Bush is a hero

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#159962 Mar 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
and they wonder why this thread is dying a slow death......
Who's "they", and..........why are you dodging?

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Hermosa Beach, CA

#159963 Mar 6, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I know. It's called magical thinking. Better than Prozac.
No.

I am making the most of my allotted time here on earth.

My aim is to lead a good and decent life, and to enjoy it along the way.

Religion is the magical thinking.

I don't have that.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159964 Mar 6, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh so in your opinion, Obama is NOT out to smash Republicans so that he can control all 3 branches of gov't in his final 2 years?
Wheww sure am glad to hear that.
In other news, Rand Paul is about 10 hours into a filibuster on the Senate floor on the appointment of Brenner, and will continue until the Obama administration makes clear whether or not he will use his authority to drone strike US citizens inside the US, with no prior notice.
Course I imagine you think I just made that up, since we haven't had a REAL filibuster in <X> number of years.
One final item of business for you, the grand marshal of misinformation: posted this reply monday with crickets still chirping.
<quoted text>
REEEEEEEEALLY!
So if I tuned in from 10Am to 7Pm Eastern, I could find that on
FNN? Or maybe 10Pm to 11Pm Eastern, I could find that? Wowman,
thanksfertheupdate.
And you say..........
I'm shocked. Shocked, I say.

If what you say is correct, the Democrats actually want to take control of the United States House of Representatives in 2014.

Whoever heard of such a thing ...

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#159965 Mar 6, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I'm shocked. Shocked, I say.
If what you say is correct, the Democrats actually want to take control of the United States House of Representatives in 2014.
Whoever heard of such a thing ...
I'm shocked you left off the main part of the story.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#159966 Mar 7, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Who's "they", and..........why are you dodging?
Not dodging a thing bob. Just not interested in spending time chasing red herrings for other's amusement. The post just previous specified "prime-time Faux Noize". To my knowledge I was the first in the thread to differentiate primetime Fox entertainment from the rest of the day (tho' the morning show can be included with the former), and have done so periodically since, so I'm going to take the liberty of assuming you know I >do< make that distinction, you've seen it multiple times, and thus I won't be wasting characters adding a disclaimer to each and every reference. Your question adds nothing to the overall point. It's just word-sparring for the bored. Nahhh, I got other things to do....

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159967 Mar 7, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm shocked you left off the main part of the story.
I addresse d the only indisputable facts in the story, bob. The rest is just political blather by people doing what they're paid to do: bash Obama.

“The future begins”

Since: Jul 07

every moment

#159968 Mar 7, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh so in your opinion, Obama is NOT out to smash Republicans so that he can control all 3 branches of gov't in his final 2 years?
Wheww sure am glad to hear that.

In other news, Rand Paul is about 10 hours into a filibuster on the Senate floor on the appointment of Brenner, and will continue until the Obama administration makes clear whether or not he will use his authority to drone strike US citizens inside the US, with no prior notice.

Course I imagine you think I just made that up, since we haven't had a REAL filibuster in <X> number of years.
Paul got his answer from the DOJ. He just doesn't like the answer. That's his right.

If there's a question at all (in my mind) it is if and just how long will the citizenry tolerate open-ended and ill-defined declarations of "war" such as the "Cold War" and today's "War On Terror". "War" is thrown around so loosely anymore that it's full meaning has lost it's sting in general conversation. "War is hell", Sherman said. Collateral damage is part and parcel - just ask Georgia. If people didn't object to the term, along with all it's implications, from 2001-08, I think it's fair to doubt the sincerity of objections today. Although I do suspect Paul himself is being somewhat true to his libertarian principles, many in the blogosphere that are just now jumping on the bandwagon have a decidedly less humanitarian agenda.

So, has the "War On Terror" been declared over? If the answer is no, then, do we want the CiC to broadcast to enemy combatants the limits by which they can adjust and skirt around, using our freedoms as a cover? Of course the CiC should not do so. If anything (for myself) I would prefer that the gov't quit tossing around the word "war" as if it's a perpetual state of being, as it has been for virtually my entire lifespan.

But as it is, an enemy combatant should live with the uncertainty that he might be tracked and hit by counter-force wherever and whenever he might surface. That is the cost of war, and after all, war is hell.
UIDIOTRACEAMEKWO RLDPEACE

United States

#159969 Mar 7, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Paul got his answer from the DOJ. He just doesn't like the answer. That's his right.
If there's a question at all (in my mind) it is if and just how long will the citizenry tolerate open-ended and ill-defined declarations of "war" such as the "Cold War" and today's "War On Terror". "War" is thrown around so loosely anymore that it's full meaning has lost it's sting in general conversation. "War is hell", Sherman said. Collateral damage is part and parcel - just ask Georgia. If people didn't object to the term, along with all it's implications, from 2001-08, I think it's fair to doubt the sincerity of objections today. Although I do suspect Paul himself is being somewhat true to his libertarian principles, many in the blogosphere that are just now jumping on the bandwagon have a decidedly less humanitarian agenda.
So, has the "War On Terror" been declared over? If the answer is no, then, do we want the CiC to broadcast to enemy combatants the limits by which they can adjust and skirt around, using our freedoms as a cover? Of course the CiC should not do so. If anything (for myself) I would prefer that the gov't quit tossing around the word "war" as if it's a perpetual state of being, as it has been for virtually my entire lifespan.
But as it is, an enemy combatant should live with the uncertainty that he might be tracked and hit by counter-force wherever and whenever he might surface. That is the cost of war, and after all, war is hell.
Michael Ignatieff, Carr Professor of Human Rights Policy.

"America's entire war on terrorism is an exercise in imperialism.
UIDIOTRACEAMEKWO RLDPEACE

United States

#159970 Mar 7, 2013
Jules Lobel and Michael Ratner,
Power Trip, ed. John Feffer, p81

[The U.S.] has imprisoned over five hundred people from some thirty-three countries in a prison at a U.S. military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It has charged none of these persons with a crime, claims the right to keep them imprisoned indefinitely, and is arguing, so far successfully, that no court can review the imprisonments. It is refusing to allow these prisoners access to their families or lawyers.
UIDIOTRACEAMEKWO RLDPEACE

United States

#159971 Mar 7, 2013
"American policymakers, setting themselves up as guardians of the world system, are more inclined than ever to simply disregard international laws and conventions if they get in the way of unrivaled military supremacy. Every instance of U.S. armed intervention... represents a flagrant violation of regional treaties and laws, not to mention the UN Charter itself, which explicitly prohibits military attacks against sovereign nations - for example, Grenada, Nicaragua, Haiti, Panama, Serbia, Iraq...
In any event, the U.S. has consistently shown its contempt for international bodies, agreements, and procedures that might conflict with its hegemonic aspirations."
Carl Boggs
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159972 Mar 7, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
No.
I am making the most of my allotted time here on earth.
My aim is to lead a good and decent life, and to enjoy it along the way.
Religion is the magical thinking.
I don't have that.
So is everyone else Catcher. You are not special because you are a good person and are happy. Conservatives are that too. The whole thing of "I'm better than you are" goes against the claim that you are a happy person. You're hiding something. As for religion. That is not magical thinking. You do know what magical thinking is don't you. It puts you in an unrealistic power position. People that have religion put God in that position. Besides religion and God are not synonyms.

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#159973 Mar 7, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
In the meantime, consumer confidence is up, housing starts and sales are up, the stock market is at an all-time record high, no doubt to the great chagrin of the naysayers.
I think your confusing liberals with conservatives. Its you guys who are the petty ones that would hope for failure of our country rather then to see the other guy succeed..........

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#159974 Mar 7, 2013
UndeadReagan wrote:
OK everyone story time. There once was a retard President named Bush, he was sooooooooooo retarded that everyone died. The End.
That didnt even rhyme..........

Man..........

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#159975 Mar 7, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Not dodging a thing bob. Just not interested in spending time chasing red herrings for other's amusement. The post just previous specified "prime-time Faux Noize". To my knowledge I was the first in the thread to differentiate primetime Fox entertainment from the rest of the day (tho' the morning show can be included with the former), and have done so periodically since, so I'm going to take the liberty of assuming you know I >do< make that distinction, you've seen it multiple times, and thus I won't be wasting characters adding a disclaimer to each and every reference. Your question adds nothing to the overall point. It's just word-sparring for the bored. Nahhh, I got other things to do....
1) My alz doesn't recall ANY "distinction" you've made over the years, regarding FNN. But even so, there are new posters and new readers, who probably have not seen your qualifier.

2) Since you defined your slam of Fox to only mean Prime Time, that includes O'Reilly (8-9 eastern), Hannity (9-10), and Greta
10-11). Any Fox viewer knows Greta does NOT fit your mold. That
leaves you at 66%, which is unsatisfactory for a "mayor of misinformation".

3) Of course yer free to ignore whatevah ya opts, but how long and how tedious is it to reply "no comment"? Yeah I know you got better things to do.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#159976 Mar 7, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I addresse d the only indisputable facts in the story, bob. The rest is just political blather by people doing what they're paid to do: bash Obama.
That's just plain horse hockey! Left-leaning MSM took pleasure in grinding on GW Bush for 7+ years, but that doesn't mean Hume, Krauthammer, and even O'Reilly have not been fair to Obama.

Obama's got you and the rest of his base mesmerized with his cool speech and dazzling smile, but there are many that have not been
so hypnotised.

His latest publicity stunt in shutting down WH tours over staffing cuts is ridiculous. That cost is minimal (and with volunteers), when compared to a $900M golf outing to FLA with Tiger. And IINM, USDA has 2 gala fetes on the immediate horizon, one in CA and one in ORE, both on the taxpayers.

Twice ignoring his own financial economic firm's (? & Bowles) advice, Obama refuses to make real spending cuts and instead prefers to raise taxes on everyone.

The Fed is simply printing more money, which will cause the USD
to devalue, and if Obama is not stopped, bankruptcy is in our not-too-distant future. But you are not worried. You'll be in the bridge with your captain, going going gone.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#159977 Mar 7, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Paul got his answer from the DOJ. He just doesn't like the answer. That's his right.
Holder didn't say "NO, drones won't be used". He said "I can't
see a reason why they would", and "I don't think they will" (both paraphrased).

Then when pressed by <Leahy?>, he finally offered his standard
excuse. "Well, I didn't think I was being vague". "I figured everyone knew by my comments, that I meant no" (again para- phrased).

Notice he will NOT come out and directly state that drones will NOT be used to kill US citizens in the US.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159978 Mar 7, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
That's just plain horse hockey! Left-leaning MSM took pleasure in grinding on GW Bush for 7+ years, but that doesn't mean Hume, Krauthammer, and even O'Reilly have not been fair to Obama.
I stopped reading right here.
lisw

Lewis Center, OH

#159979 Mar 7, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I addresse d the only indisputable facts in the story, bob. The rest is just political blather by people doing what they're paid to do: bash Obama.
Obama needs to be bashed. Every president needs to be bashed. Can you imagine if there were a say 90% approval rating of any president there would be a very strong temptation to keep on being president. I'm very glad I'm allowed to bash Obama. It's sincere bashing but useful just the same.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159980 Mar 7, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Obama needs to be bashed. Every president needs to be bashed. Can you imagine if there were a say 90% approval rating of any president there would be a very strong temptation to keep on being president. I'm very glad I'm allowed to bash Obama. It's sincere bashing but useful just the same.
Not trying to deny anyone their right to bash - not you, not Krauthammer, not the Fox talking heads.

I don't happen to think bashing is useful (whether it's bashing someone I voted for or someone I didn't vote for) for anything other than rallying the party faithful. That's the reason I'm critical of the entire spectrum of talking heads, from Maddows to O'Reilly and everyone in between.

Now criticism, which is different from bashing - that is useful.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159981 Mar 7, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Paul got his answer from the DOJ. He just doesn't like the answer. That's his right.
If there's a question at all (in my mind) it is if and just how long will the citizenry tolerate open-ended and ill-defined declarations of "war" such as the "Cold War" and today's "War On Terror". "War" is thrown around so loosely anymore that it's full meaning has lost it's sting in general conversation. "War is hell", Sherman said. Collateral damage is part and parcel - just ask Georgia. If people didn't object to the term, along with all it's implications, from 2001-08, I think it's fair to doubt the sincerity of objections today. Although I do suspect Paul himself is being somewhat true to his libertarian principles, many in the blogosphere that are just now jumping on the bandwagon have a decidedly less humanitarian agenda.
So, has the "War On Terror" been declared over? If the answer is no, then, do we want the CiC to broadcast to enemy combatants the limits by which they can adjust and skirt around, using our freedoms as a cover? Of course the CiC should not do so. If anything (for myself) I would prefer that the gov't quit tossing around the word "war" as if it's a perpetual state of being, as it has been for virtually my entire lifespan.
But as it is, an enemy combatant should live with the uncertainty that he might be tracked and hit by counter-force wherever and whenever he might surface. That is the cost of war, and after all, war is hell.
I think Holder could have done a better job in answering this hypothetical question without tipping our hand to terrorists or playing into Paul's hands.

There are circumstances under which a drone strike might be effective in dealing with a cell/group engaged in active acts of terror in the United States, even if the group was domestic or had some members who are citizens of the United States.

Under that hypothetical it's interesting to ponder how many seconds Obama would have to hesitate before 'unleashing the gamers' before many of the people who are jumping on Paul's bandwagon would be calling him soft on terror.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 4 min Bear Claw 59,807
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 9 min MOGADORE 695,570
I accidentially swigged...some PEE!! 37 min Pee Wee 1
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 59 min Robert F 994,033
☑️____Antichrist in plain view____ 1 hr Feb 2018 1
Last Post Wins !!! [ game time :) ] (Jan '11) 2 hr MOGADORE 2,499
Why did O.J. criminal trial jurors IGNORE cuts ... 2 hr MOGADORE 8
wierd situation with my mom. (Jul '14) Mon Pimpy 23
More from around the web