So let me get this straight

[jrogers]

"Multiracial."

"Human being" also works.

You're welcome.

 

[Stschil]

"Multiracial."

"Human being" also works.

You're welcome.

That won't do for the left, since they insist on labels for everyone.

Now before you begin pontificating from your lofty equine perch, his skin color is immaterial to me. I don't like his politics and that's all that matters.

 

[jrogers]

That won't do for the left, since they insist on labels for everyone.

Now before you begin pontificating from your lofty equine perch, his skin color is immaterial to me. I don't like his politics and that's all that matters.

You'd be disappointed in my horsemanship.

I agree that his skin color should be a non-issue.

 

[DocEd]

I suppose you have never had extramarital sex. Please explain what about her morals is so scandalous and clarify what would constitute accepting responsibility for her behavior.

I can understand the position that birth control should not be covered by insurance, but the extreme right seems unable to exercise moderation in response. The bizarre attempts at slut-shaming the woman don't actually play outside of ultraconservative echo chambers. They're unfounded and beyond the pale, but this is the sort of thing one expects of an inherently misogynistic philosophy.

No see thats the problem, people are so focused on vilifying the conservatives in this country that you missed the whole point. Rush called her out because he knew it would cause an uproar, yet nothing is said when someone from the left goes after a conservative, be it woman or a minority. Now to further clarify something's, I don't think that a national healthcare bill should exist but it does. That being said birth control, abortions and sexual enhancers such as Viagra shouldn't be covered. If you want those things go get private insurance. Private enterprise funded by their own hard work can cover what it wants I couldn't give two rats crap what they do. I have premarital sex, I also have a job and buy my own condoms and have never asked nor wanted someone else to pay for it!

 

[LP1]

She is not destitute, she has morals that would scandalize an alley cat, and does not want to accept responsibility for her behavior but rather wants to impose it on the rest of us. Sounds like a slut to me.

Such a blind follower of Limbaugh that you will condemn the morals of someone you have never met? I know that it's easier to outsource your thinking to someone else (who happens to be a hypocrite, but I digress), but you really ought to try thinking for yourself sometime.

 

[poptab]

Indydave1776 is a blind follower of Rush.

 

[DocEd]

I am pretty sure its safe to say that the republic is dead when the president can assasinate u.s. citizens with impunity.

I keep hearing this from crazed folowers of ron paul, but i dont know what citizens obama has assasinated. i hate it whne i am forced to defend the campaigner in chief. but maybe if someone would just tell me who they are talking about i could stop.

 

[DocEd]

I am pretty sure its safe to say that the republic is dead when the president can assasinate u.s. citizens with impunity.

I keep hearing this from crazed folowers of ron paul, but i dont know what citizens obama has assasinated. i hate it whne i am forced to defend the campaigner in chief. but maybe if someone would just tell me who they are talking about i could stop.

 

[poptab]

Obama Crosses the Rubicon: The Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki - Forbes

And his 15 year old son was also killed, assasinated, collateral damage whatever.

And those Forbes writers sure are crazed Ron Pualbots

 

[DocEd]

Obama Crosses the Rubicon: The Killing of Anwar al-Awlaki - Forbes

And his 15 year old son was also killed, assasinated, collateral damage whatever.

And those Forbes writers sure are crazed Ron Pualbots

he renounced his citenzship, and once you commit a terrorist act or help perpetuate one i believe your citezenship is null and void. he committed a crime punishable by death and thats what he got. as far as his son goes, he wasnt an innocent bystander, he was an accomplice. his case is different than if one of us was targeted for our posts on here about how dissapointed we are with where the country is going. our posts and actions are still rooted in a loyalty to this country and what it was founded on. I may be off base in this thought process but its just how i view that. I am NOT a fan of much of anything the POTUS does. but this was a neccessary action to end the actions of a person that was activly waging a terroristic war against this country. and if you dont dont believe he was, go ask someone from fort hood that was there when this nutbags proxy went on a shooting spree. its a fine line the government has to walk and thus far it is staying on the right side of it.

now that all being said i would be the first to stand up and shout at the top of my lungs when my freedoms are being infringed, as with the misnamed patriot act. maybe having fought against these crazy aholes in iraq and afganistan has made me too jaded or i better understand how they think. but we cant just let things slide. we have to answer all threats from the likes of muslim fanatics with with supreme firepower and predjeduce. its the only thing they know, understand and will fear.

 

[DocEd]

I forgot to pose a question in my previous post. do you think that 1 the killings and such will reduce now that reelection has been won. and do you think that if he wasnt in his first term OBL would have been targeted and taken out like he was?

I really deep down want to give the POTUS the benifit of the doubt, but something tells me he wouldnt have done any of that in his second term and i think that the drone attacks and killings will decrease now that he won reelection.

 

[Gino66]

Don't you just love that? Clear facts, sound interpretation including historic antecedents in which the same things happened in the same way and did not end well, any not only are you crazy, but it is a conspiracy theory (as opposed to simply seeing what is plainly in front of you).

YIP, people look at me like I am the oddball, because I chose to be an informed voter and responsible citizen. How many people get their news from MTV and their vote counted also.....or MSNBC, CNN, BBC, etc! Hell, they are probably practicing the Chicago way of voting too.....early and often

IMHO, We are going to need a new emoticon.....with the flag upside down!

 

[BigMatt]

I gave up watching this crap because I am out of hope. Things are going to go however they go regardless of whether or not I watch the news.

Tell me the rules, and I will play the game...

 

[poptab]

he renounced his citenzship, and once you commit a terrorist act or help perpetuate one i believe your citezenship is null and void. he committed a crime punishable by death and thats what he got. as far as his son goes, he wasnt an innocent bystander, he was an accomplice.

What act of terrorism did he commit? Where is the evidence?
His son was an accomplice? Prove it.
I think that is what you need to sentence someone to their death.

 

[DocEd]

What act of terrorism did he commit? Where is the evidence?
His son was an accomplice? Prove it.
I think that is what you need to sentence someone to their death.

I cant believe your actually trying to defend a terroist piece of **** that planned attacks and was responsible for the murders of us troops. he was the guy who organized, recruited and instructed that so conviently forgotten shooting on fort hood. and the christmas day bomber, remember that. he was the orchestrator behind that as well. and the evidence was in hassans questioning, and the guys own words.

 

[DocEd]

What act of terrorism did he commit? Where is the evidence?
His son was an accomplice? Prove it.
I think that is what you need to sentence someone to their death.

and you conviently forgot to even aknowledge that this guy renounced his US citizenship. therefore we didnt assasinate a us citizen we assinated a murderous thug who deserved to die a much slower and more excruciating death than he got.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I cant believe your actually trying to defend a terroist piece of **** that planned attacks and was responsible for the murders of us troops. he was the guy who organized, recruited and instructed that so conviently forgotten shooting on fort hood. and the christmas day bomber, remember that. he was the orchestrator behind that as well. and the evidence was in hassans questioning, and the guys own words.

I believe that you are missing the point here. Poptab isn't defending the terrorist per se but forming his position in the knowledge that if anyone with US citizenship can arbitrarily be declared a 'terrorist' and effectively declared a 'non-citizen', they can to the same to him, or to me, or to you. The fact that you joined Indiana Gun Owners stands in evidence that you are part of a group that the DHS has already designated as at minimum 'potential terrorists'. If you have been in the military, oppose abortion, oppose illegal immigration, believe that the government should follow the Constitution, or believe in the Second Coming of Christ, each of these is considered an indicator of being a 'potential terrorist'.

Are you going to feel the same way about demanding due process of law when they knock at your door, or simply blow up your vehicle with a missile from a drone as you drive down the highway? Never forget that attacks on liberty generally start with a target such as this man who will generate little to no public sympathy and then will stand as a precedent as the line you perceived to be miles away gets closer and closer to you until one day you find yourself in the crosshairs. Just look at how the seatbelt law worked over time, even though that is a relatively innocuous thing, it started affecting only a few in the CFR back in the 1970s, then the states got leveraged onto the bandwagon in the 1980s with several exemptions, and now the exemptions have been eliminated. In much the same way, if we accept this now, the day will come that the .gov can arbitrarily declare any citizen a 'terrorist' hence a 'non-citizen' and engage in summary execution without trial or anything else that vaguely resembles due process of law.

 

[poptab]

and you conviently forgot to even aknowledge that this guy renounced his US citizenship. therefore we didnt assasinate a us citizen we assinated a murderous thug who deserved to die a much slower and more excruciating death than he got.

Really!? You expose your irrationality and blood lust. That would be a violation of the 8th amendment.

Did his son renounce US citizenship?

Regardless, human rights come from God (or nature if you are an atheist) not from the government. Have you read anything about the president's 'kill list'.
Your telling me its ok for the president to be judge jury and executioner when even the president himself was scrambling to put limits on this power before the election so that it didnt fall into the 'wrong' hands if he wasnt reelected? Those plans by the way were put on hold after he got reelected.

 

[DocEd]

I can understand that point of view, but having served in the army and having known people who were on fort hood that day, it's an example that will not strike a chord with me. This particular piece of garbage deserved what he got. And his son, ohh well. There's a fine line between this And where you think this might go. I'm enough of a thinker to see that line and when it starts to creep in the wrong direction. If you want to be worried about something I would be worried about obamas blatant abuse of executive orders vs drone strikes.

 

[IndyDave1776]

I can understand that point of view, but having served in the army and having known people who were on fort hood that day, it's an example that will not strike a chord with me. This particular piece of garbage deserved what he got. And his son, ohh well. There's a fine line between this And where you think this might go. I'm enough of a thinker to see that line and when it starts to creep in the wrong direction. If you want to be worried about something I would be worried about obamas blatant abuse of executive orders vs drone strikes.

Indeed so, but this is extremely critical. I doubt that you are going to find anyone here who does not consider the world a better place for being rid of these, well, individuals. The problem is that this will work just like asset forfeiture. We were told that it was prohibitively expensive to prosecute high ranking drug dealers because of the incredible amount of money they had to lawyer up, and even then we couldn't give them what they deserved with those almighty lawyers they were hiring, so we need to be able to take that money away before they can use it. We still haven't seen any of these mythical drug 'kingpins' prosecuted the way it was suggested that they were going to start falling like bowling pins, but if I go on vacation and take enough money to pay cash as I go and get caught with that case, I can count on some state-sponsored thief with a badge relieving me of it because, after all, no one but a criminal would have a few thousand dollars cash in his pocket.

In the end, as much as I want rid of these people, I am not willing to set myself up to join them in a similar demise in order to get them. If they are in fact guilty of crimes warranting such treatment, there should be no problem applying due process and ridding ourselves of them the right way.

Even the most obtuse of sheep would never go along with summary execution of US citizens in general. It was absolutely necessary to find some of the most evil people on the face of the planet, people who are not going to be accepted as 'garden variety' Americans, and conveniently happen not to be within US borders at the time, and make them the poster children for such a power grab. By accepting for anyone, we accept it for ourselves.