Obama distances himself from report!

SmarterThanYou said:
retribution from a slighted liberal political group. They plan to incite an all out war to attempt to exterminate their political enemies. kinda like stalin.
Click to expand...

If there is a potential for a war, the reasons should be solid and clear.

Unless the government does something that warrants a war, no one (lib or con) should start it.

No one should be able to incite a war unless the people are chomping at the bit to start.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
for all of the bitching you libs did during bush's reign or terror, you'd think you dumbfucks would be happy that people are finally ready to enforce states rights. just goes to show that you are really just partisan hacks who care nothing more than to see conservatives upset, no matter what the dems do.

I need you to explain why keeping an oath to support and defend the constitution is 'loony'.
Click to expand...

I think left wing kooks should be monitored as well. I have always thought that so where is the hypocrisy?

Also as I made clear, if you had any level of reading comprehension, I'm not talking about regular citizens protesting for states rights, or tax reform, or teabaggers. I'm talking about the small amount of people that those groups attract that are crazy like McVeigh and the guy that killed 3 cops a couple weeks ago.

Learn2ReadandComprehend4theWin
 
Last edited:
leaningright said:
First off, Gitmo is going to be closed, isn't it? ;)

Secondly, I assume that when you (and others) say, "watched very closely" that means within the confines of the law, right? I mean you're not talking about illegal wire-tapping or nothing like that are you?

And finally, though it wasn't addressed to a country, did you know that that last statement sounded like George W. Bush? :)

Now to the serious part, I agree with you guys who say they should be watched closely. Like Blackflag (hey BF, haven't seen you in a while) says, we don't want another Timothy McVeigh on our hands, do we?
Click to expand...

I was using their own rhetoric against them.

They want Gitmo left open. Fine .. put them in it.

They support illegal wiretapping. Fine .. let's use it on them.

And yes, that statement sounded exactly like Bush .. but I'm sure you're already know my point my brother.

:)
 
Solitary said:
If there is a potential for a war, the reasons should be solid and clear.

Unless the government does something that warrants a war, no one (lib or con) should start it.
Click to expand...
In all your time on this planet, you've not seen one single incident where a US government entity has purposefully incited violence so that they could 'put it down'?

Solitary said:
No one should be able to incite a war unless the people are chomping at the bit to start.
Click to expand...

Ib1conterminator would probably disagree with you.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
retribution from a slighted liberal political group. They plan to incite an all out war to attempt to exterminate their political enemies. kinda like stalin.
Click to expand...

:lmao:

Is that bullshit supposed to be serious?

You have Glen beck, Limbaugh, and other right-wing pundits pushung for war on the air everyday .. now you whine when there is push back.

From my perspective, if war is what they want, then let's do it. We can refight the Civil War all over again if that's what it takes.

Guns .. yeah, everybody grab a gun.

It's OK and the "patriotic" thing to do when the right-wing does it and I've never heard a word from you denouncing Beck and his minions for their terrorist calls. You saved your anguish for a "slighted liberal group."

How amazing.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
In all your time on this planet, you've not seen one single incident where a US government entity has purposefully incited violence so that they could 'put it down'?



Ib1conterminator would probably disagree with you.
Click to expand...

The Great Sioux Wars, 1 and 2

Spanish-American War

Vietnam

Pearl Harbor

The Bombing of Tulsa, Oklahoma

Murders of college students at Kent State and Jackson State

Edmond Pettis Bridge

The invasion of Iraq

.. just to name a few.
 
blackascoal said:
Is that bullshit supposed to be serious?

You have Glen beck, Limbaugh, and other right-wing pundits pushung for war on the air everyday .. now you whine when there is push back.
Click to expand...
Frankly, I expected all the libs and socialists to freak out and push back when people rejected their unconstitutional policies.

blackascoal said:
From my perspective, if war is what they want, then let's do it. We can refight the Civil War all over again if that's what it takes.
Click to expand...
thats cool, lets roll.

blackascoal said:
It's OK and the "patriotic" thing to do when the right-wing does it and I've never heard a word from you denouncing Beck and his minions for their terrorist calls. You saved your anguish for a "slighted liberal group."

How amazing.
Click to expand...

What were YOU doing when the Bush and Cheney cabal was running roughshod over the constitution? You were probably crying and whining and protesting, all the time asking 'why won't someone do something?', well we are now and all you can do is still cry and whine and now demand that they do something.

Asshat was right, you are against freedom. drive or be driven.

Asshat always wins, always.
 
Ice Dancer said:
I posted the link to Malikin's op-ed where the link to the pdf was hyperlinked. Are you all that dense, lazy or both??? I happened to have liked Malkin's opinion and I am entitled to post it. I also thought that since knee-jerk "attack the messenger" idgits made her the debate, I'd post another article.

I guess it's too difficult to really address the issue which is; supporters of our republic, as opposed to those who want a socialstic government, are being targeted as "radicals".
Click to expand...
That was my point that I was making to Dung. Don't get in a tweeze.
 
Ice Dancer said:
I posted the link to Malikin's op-ed where the link to the pdf was hyperlinked. Are you all that dense, lazy or both??? I happened to have liked Malkin's opinion and I am entitled to post it. I also thought that since knee-jerk "attack the messenger" idgits made her the debate, I'd post another article.

I guess it's too difficult to really address the issue which is; supporters of our republic, as opposed to those who want a socialstic government, are being targeted as "radicals".
Click to expand...


I guess I was hoping that you were being ironic by posting a piece by Michelle "In Defense of Internment" Malkin complaining about the government taking a close look at (white) rightwing radical groups. Apparently not.

Just for the record, Michelle supports throwing tens of thousands of innocent (non-white) people into internment camps for years at a time but gets the vapors and goes apeshit when the government assesses the risks posed by (white) rightwing radical militant groups. That makes sense.

Screw Malkin and anyone that takes her seriously.
 
I told you that there will be some nutbag going all Murrah building on us because of the right fringe rantings the fools are pumping out.

These guys see the danger also.

The right wont be happy until some American gets killed for their "cause".

Dead babies is what they are after.
 
evince said:
I told you that there will be some nutbag going all Murrah building on us because of the right fringe rantings the fools are pumping out.

These guys see the danger also.

The right wont be happy until some American gets killed for their "cause".

Dead babies is what they are after.
Click to expand...

you're a party blind ignorant hack. you remind me of the bitch interviewed after the kent state shootings, the one that said they should shoot more war protesters.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
The timing on this report is suspicious. Then we have the radical Rosa Brooks who was appointed by Obama to a mid-level job in the Defense Department as advisor. What the hell is going on?
Click to expand...

What, you have a problem with putting an unqualified anti-defense pro-Iran anti-Israel I hate the Bush administration person in a position of power able to read Defense Department intelligence?
 
Yes, I have a big problem with this nomination. The woman is a radical nut. I can imagine what she would do with this Intelligence and it ain't good. This is a pox on Obama.

Ice Dancer said:
What, you have a problem with putting an unqualified anti-defense pro-Iran anti-Israel I hate the Bush administration person in a position of power able to read Defense Department intelligence?
Click to expand...
 
I guess it's too difficult to really address the issue which is; supporters of our republic, as opposed to those who want a socialstic government, are being targeted as "radicals".
//

And here I thought the right wing claim to be for smaller Govt?
But as bush (and the republicans by proxy) proved they are really the friends of big government.

Valid point I suppose in a warped sort of way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top