cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 08:54 pm
@mysteryman,
She doesn't have to respond to your stupid queries about "all, most, 50% or anything else" when you yourself exaggerate what other people say. Quit being such an ass. Most of us make that kind of mistake.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 08:55 pm
@cicerone imposter,
So now you are saying that "most conservatives" post here on a2k?
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  2  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 08:57 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
She doesn't have to respond to your stupid queries about "all, most, 50% or anything else" when you yourself exaggerate what other people say. Quit being such an ass. Most of us make that kind of mistake.


So now you are saying that she doesnt have to back up her claim?
You are the same person that has insisted that others back up what they say.

Since she claimed that I have suggested that I speak for all veterans, its up to her to provide some proof of that or retract the statement.

cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 08:58 pm
@mysteryman,
It's trivial.
mysteryman
 
  2  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 09:07 pm
@cicerone imposter,
So its trivial when you or her cant support your claims, but it proves a conservative is either lying or doesnt know what they are talking about if they cant back up their claims?

Is that what you are now saying?
It seems like you are applying a double standard.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 09:08 pm
@mysteryman,
You can also claim anything you wish concerning how I think. bye.
mysteryman
 
  2  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 09:13 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Thats what I thought.
Run away instead of defending your position and your statements.
okie
 
  1  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 09:20 pm
I wonder if Obama will ask Hugo Chavez about this when they meet and have that friendly warm chat?:

"U.S. Group Sues Hugo Chavez for Alleged Acts of Terrorism, Human Rights Violations
MIAMI " A nonprofit group has sued Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez for alleged acts of terrorism and human rights violations, including conspiring with Colombian guerrillas, al-Qaida and the Taliban."


http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,516905,00.html

"Obama Meets Latin America's Left
This week, President Obama’s globe-trotting will take him to a Latin America for the Summit of the Americas, a region of the world where a resurgence of Communism has complicated U.S. relations. Hispanic-Americans will be paying close attention to the posture he takes with hard-left dictators like Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega."


http://townhall.com/columnists/DavidSpady/2009/04/13/obama_meets_latin_americas_left
http://www.foxnews.com/images/528928/1_61_041609_chavez.jpg
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 09:26 pm
http://images2.cafepress.com/product/325967892v3_350x350_Front.jpg
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Thu 16 Apr, 2009 10:05 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:
There is a state in Marxist concepts that does not differ all that much from Facism and there are those who apply socialist philosophy in a way that is virtually indistinguishable from core components of Marxsm, Facism, Nazi-ism. It would probably be helpful to agree on a defintiion of socialism before attempting to claim or deny that such concepts are being put into practics now.

As a matter of note, Foxfyre, I've been reading Hitler's Mein Kampf, and the 25 points of the Nazi Party, and the main difference I see between Hitler and Marx, is that Hitler hated Jews and he thougtht the Marxists were accomplishing things, only to have the Jews rule the world or some such imagination. Hitler was a confused man, and so are his writings, and after reading it, I wonder how could anyone believe in this guy, let alone an entire country?

At any rate, it is clear when you read the doctrine, the "Folk State" that Hitler wanted and talked about endlessly, means the "Peoples State." And the State was to rule supreme, a strong central government, from the top down, all for the "common good," as ensured by the central authority. Newspapers transgressing the common welfare was to be suppressed, property and profits could be confiscated for the common good, and so on. It was clearly a socialistic state, as ensured by a strong central authority, not much different than what you see today, in communist states or very socialistic states.

Actually, it is eerie to read some of this stuff, because it sounds eerily similar to tactics used now by the left. One of Hitler's basic approaches was - do not become bogged down in details, simply outline broad principles with sloganeering, etc., with broad appeal, to obtain a wide following among the masses. Hide the details and don't even give out the details to people that don't need to know them. He despised endless political debate and wrangling over the details.

Interesting how its like pulling hens teeth to get any details of Obama's policies until he actually does them. All we had were slogans and broad plans. Note here to all the libs, I am not comparing Obama to Hitler, but I am comparing the leftist tactics to leftist tactics used in history, and there is absolutely no doubt after reading more of this stuff, it reinforces the fact that Hitler was a leftist, at least in context with modern American politics.
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  1  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 04:38 am
@mysteryman,
He's been running that game for a while now. Making statements like "it's not my job to figure it out", "Obama's got smart advisors so I'll trust what they say, even if I can't explain why their programs will work, I just believe that they will".

He's become very boring to read and converse with.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 06:13 am
This is interesting.
Apparently, Obama lied to senior citizens, and will not( at least not so far), keep his promise to them.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/24/end-income-tax-for-seniors-making-less-than/

Quote:
President Obama's campaign pledge to end taxes for seniors making less than $50,000 has fallen off the radar.

It wasn't part of the tax cuts in the economic stimulus bill, also known as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. It wasn't in Obama's first budget outline, which was approved by Congress on April 2, 2009. And it's not part of any proposed legislation that we can find.


How low do you have to be to lie to a senior citizen?
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 06:19 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

This is interesting.
Apparently, Obama lied ...


Shocked PrezBO lied !!!
parados
 
  2  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 06:46 am
@mysteryman,
So, now you are speaking for all senior citizens MM?


Twisted Evil
revel
 
  1  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 07:17 am
@cicerone imposter,
Actually I can understand his reasoning on this if you think it through. During the Bush administration the justice department set their own legal perimeters and it would not be fair to prosecute cia officers for only following those perimeters.

I am beginning to think all this kind of thing is a work in progress and as more information is learned, more information will be forth coming. And perhaps more changes are made in connection to it.

Quote:
"It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department," Holder said.

Obama said in his statement and a separate letter sent directly to CIA employees that the nation must protect their identity "as vigilantly as they protect our security."

Current CIA Director Leon Panetta said in a message to his employees: "CIA responded, as duty requires."

Some parts of the memos were blacked out, and Panetta had pushed for more redactions, according to a government official who declined to be named because he was not authorized to release the information.

The CIA has acknowledged using waterboarding on three high-level terror detainees in 2002 and 2003, with the authorization of the White House and the Justice Department. Hayden said waterboarding has not been used since, but some human rights groups have urged Obama to hold CIA employees accountable for what they, and many Obama officials, say was torture.

The memos produced by the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel in 2002 and 2005 were released to meet a court-approved deadline in a lawsuit against the government in New York by the American Civil Liberties Union.

"It's impossible not to be shocked by the contents of these memos," said ACLU lawyer Jameel Jaffer. "The memos should never have been written, but we're pleased the new administration has made them public."

In addition to detailing individual techniques, one memo also specifically authorized a method for combining multiple methods, a practice human rights advocates argue crosses the line into torture even if any individual methods does not.

The methods authorized in the memos include keeping detainees naked, keeping them in painful standing positions and keeping their cells cold for long periods of time. Other techniques include depriving them of solid food and slapping them. Sleep deprivation, prolonged shackling and threats to a detainee's family were also used.

Interrogators were told not to allow a prisoner's body temperature or food intake to fall below a certain level, because either could cause permanent damage, said senior administration officials.

The Obama administration last month released nine legal memos from the Bush administration. It probably will release more as the ACLU lawsuit proceeds, the officials said.

The lawsuit has sought to use the Freedom of Information Act to shed light on the treatment of prisoners " though the Bush administration eventually abandoned many of the legal conclusions put forth in the memos and the Obama administration has gone further to actively dismantle much of President Bush's anti-terror program.

Obama has ordered the CIA's secret overseas prisons known as "black sites" closed and has ended "extraordinary renditions" of terrorism suspects to other countries if there is any reason to believe those countries would torture them. He has also restricted CIA questioning to methods and protocols approved for use by the U.S. military until a complete review of the program is conducted.

Also on Thursday, Holder formally revoked every legal opinion or memo issued during Bush's presidency that justified interrogation programs.

The documents have been the subject of a long, fierce debate inside and outside government over how much should be revealed about the previous administration's approach.

In his statement, Obama said he was reassured about the potential national security implications by the fact that much of the information contained had already been widely publicized " including some of it by Bush himself " and by the fact that the program no longer exists as it did.

Withholding the memos, Obama argued, would only serve to deny facts already in the public domain.

"This could contribute to an inaccurate accounting of the past, and fuel erroneous and inflammatory assumptions about actions taken by the United States," the president said.




source
revel
 
  1  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 07:38 am
@mysteryman,
Evidently it is planned because they posted it on the agenda but is now being slowed because there has not been a person nominated for the department of health and human services.

Obama White House Posts Agenda for Senior Citizen Programs; No Taxes for Seniors Earning Under $50M



0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 09:05 am
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

mysteryman wrote:

This is interesting.
Apparently, Obama lied ...


Shocked PrezBO lied !!!

Brevity is the soul of wit, and also often captures the kernel of truth.

That such a thing happens is not surprising to many of us.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 09:09 am
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
Most of us make that kind of mistake.

Is that the common defense now, ci? You said something similar about all the cabinet picks not paying tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands in taxes. After all, we all defraud the IRS, just honest mistakes, right?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  0  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 09:16 am
@revel,
Quote:

Also on Thursday, Holder formally revoked every legal opinion or memo issued during Bush's presidency that justified interrogation programs.

So, what do we learn now, every legal opinion previously put forth can be "revoked" by the stroke of a pen. Isn't that wonderful! Just imagine what can be done with the Supreme Court, just revoke every legal opinion, every decision, and that would make it very easy for Obama, the great one, to wipe out every authority but his.

Does this not strike other people as overstepping normal bounds?

I thought Bush simply ordered this stuff done, there were no legal opinions, at least that was the tenor of what was pushed in the media.
okie
 
  0  
Fri 17 Apr, 2009 09:24 am
@okie,
Also, if this has not been posted, it is stupid, stupid, stupid, to release details of our methods of extracting information from terrorists that saved many lives. That is akin to giving the blueprint of our battle plans to the terrorist cells around the world. How stupid is that? Very. But then again, nothing surprises me with this bunch in the Whitehouse.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1224
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 04/20/2025 at 05:26:21