muzzle loader time.

Germany.
Next?

[Anonymous of Indy]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Hitler, Stalin and Mao would never have been able to commit their mass murders against an armed population.
How's that?

Exactly Right even Vladimir Lenin even knew what you could do with a country where the civilians are unarmed and how easy it is to force Social Change.

"One man with a gun can control 100 without one."

Vladimir Lenin

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/v/vl...

[sonicfilter]

As Secretary of Defense, even in an Obama administration, Hagel will become one of the three or four most visible and prominent Republicans in the country. Moreover, he is an exemplary representative of a political type which used to be prominent, when the party was far stronger nationally; a type which has since become nearly invisible, to the party’s great detriment. Hagel is essentially an Eisenhower Republican–a fiscal conservative, with combat experience in war, roots in the American heartland, and an awareness that it is far easier to get into wars than get out of them.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/the-ha...

[brown eyes]

As for trench coat mafia I feel you were responsible for Columnine I had two I sue to wear at Mexican Le Hasiende De Lupe I unarmed in these even though other hombres thought I was packing. If I hear of you I will swear in Posse of Storm Troopers Wolfpack State. GF008 Safer World 2013

[Stephen Waxman]

mdbuilder wrote:

<quoted text>
You may have killed a half-rack of Tombstone but a man?? That'd require a face to back confrontation, something you're a little squeamish about and ill equipped to do, killing a man is harder than you imagine. And like I said before, I'm retired, no more construction, but that doesn't preclude destruction, come on by, I'll show you what I mean.

Honey, I'll come by anytime you want, but I'm so amusing you might find yourself enjoying my company and then where'd we be? I'd take issue with your bold claims but you and I both know it's all bullshit. I spent 30 years clipping imperious clowns on the back of the head, literally. I know exactly how hard it is to kill a "man" with just my hands. Probably the equivalent of how hard it is to find one. My new routine is vary simple, like me, in fact. I'm old. Nobody expects an old man to be able to kick them in the face. That fraction of a second when it registers on their faces what's happened are the most pleasurable times in my life these days. It used to be fishing and before that it was fucking but time passes, eh? So, um, you think you're "bad," huh? Maybe you are? I'm going to assume you are because it would be foolish to think I'm the only bad guy in Dodge so I don't. I'm careful. When I hunt a man I take a cane and some old shoes and a plain gray jacket. You won't even see it coming, you're right. Behinds are things I understand better than anyone. All you got to do is ask, honey, I'm your man... in a not-gay way.

[mdbuilder]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you seem to recall that answer, can you post it here?
The answer to the first question is simply a location.
The answer to the second question is simply a source of money.
It can't get any simpler than that.
Please remind us of what the answers were.
Where exactly was Obama during the 7-hour battle between Al Qaeda and the stripped-down American security detatchment while it was being watched real-time in the White House?
And;
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?
Location?
Source of money?

One more thing about Libya, where are the survivors, I read there was around thirty of them, why haven't they been heard from?

[Stephen Waxman]

OzRitz wrote:

<quoted text>
The man gave you a slam dunk answer and you still did not comprehend. Why, because those same filters in your brain which dismisses climate science, gun control and anything else that makes sense engages anytime some facts comes your way.
It was known for at least 20 yrs the boomers hitting retirement was going to break the back of the economy model. Yet NOTHING was done about it, Obama had to drag you lot kicking & screaming on health care to try and address some of it.
Next the taxes to pay for all this extra demand on the government to pay for that as well. Same idea, same response from your lot.
Put on top of that a World economic collapse cause by the very same people you vote for then I'd say he is more than dealing with the forces of evil. He has the dark side right here in his own backyard. Like that idiot who came on to the Piers Morgan show ranting on about gun control. Then your lot want him deported lol
This is your idea of free speech, as long as i agree with it.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/01/07/us/piers-mo...

I love you, man. Group hug.

[Stephen Waxman]

mdbuilder wrote:

<quoted text>
One more thing about Libya, where are the survivors, I read there was around thirty of them, why haven't they been heard from?

Well, what I'd like to know is exactly where they were during the attack in real time, and who's going to pay for them to survive?

[brown eyes]

I know of you also Columbia Cartel Be nice do not want OK Coral incident. GF008 Safer World GF008

[baby new year dem]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Germany.
Next?

Russia?
thought you morons were leaving the Union?
Come on Tex, make Dallas your capital.
hee hee

[Realtime]

John Galt wrote:

<quoted text>
BS
Demos/Tenzing/Nucular is a non-degreed paper-pusher in the nuclear industry.

During the Gulf oil spill he, Nucular, was posting as Ayn Rand and was posting to us from the Mississippi coast where he was assisting with the math re: the Macondo fault.

If memory serves, he's a mathematician or tech type with, or who was on loan to the US Geological Survey.

Demos/Tenzing is a different poster__completely different__stop being stupid OK?

[John Galt]

sonicfilter wrote:

<quoted text>
The Campaign Against Hagel Isn’t Just About Policy
The Post story on the politics of Hagel’s confirmation makes a point I’ve touched on before:
There have been fights in the past over presidents’ nominees, but longtime observers say the attacks on Hagel’s policy positions are unprecedented.
“I have never seen anything like this,” said Lawrence J. Korb, an assistant secretary of defense during the Reagan administration. He and others recalled the clash over former senator John Tower’s nomination to be defense secretary in 1989. But the objections in the Texas Republican’s case turned on questions of morality and character, not policy.
That’s true, but it’s worth adding that the smear campaign against Hagel isn’t just focused on policy differences. Instead, this campaign is aimed at using policy differences to tar Hagel’s reputation either by grossly distorting his views into something they’re not or drawing wild, fantastical conclusions about what his views must imply. Hagel’s loudest critics have sought to vilify him in the most scurrilous way possible by imputing prejudices to him that he doesn’t have and by trying to cast his legitimate policy disagreements as moral failures. All of these things are baseless attacks on Hagel’s character.
The attacks on Hagel’s views are unprecedented in a Cabinet nomination process, but they’re only too familiar from the foreign policy debate of the last twenty years. The purpose of the attacks is to limit the range of foreign policy views that can be held, cow would-be dissenters (especially those inside the GOP) into keeping quiet, and reinforce the exceedingly narrow boundaries of what views are considered acceptable. Fortunately, these tactics have been so overused in the last ten years that their effectiveness has diminished considerably.
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/lariso...

Nobody cares except those trying to create a diversion.

[Stephen Waxman]

DBWriter wrote:

<quoted text>
Since you seem to recall that answer, can you post it here?
The answer to the first question is simply a location.
The answer to the second question is simply a source of money.
It can't get any simpler than that.
Please remind us of what the answers were.
Where exactly was Obama during the 7-hour battle between Al Qaeda and the stripped-down American security detatchment while it was being watched real-time in the White House?
And;
Where will the money come from to pay for Obama's government?
Location?
Source of money?

So, um, you get to ask the questions AND supply the answers? Sounds like a rhetorical argument to me?

[baby new year dem]

mdbuilder wrote:

<quoted text>
One more thing about Libya, where are the survivors, I read there was around thirty of them, why haven't they been heard from?

you didnt get no postcards?
or you just too dumb to read one?