>>> >> >> >> >And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>> >> >> >> >Patriot >> Act.
>>> >> >> >> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>> >> >> >> agreed >> to
>>> >> >> >> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>> >> >> >Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to
>>> >> >> >allow warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>> >> >> >imagined t >> hat
>>> >> >> >you might be destroying evidence?
>>> >> >> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY PRISONS
>>> >> >> without any proof of guilt?
>>> >> >You dodged the question. ere, try again:
>>> >> Of course I dodged your question.
>>> >Of course. utters don't want to face the fact that if they pull a
>>> >gun on BATF to check them evil feds they get a 3rd eye.
>>> Which has got nothing to do with the FACT that Obama signed and
>> The only reason Obama got elected in the first place is because the
>> GOP spent the last 3 decades getting elected by bottom fishing for
>> poor wingers including racist gun nutters who cheered Mel Gibson's
>> _Patriot_ movie and BushCo's Patriot Act.
>> Turns out most Americans are more interested in having a functional
>> economy than cheering things misnamed "Patriot" so Obama got elected.
>> Had the GOP spent less time bankrupting the country a black man would
>> never have been able to get elected a generation ahead of schedule.
>> Now, thanks to Scalia, cops can kick in your door on virtually any
>> pretext and if you "git pushed too far" and try to defend your home 'n
>> hearth you join Randy Weaver in the Great Militia In the Sky.
>Don't let this throw you for a loop, but IIRC, Randy Weaver is still >alive. He lives in Kalispell, Arkansas. Or did as recently as September >of 2010. I have not seen any notice of his death.
Is that what he was trying to say, that you'll get killed if you try
to defend your home against the "gummint?"
I wonder if he knows who Todd McKeehan, Conway LeBleu, Robert
Williams, William Degan, and Steve Willis are?
>>>>>>>> Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>> news:a9430e15-da69-489a-a56c-32ef30f808e0
>> @q7g2000pbj.googlegroups.co
>>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 7:44 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 07:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
>>>>>>>>>> <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>> >On Sep 22, 7:29 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> On Sep 21, 4:18 pm, RD Sandman
>>>>>>>>>> >> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> You Liberals want to allow the forcing
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>of > religiou >>>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> schools to follow government dictates
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>on > birth con >>>>>>>>> trol
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and abortion
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, this is what you imagine.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> but you don't want to
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> allow a child to transfer to that
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> religious school >>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> you say you can control and regulate?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, I don't want my tax money used to >> teach
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignoran >>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> religion to impressionable young
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>people. >>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Besides, it unconstitutional. We know
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>how much you conservatives hold to the
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> constitution.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Then why do Liberals stop following the
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> constitution >>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> other issues?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> What would conservatives know about
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> It still works...
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > ....because it is a living constitution.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Is that why Obama signed a bill allowing >> military
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> impriso >>>>>>>>> nment
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> of citizens suspected of terrorism?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> he is just trying to attract conservative
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> voters.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Is that why he did it?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Obama has spent years trying to "reach
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>across the aisle" and work with Republicans,
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>only to get rebuffed.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Republicans not only reject Obama's ideas,
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>they reject their OWN ideas if Obama happens
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>to agree with them.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Oh! I understand now!
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Condemning American citizens to military prison
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>without trial >>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>mere SUSPICION of terrorist activity is Obama's
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>way >> of
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>"reachi >>>>>>>>> ng
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>across the aisle!"
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>Sadly, he is doing the same evil think that >> Cheney/Bush
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>did. At least he hasn't started any new wars
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>through lies.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> Yeah, continuing the old one is killing just as
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> many people. Go >>>>>>>>> od
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> job, Obama!
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> If Obama ends Bush's wars he is "surrendering
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> to the terrorists". If he continues them he is
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> "sacrificing our troops".
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Excuse me, but Obama is scaling down Iraq on Bush's
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> schedule and >>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> was made possible by the surge which Obama opposed.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Afghanista >>>>>>>>> n,
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Obama thought, was the "right" war and he escalated
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> it. Bush a >>>>>>>>> lso had
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> nothing to do with Egypt, Libya, or the neglect of
>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Israel.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Bush bragged about spreading democracy to the
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Middle East and now that is happening. Why are
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "pro-demcracy" conservatives complaining about it?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > You may have to ask them. I am not complaining about it
>>>>>>>>>> >> > I am simp >>>>>>>>> ly
>>>>>>>>>> >> > straightening out the record.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Do they really want Mubarak and Ghaddafi back?
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "We are trying to promote democracy in places that
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > do not have any values for civilized societies, values
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > like respecting minorities and womens rights and
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > independent judiciary and rule of law. How much longer
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > do we not support and fund Sharia democracy?"
>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Sarah Palin, Sept 13, 2012
>>>>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
>>>>>>>>>> >> > And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
>>>>>>>>>> >> > Sleep well, tonight.....
>>>>>>>>>> >> > RD (The Sandman)- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> >> > - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> >> The trouble with the voucher system is that it's wasteful
>>>>>>>>>> >> and it will destroy the public school system.
>>>>>>>>>> For the GOP racists, that is a feature, not a bug.
>>>>>>>>>> >> We should put our energies into improving the public
>>>>>>>>>> >> schools, not farming students out to private schools.
>>>>>>>>>> Yes.
>>>>>>>>>> >> Also, a voucher of the amount spent on a public school >> student
>>>>>>>>>> >> will not be enough to fund a private school education.
>>>>>>>>>> >> It's an impractical idea.
Discussion subject changed to "Condemning American Citizens to Military Prison Stays is Just Obama "Reaching Across the Aisle" - Mitch Holman" by RD Sandman
>>>> >> >> >> >And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>> >> >> >> >Patriot >>> Act.
>>>> >> >> >> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>> >> >> >> agreed >>> to
>>>> >> >> >> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>> >> >> >Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to
>>>> >> >> >allow warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the
>>>> >> >> >cops imagined t >>> hat
>>>> >> >> >you might be destroying evidence?
>>>> >> >> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY
>>>> >> >> PRISONS without any proof of guilt?
>>>> >> >You dodged the question. ere, try again:
>>>> >> Of course I dodged your question.
>>>> >Of course. utters don't want to face the fact that if they pull a
>>>> >gun on BATF to check them evil feds they get a 3rd eye.
>>>> Which has got nothing to do with the FACT that Obama signed and
>>> The only reason Obama got elected in the first place is because the
>>> GOP spent the last 3 decades getting elected by bottom fishing for
>>> poor wingers including racist gun nutters who cheered Mel Gibson's
>>> _Patriot_ movie and BushCo's Patriot Act.
>>> Turns out most Americans are more interested in having a functional
>>> economy than cheering things misnamed "Patriot" so Obama got
>>> elected.
>>> Had the GOP spent less time bankrupting the country a black man
>>> would never have been able to get elected a generation ahead of
>>> schedule.
>>> Now, thanks to Scalia, cops can kick in your door on virtually any
>>> pretext and if you "git pushed too far" and try to defend your home
>>> 'n hearth you join Randy Weaver in the Great Militia In the Sky.
>>Don't let this throw you for a loop, but IIRC, Randy Weaver is still >>alive. He lives in Kalispell, Arkansas. Or did as recently as
>>September of 2010. I have not seen any notice of his death.
> Is that what he was trying to say, that you'll get killed if you try
> to defend your home against the "gummint?"
I guess...
> I wonder if he knows who Todd McKeehan, Conway LeBleu, Robert
> Williams, William Degan, and Steve Willis are?
--
Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
>> Gray Guest <No_email_for_...@wahoo.com> wrote in >> news:XnsA0D6CC0604020Wereofftoseethewizrd@88.198.244.100: ...
>>> And so you think that the parents who do care in addition to caring for >>> their own children they should care for others, too?
>> Not as a rule but I find that many parents who truly care for their kids >> also care for others. Probably not financially but in opportunity.
>So they should be compelled by?
Why not? Sociopaths destroy society if they are not held in check.
>>>>>>>>> Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> news:a9430e15-da69-489a-a56c-32ef30f808e0
>>> @q7g2000pbj.googlegroups.co
>>>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 7:44 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 07:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
>>>>>>>>>>> <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>> >On Sep 22, 7:29 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >> On Sep 21, 4:18 pm, RD Sandman
>>>>>>>>>>> >> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> You Liberals want to allow the forcing
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>of > religiou >>>>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> schools to follow government dictates
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>on > birth con >>>>>>>>>> trol
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and abortion
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, this is what you imagine.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> but you don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> allow a child to transfer to that
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> religious school >>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> you say you can control and regulate?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, I don't want my tax money used to >>> teach
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignoran >>>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> religion to impressionable young
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>people. >>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Besides, it unconstitutional. We know
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>how much you conservatives hold to the
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Then why do Liberals stop following the
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> constitution >>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> other issues?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> What would conservatives know about
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> It still works...
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > ....because it is a living constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Is that why Obama signed a bill allowing >>> military
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> impriso >>>>>>>>>> nment
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> of citizens suspected of terrorism?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> he is just trying to attract conservative
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> voters.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Is that why he did it?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Obama has spent years trying to "reach
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>across the aisle" and work with Republicans,
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>only to get rebuffed.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Republicans not only reject Obama's ideas,
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>they reject their OWN ideas if Obama happens
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>to agree with them.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Oh! I understand now!
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Condemning American citizens to military prison
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>without trial >>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>mere SUSPICION of terrorist activity is Obama's
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>way >>> of
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>"reachi >>>>>>>>>> ng
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>across the aisle!"
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>Sadly, he is doing the same evil think that >>> Cheney/Bush
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>did. At least he hasn't started any new wars
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>through lies.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> Yeah, continuing the old one is killing just as
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> many people. Go >>>>>>>>>> od
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> job, Obama!
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> If Obama ends Bush's wars he is "surrendering
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> to the terrorists". If he continues them he is
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> "sacrificing our troops".
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Excuse me, but Obama is scaling down Iraq on Bush's
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> schedule and >>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> was made possible by the surge which Obama opposed.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Afghanista >>>>>>>>>> n,
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Obama thought, was the "right" war and he escalated
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> it. Bush a >>>>>>>>>> lso had
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> nothing to do with Egypt, Libya, or the neglect of
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Israel.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Bush bragged about spreading democracy to the
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Middle East and now that is happening. Why are
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "pro-demcracy" conservatives complaining about it?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > You may have to ask them. I am not complaining about it
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > I am simp >>>>>>>>>> ly
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > straightening out the record.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Do they really want Mubarak and Ghaddafi back?
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "We are trying to promote democracy in places that
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > do not have any values for civilized societies, values
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > like respecting minorities and women s rights and
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > independent judiciary and rule of law. How much longer
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > do we not support and fund Sharia democracy?"
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Sarah Palin, Sept 13, 2012
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > Sleep well, tonight.....
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > RD (The Sandman)- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> >> > - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> >> The trouble with the voucher system is that it's wasteful
>>>>>>>>>>> >> and it will destroy the public school system.
>>>>>>>>>>> For the GOP racists, that is a feature, not a bug.
Discussion subject changed to "Condemning American Citizens to Military Prison Stays is Just Obama "Reaching Across the Aisle" - Mitch Holman" by Gray Guest
>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns >>:
>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot >>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>> agreed >>to
>>>>>>>>>>> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to allow
>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>> imagined >>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY PRISONS
>>>>>>>>> without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance centric.
>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to steal
>>>>> everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential governemtn
>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>Yeah, pity we haven't had a budget in 3 years to know what those
>>priorities are.
> Tell me why you think it makes a difference.
>>>>You are a vomitous little worm.
>>> So you say, but your inability to understand reality clearly
>>> undermines the effectiveness of your petty insults.
>>They are only petty in that they refer top a petty thug like you.
1) It's the law.
2) By not passing abudget how much spending is not documented?
3) In the public interest to know what the governm,ent is spending on.
4) The fact that you have to ask says volumes about you, none of which is good.
>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot >>>>>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agreed to throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to >>> allow
>>>>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined >>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY
>>>>>>>>>>>> PRISONS without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>>>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance >>> centric.
>>>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to
>>>>>>>> steal everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential >>> governemtn
>>>>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>>>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>>>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>>>Apparently, then they really don't regard those "essential government
>>>>>programs" to be that essential.
>>>> Were you under the impression that they had different rules?
>>> Where did that not-so brilliant piece of logic come from? What I said
>>> was that Obama's view of this country is that it should be government >>> centric. Most conservatives want it to be capitalism centric unless
>>> they can get the government to yield to their bidding. In that last
>>> respect both parties are equal.
>>>> The only time the concept of 'essential government programs' arises
>>>> is when they fail to get their spending bills passed in time for the
>>>> new budget year. Now, I realize that Congress is hopelessly
>>>> incompetent, >>> but
>>>> there is no excuse for failing to get the spending bills passed in 9
>>>> months. They failed, of course, this year, but they passed a stopgap
>>>> spending bill instead.
>>> Or a budget passed in three years.
>>>> Congress is hopeless. The Democrats are terrible at their jobs and
>>>> the Republicans are proud that they are far worse at it.
>>> They are both pretty damn bad. I don't really think one is worse at
>>> it than the other, just that the result they are looking for is much >>> different.
>>In some ways I think the Republicans are worse. At least with the
>>Democrats you know exactly what you are getting - lieing socialist, big
>>government thugs and bullys. The Republicans have thier platform and
>>thier postions and thier stirring rhetoric, but clearly many in the
>>leadership don't beelive it.
>>It's one thing to tell me up front you want to fuck me in the ass. It's >>quite another to assure me that you don't and then the first chance he >>gets, out comes the KY.
> Republicans have not rolled back government. They grow government faster
> than Democrats. They spend more time wanting to tell you what to do in
> your bedroom and your boardroom. You have been misled by your right-wing
> propaganda ministry.
You are delusional and disassociated from reality.
>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot
>>>>>>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> agreed to throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to
>>>> allow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined
>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY
>>>>>>>>>>>>> PRISONS without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife
>>>>>>>>>>>>does....
>>>>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance
>>>> centric.
>>>>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to
>>>>>>>>> steal everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential
>>>> governemtn
>>>>>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>>>>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>>>>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>>>>Apparently, then they really don't regard those "essential
>>>>>>government programs" to be that essential.
>>>>> Were you under the impression that they had different rules?
>>>> Where did that not-so brilliant piece of logic come from? What I
>>>> said was that Obama's view of this country is that it should be
>>>> government centric. Most conservatives want it to be capitalism
>>>> centric unless they can get the government to yield to their
>>>> bidding. In that last respect both parties are equal.
>>>>> The only time the concept of 'essential government programs' arises
>>>>> is when they fail to get their spending bills passed in time for
>>>>> the new budget year. Now, I realize that Congress is hopelessly
>>>>> incompetent,
>>>> but
>>>>> there is no excuse for failing to get the spending bills passed in
>>>>> 9 months. They failed, of course, this year, but they passed a
>>>>> stopgap spending bill instead.
>>>> Or a budget passed in three years.
>>>>> Congress is hopeless. The Democrats are terrible at their jobs and
>>>>> the Republicans are proud that they are far worse at it.
>>>> They are both pretty damn bad. I don't really think one is worse at
>>>> it than the other, just that the result they are looking for is much
>>>> different.
>>>In some ways I think the Republicans are worse. At least with the
>>>Democrats you know exactly what you are getting - lieing socialist,
>>>big government thugs and bullys. The Republicans have thier platform
>>>and thier postions and thier stirring rhetoric, but clearly many in
>>>the leadership don't beelive it.
>>>It's one thing to tell me up front you want to fuck me in the ass.
>>>It's quite another to assure me that you don't and then the first
>>>chance he gets, out comes the KY.
>> Republicans have not rolled back government. They grow government
>> faster than Democrats. They spend more time wanting to tell you what
>> to do in your bedroom and your boardroom. You have been misled by your
>> right-wing propaganda ministry.
> One only needs to look at the running of the country and where debt rises
> to see which party really runs it up. There is a spreadsheet available
> that shows that rather vividly going back to 1950. It looks at the
> makeup of Congress along with who was president and shows that there
> really is not that much difference between the parties. Something that
> your 'ministry' doesn't tell you.
How true, but if you want to get specific...The Democrat turn out to be somewhat worse than Republicans.
But that's minor, what is clear is that BOTH parties are fully involved in funding up our debt and spending money we don't have.
Somehow I doubt Lunch's partisanship will allow him to acknowledge that.
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 13:56:02 -0500, RD Sandman
>>>>> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
> ...
>>>>>>Apparently, then they really don't regard those "essential
>>>>>>government programs" to be that essential.
>>>>> Were you under the impression that they had different rules?
>>>>Where did that not-so brilliant piece of logic come from? What I said
>>>>was that Obama's view of this country is that it should be government
>>>>centric.
>>> That is not accurate, but it has nothing to do with what essential
>>> government services are.
>>It has to do with the government being the center of everything. You
>>didn't do that. I assume that when one goes into business and fails, he
>>didn't fail, government did, other people did. It is typical of Obama
>>that when things don't work out, it was someone else's fault or problem
>>that he inherited.....but when things do work out, he is quick to jump in
>>an take credit.....see Iraq and Osama.
> As long as you are in denial about the causes of the 2008 financial
> catastrophe
Well, let's see.... first we had all the bipartisan deregulation in which BOTH parties were involved, much of what occurred under Clinton.....
Or are you in denial about the causes?
>and the refusal of Republicans to cooperate in any way in
> the attempt to get us back out of Bush's Near-Depression,
Seems to me that Democrats were as much if not more uncooperative when Bush warned Congress in 2001 and again in 2004 about the pending disaster they were producing.
> there's no way
> I can get you to understand what is being talked about.
First let's see if you're willing to talk about the facts.....or if you're blinded by your partisanship and simply want to blame it all on Republicans.
>>>>>>>>>> Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>> news:a9430e15-da69-489a-a56c-32ef30f808e0
>>>> @q7g2000pbj.googlegroups.co
>>>>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 7:44 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 07:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >On Sep 22, 7:29 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On Sep 21, 4:18 pm, RD Sandman
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> You Liberals want to allow the
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>forcing >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>of > religiou >>>>>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> schools to follow government
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>dictates >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>on > birth con >>>>>>>>>>> trol
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and abortion
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, this is what you imagine.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> but you don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> allow a child to transfer to that
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> religious school >>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> you say you can control and
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>regulate?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, I don't want my tax money used to
>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignoran >>>>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> religion to impressionable young
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>people. >>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Besides, it unconstitutional. We know
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>how much you conservatives hold to
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>the >> constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Then why do Liberals stop following
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>the > constitution >>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> other issues?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> What would conservatives know about
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> It still works...
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > ....because it is a living
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Is that why Obama signed a bill allowing >>>> military
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> impriso >>>>>>>>>>> nment
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> of citizens suspected of terrorism?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> he is just trying to attract conservative
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> voters.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Is that why he did it?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Obama has spent years trying to "reach
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>across the aisle" and work with Republicans,
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>only to get rebuffed.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Republicans not only reject Obama's ideas,
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>they reject their OWN ideas if Obama happens
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>to agree with them.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Oh! I understand now!
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Condemning American citizens to military prison
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>without trial >>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>mere SUSPICION of terrorist activity is Obama's
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>way >>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>"reachi >>>>>>>>>>> ng
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>across the aisle!"
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>Sadly, he is doing the same evil think that >>>> Cheney/Bush
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>did. At least he hasn't started any new wars
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>through lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> Yeah, continuing the old one is killing just as
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> many people. Go >>>>>>>>>>> od
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> job, Obama!
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> If Obama ends Bush's wars he is "surrendering
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> to the terrorists". If he continues them he is
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> "sacrificing our troops".
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Excuse me, but Obama is scaling down Iraq on Bush's
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> schedule and >>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> was made possible by the surge which Obama opposed.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Afghanista >>>>>>>>>>> n,
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Obama thought, was the "right" war and he escalated
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> it. Bush a >>>>>>>>>>> lso had
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> nothing to do with Egypt, Libya, or the neglect of
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Israel.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Bush bragged about spreading democracy to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Middle East and now that is happening. Why are
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "pro-demcracy" conservatives complaining about it?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > You may have to ask them. I am not complaining about
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > it I am simp >>>>>>>>>>> ly
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > straightening out the record.
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Do they really want Mubarak and Ghaddafi back?
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "We are trying to promote democracy in places that
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > do not have any values for civilized societies,
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > values like respecting minorities and womens rights
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > and independent judiciary and rule of law. How much
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > longer do we not support and fund Sharia democracy?"
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Sarah Palin, Sept 13, 2012
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > --
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be
>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > President,
Discussion subject changed to "Condemning American Citizens to Military Prison Stays is Just Obama "Reaching Across the Aisle" - Mitch Holman" by RD Sandman
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot
>>>>>>>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Obama agreed to throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to >>>>> allow
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined
>>>>>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PRISONS without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife
>>>>>>>>>>>>>does....
>>>>>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance
>>>>> centric.
>>>>>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to
>>>>>>>>>> steal everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential
>>>>> governemtn
>>>>>>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>>>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>>>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they
>>>>>>>> consider essential. There are no superlaws that force them to
>>>>>>>> spend or not spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>>>>>Apparently, then they really don't regard those "essential
>>>>>>>government programs" to be that essential.
>>>>>> Were you under the impression that they had different rules?
>>>>> Where did that not-so brilliant piece of logic come from? What I
>>>>> said was that Obama's view of this country is that it should be
>>>>> government centric. Most conservatives want it to be capitalism
>>>>> centric unless they can get the government to yield to their
>>>>> bidding. In that last respect both parties are equal.
>>>>>> The only time the concept of 'essential government programs'
>>>>>> arises is when they fail to get their spending bills passed in
>>>>>> time for the new budget year. Now, I realize that Congress is
>>>>>> hopelessly incompetent,
>>>>> but
>>>>>> there is no excuse for failing to get the spending bills passed
>>>>>> in 9 months. They failed, of course, this year, but they passed a
>>>>>> stopgap spending bill instead.
>>>>> Or a budget passed in three years.
>>>>>> Congress is hopeless. The Democrats are terrible at their jobs
>>>>>> and the Republicans are proud that they are far worse at it.
>>>>> They are both pretty damn bad. I don't really think one is worse
>>>>> at it than the other, just that the result they are looking for is
>>>>> much different.
>>>>In some ways I think the Republicans are worse. At least with the
>>>>Democrats you know exactly what you are getting - lieing socialist,
>>>>big government thugs and bullys. The Republicans have thier platform
>>>>and thier postions and thier stirring rhetoric, but clearly many in
>>>>the leadership don't beelive it.
>>>>It's one thing to tell me up front you want to fuck me in the ass.
>>>>It's quite another to assure me that you don't and then the first
>>>>chance he gets, out comes the KY.
>>> Republicans have not rolled back government. They grow government
>>> faster than Democrats. They spend more time wanting to tell you what
>>> to do in your bedroom and your boardroom. You have been misled by
>>> your right-wing propaganda ministry.
>> One only needs to look at the running of the country and where debt
>> rises to see which party really runs it up. There is a spreadsheet
>> available that shows that rather vividly going back to 1950. It
>> looks at the makeup of Congress along with who was president and
>> shows that there really is not that much difference between the
>> parties. Something that your 'ministry' doesn't tell you.
> How true, but if you want to get specific...The Democrat turn out to
> be somewhat worse than Republicans.
Somewhat, yes.
> But that's minor, what is clear is that BOTH parties are fully
> involved in funding up our debt and spending money we don't have.
Bingo!!
> Somehow I doubt Lunch's partisanship will allow him to acknowledge
> that.
Much like that deregulation timeline I insert in here from time to time when BDS gets to be too rampant.
--
Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns >>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot >>>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>> agreed >>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to
>>>>>>>>>>> allow warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the
>>>>>>>>>>> cops imagined >>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY
>>>>>>>>>> PRISONS without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance
>>>>>>>centric.
>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to
>>>>>> steal everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential
>>>>>governemtn progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those
>>>>>essential governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>Yeah, pity we haven't had a budget in 3 years to know what those
>>>priorities are.
>> Tell me why you think it makes a difference.
>>>>>You are a vomitous little worm.
>>>> So you say, but your inability to understand reality clearly
>>>> undermines the effectiveness of your petty insults.
>>>They are only petty in that they refer top a petty thug like you.
> 1) It's the law.
> 2) By not passing abudget how much spending is not documented?
None, but it isn't planned or alloted either.
> 3) In the public interest to know what the governm,ent is spending on.
It is some of that transparency that Obama promised but hasn't delivered on.
> 4) The fact that you have to ask says volumes about you, none of which
> is good.
--
Democracy means that anyone can grow up to be President,
And anyone who doesn't grow up can be Vice President.
>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>> >>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>> >>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>> >>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>> >>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns :
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot
>> >>>>>>>Act.
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>> >>>>>>>>>>>> agreed to throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>> >>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to
>> >allow
>> >>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>> >>>>>>>>>>> imagined
>> >>>>>>>that
>> >>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>> >>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY >> >>>>>>>>>> PRISONS
>> >>>>>>>>>> without any proof of guilt?
>> >>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>> >>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>> >>>>>>>> Not at all.
>> >>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance
>> >centric.
>> >>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to >> >>>>>> steal
>> >>>>>> everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>> >>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential >> >>>>>governemtn
>> >>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>> >>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>> >>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>> >>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>> >>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>> >>>Apparently, then they really don't regard those "essential government
>> >>>programs" to be that essential.
>> >> Were you under the impression that they had different rules?
>> >Where did that not-so brilliant piece of logic come from? What I said
>> >was that Obama's view of this country is that it should be government
>> >centric.
>> That is not accurate, but it has nothing to do with what essential
>> government services are.
>> >Most conservatives want it to be capitalism centric unless they
>> >can get the government to yield to their bidding. In that last respect
>> >both parties are equal.
>> >> The only time the concept of 'essential government programs' arises is
>> >> when they fail to get their spending bills passed in time for the new
>> >> budget year. Now, I realize that Congress is hopelessly incompetent, >> >> but
>> >> there is no excuse for failing to get the spending bills passed in 9
>> >> months. They failed, of course, this year, but they passed a stopgap
>> >> spending bill instead.
>> >Or a budget passed in three years.
>> But, as you know, the budget is just a planning document and does not
>> have a force of law.
>> >> Congress is hopeless. The Democrats are terrible at their jobs and the
>> >> Republicans are proud that they are far worse at it.
>> >They are both pretty damn bad. I don't really think one is worse at it
>> >than the other, just that the result they are looking for is much
>> >different.
>> The GOP seems not to care if government destroys things.
> Wrong.
> The GOP WANTS government to destroy thing because it fulfills their
> belief that government is bad.
What is it about pinkies and making stupid statements ?
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns >>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot >>>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>> agreed >>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to allow
>>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>>> imagined >>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY PRISONS
>>>>>>>>>> without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance centric.
>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to steal
>>>>>> everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential governemtn
>>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>Yeah, pity we haven't had a budget in 3 years to know what those
>>>priorities are.
>> Tell me why you think it makes a difference.
>>>>>You are a vomitous little worm.
>>>> So you say, but your inability to understand reality clearly
>>>> undermines the effectiveness of your petty insults.
>>>They are only petty in that they refer top a petty thug like you.
>1) It's the law.
Not really.
>2) By not passing abudget how much spending is not documented?
None. The spending bills document the authorization.
>3) In the public interest to know what the governm,ent is spending on.
That is what the spending bills show us (except for all of the
super-secret stuff for defense and NSA and stuff).
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns >>>> :
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot >>>>>>>> Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>>> agreed >>>> to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to allow
>>>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined >>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY PRISONS
>>>>>>>>>>> without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>> Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>> He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance centric.
>>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to steal
>>>>>>> everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>> Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential governemtn
>>>>>> progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>>> governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>> Yeah, pity we haven't had a budget in 3 years to know what those
>>>> priorities are.
>>> Tell me why you think it makes a difference.
>>>>>> You are a vomitous little worm.
>>>>> So you say, but your inability to understand reality clearly
>>>>> undermines the effectiveness of your petty insults.
>>>> They are only petty in that they refer top a petty thug like you.
>> 1) It's the law.
> Not really.
>> 2) By not passing abudget how much spending is not documented?
> None. The spending bills document the authorization.
>> 3) In the public interest to know what the governm,ent is spending on.
> That is what the spending bills show us (except for all of the
> super-secret stuff for defense and NSA and stuff).
>> 4) The fact that you have to ask says volumes about you, none of which is >> good.
It's a LACK of leadership.....
It's a poor business practice.
And Obama is neither a leader or a businessman so why would we expect
any more of him?
>>>>>>>>>>> Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>> news:a9430e15-da69-489a-a56c-32ef30f808e0
>>>>> @q7g2000pbj.googlegroups.co
>>>>>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 7:44 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 07:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >On Sep 22, 7:29 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On Sep 21, 4:18 pm, RD Sandman
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> You Liberals want to allow the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>forcing >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>of > religiou >>>>>>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> schools to follow government
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>dictates >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>on > birth con >>>>>>>>>>>> trol
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and abortion
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, this is what you imagine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> but you don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> allow a child to transfer to that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> religious school >>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> you say you can control and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>regulate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, I don't want my tax money used to
>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignoran >>>>>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> religion to impressionable young
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>people. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Besides, it unconstitutional. We know
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>how much you conservatives hold to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>the >> constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Then why do Liberals stop following
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>the > constitution >>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> other issues?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> What would conservatives know about
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> It still works...
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > ....because it is a living
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Is that why Obama signed a bill allowing >>>>> military
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> impriso >>>>>>>>>>>> nment
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> of citizens suspected of terrorism?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> he is just trying to attract conservative
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> voters.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Is that why he did it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Obama has spent years trying to "reach
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>across the aisle" and work with Republicans,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>only to get rebuffed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Republicans not only reject Obama's ideas,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>they reject their OWN ideas if Obama happens
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>to agree with them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Oh! I understand now!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Condemning American citizens to military prison
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>without trial >>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>mere SUSPICION of terrorist activity is Obama's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>way >>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>"reachi >>>>>>>>>>>> ng
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>across the aisle!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>Sadly, he is doing the same evil think that >>>>> Cheney/Bush
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>did. At least he hasn't started any new wars
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>through lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> Yeah, continuing the old one is killing just as
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> many people. Go >>>>>>>>>>>> od
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> job, Obama!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> If Obama ends Bush's wars he is "surrendering
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> to the terrorists". If he continues them he is
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> "sacrificing our troops".
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Excuse me, but Obama is scaling down Iraq on Bush's
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> schedule and >>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> was made possible by the surge which Obama opposed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Afghanista >>>>>>>>>>>> n,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Obama thought, was the "right" war and he escalated
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> it. Bush a >>>>>>>>>>>> lso had
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> nothing to do with Egypt, Libya, or the neglect of
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Israel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Bush bragged about spreading democracy to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Middle East and now that is happening. Why are
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "pro-demcracy" conservatives complaining about it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > You may have to ask them. I am not complaining about
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > it I am simp >>>>>>>>>>>> ly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > straightening out the record.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Do they really want Mubarak and Ghaddafi back?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "We are trying to promote democracy in places that
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > do not have any values for civilized societies,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > values like respecting minorities and womens rights
>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > and independent
Discussion subject changed to "Condemning American Citizens to Military Prison Stays is Just Obama "Reaching Across the Aisle" - Mitch Holman" by Gray Guest
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 16:32:55 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
>>>>>>>>> <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>> alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>On 9/21/2012 3:29 PM, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Bret Cahill <Bret_E_Cah...@yahoo.com> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> talk.politics.guns >>>>:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of nutters when BushCo signed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Patriot >>>>>>>>Act.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And not one peep out of the leftist shriekers when Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>>> agreed >>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>> throw CITIZENS into jail based on mere suspicion.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Who appointed the lone dissenter in the Scalia opinion to allow
>>>>>>>>>>>> warrentless searches in your home 'n hearth if the cops
>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined >>>>>>>>that
>>>>>>>>>>>> you might be destroying evidence?
>>>>>>>>>>> Who voted for IMPRISONING AMERICAN CITIZENS IN MILITARY PRISONS
>>>>>>>>>>> without any proof of guilt?
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah. Obama.
>>>>>>>>>>Obama hates Americans and America like his lovely wife does....
>>>>>>>>> Not at all.
>>>>>>>>He just wants it to be different.....rather more governance centric.
>>>>>>> Why would I prefer a government run by sociopaths who want to steal
>>>>>>> everything they can? That is what the GOP has become.
>>>>>>Says the lunatic who wants to increase taxes for "essential governemtn
>>>>>>progrmas" But whose party hasn't detailed what those essential
>>>>>>governemnt programs are for 3 years.
>>>>> Whatever Congress chooses to spend money on is what they consider
>>>>> essential. There are no superlaws that force them to spend or not
>>>>> spend. The spending bills are the laws.
>>>>Yeah, pity we haven't had a budget in 3 years to know what those
>>>>priorities are.
>>> Tell me why you think it makes a difference.
>>>>>>You are a vomitous little worm.
>>>>> So you say, but your inability to understand reality clearly
>>>>> undermines the effectiveness of your petty insults.
>>>>They are only petty in that they refer top a petty thug like you.
>>1) It's the law.
> Not really.
You ignorant fuck.
Where exactly does the government get the authority to spend funds without Congressional authorization?
>>2) By not passing abudget how much spending is not documented?
> None. The spending bills document the authorization.
Which seem to not have been passed. No budget, no authorizations. Is that clear enough for you?
>>3) In the public interest to know what the governm,ent is spending on.
> That is what the spending bills show us (except for all of the
> super-secret stuff for defense and NSA and stuff).
Which spending bills?
>>4) The fact that you have to ask says volumes about you, none of which is >>good.
>> Obama is neither a leader or a businessman so why would we expect
> This is America, Shit-for-brains: democratic republics aren't supposed
> to have leaders. Grow up, and take control of your own life.
Someone has to oversee this mammoth government with all the lands it
manages and the people it employs.....
Obama is about as useless as teats on a lesbian.
Obama is a community agitator, he does nothing but incite hatred.
That's only useful in a time of war and even then only useful when
directed against the enemy. Looks like Obama has designated the
American people as the enemy, because that who he is trying to agitate
into hating one another.
--
*Rumination*
#5 - You can't have Social Justice and Equal Justice at the same time,
they are 'mutually exclusive'.
> >> Obama is neither a leader or a businessman so why would we expect
> > This is America, Shit-for-brains: democratic republics aren't supposed
> > to have leaders. Grow up, and take control of your own life.
> Someone has to oversee this mammoth government with all the lands it
> manages and the people it employs.....
Yes, and that's called "the people." The USA was never supposed to
have any leaders, let alone a leader.
-- "I think he believes error bars are where people like him who
are consistently wrong go to drink."
> >> Obama is neither a leader or a businessman so why would we expect
> > This is America, Shit-for-brains: democratic republics aren't supposed
> > to have leaders. Grow up, and take control of your own life.
> Someone has to oversee this mammoth government with all the lands it
> manages and the people it employs.....
Yes, and that's called "the people." The USA was never supposed to
have any leaders, let alone a leader.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in
>>>>>>>>>>>> news:a9430e15-da69-489a-a56c-32ef30f808e0
>>>>>> @q7g2000pbj.googlegroups.co
>>>>>>>>>>>> m:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sep 22, 7:44 am, Free Lunch <lu...@nofreelunch.us>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 07:32:12 -0700 (PDT), Joe Bruno
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <ajta...@cox.net> wrote in alt.atheism:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >On Sep 22, 7:29 am, Joe Bruno <ajta...@cox.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> On Sep 21, 4:18 pm, RD Sandman
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> <rdsandman[spamremove]@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> You Liberals want to allow the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>forcing >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>of > religiou >>>>>>>>>>>>> s
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> schools to follow government
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>dictates >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>on > birth con >>>>>>>>>>>>> trol
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and abortion
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, this is what you imagine.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> but you don't want to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> allow a child to transfer to that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> religious school >>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> you say you can control and
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>regulate?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> No, I don't want my tax money used
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >to >>>>>> teach
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> ignoran >>>>>>>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> religion to impressionable young
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>people. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> Besides, it unconstitutional. We
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >know >>>>how much you conservatives
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >hold to >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>the >> constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Then why do Liberals stop following
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>the > constitution >>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>>> other issues?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >>> What would conservatives know
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >about >> the Constitution?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> >> It still works...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > ....because it is a living
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> > constitution.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> Is that why Obama signed a bill allowing >>>>>> military
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> impriso >>>>>>>>>>>>> nment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>>> of citizens suspected of terrorism?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> he is just trying to attract conservative
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>>> voters.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>> Is that why he did it?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Obama has spent years trying to "reach
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>across the aisle" and work with Republicans,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>only to get rebuffed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> Republicans not only reject Obama's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>> ideas, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>they reject their OWN ideas if Obama happens
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>>to agree with them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Oh! I understand now!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Condemning American citizens to military
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>prison without trial >>>>>>>>>>>>> on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>mere SUSPICION of terrorist activity is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>Obama's way >>>>>> of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>"reachi >>>>>>>>>>>>> ng
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>>across the aisle!"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>Sadly, he is doing the same evil think that >>>>>> Cheney/Bush
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>did. At least he hasn't started any new wars
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>>>through lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> Yeah, continuing the old one is killing just as
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> many people. Go >>>>>>>>>>>>> od
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>>> job, Obama!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> If Obama ends Bush's wars he is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> "surrendering to the terrorists". If he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >>> continues them he is "sacrificing our troops".
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Excuse me, but Obama is scaling down Iraq on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Bush's schedule and >>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> was made possible by the surge which Obama
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> opposed. Afghanista >>>>>>>>>>>>> n,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> Obama thought, was the "right" war and he
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> escalated it. Bush a >>>>>>>>>>>>> lso had
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> nothing to do with Egypt, Libya, or the neglect
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > >> of Israel.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Bush bragged about spreading democracy to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > Middle East and now that is happening. Why are
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> > > "pro-demcracy" conservatives complaining about
