by Jack
Maybe ol’ Al Hamilton had it right, that the administration of a nation like ours is too important to be left to common voters (dems). He felt they (low info voters) often acted foolishly and he wanted to raise voting qualifications. I say this only in the context that low info voters elected Barrack Obama. Now, we have another election and the voters have allowed Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton to be front runners…could they possibly do it again to us?
Aside from Obama, Sanders and Clinton are two of the least qualified people every to seek this office; yet if the dumb voters could elect an incompetent bungler like Barack Obama, they could easily be fooled into electing a Clinton or Sanders.
If there is any recompense here, it’s that we’ve seen the worst of them already, under Obama. That won’t be much of a consolation if either of the other two boneheads are elected, but one could argue its at least a baby step in the right direction.
Obama is a community organizer, born in the mold of ACORN (Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now). He has little regard for, or understanding of, law enforcement or the military. He’s all about using socialism to advantage what he feels are the oppressed minorities. He has no clue about the duties and responsibilities of our uniformed services and is loath to support them. He’s painfully demonstrated in Afghanistan and Iraq how a bungler in the White House could undue hard won gains.
On Face the Nation, Senate Intelligence Chair, Richard Burr said, “We’ve got to have a strategy. We don’t have a strategy in Syria as it relates to ISIS. The president talked the other morning about ISIS being contained. America learned within 24 hours that it’s not contained, it’s rampant.” President Obama announced he would send 50 Special Forces troops to Syria to aid rebel groups in the region, but Nunes said such measures are inadequate to deal with the problem.
“You can’t fight ISIS unless you are willing to put a strategy together that deals with the failure of Libya, the problems in the Sinai, Iraq and Syria and Afghanistan-Pakistan region,” he added.
Obama’s current ISIS policy, involves using a small number of American advisers, to facilitate “Arab” boots on the ground to fight ISIS. This is conjunction with limited tactical airstrikes and a collation of Middle Eastern nations that may not like us, but like ISIS even less. Clinton’s plan and Bernie’s plan deviate little from Obama’s plan and Obama’s plan is an utter failure, 4 more years of it won’t help.
If Clinton or Sanders get elected expect more San Bernardino’s.
Outstanding post!
“could they possibly do it again to us?”
Yes
“Sanders and Clinton are two of the least qualified people every to seek this office”
Hillary has experience as a qualified miserably failed Secretary of State. She thinks she should be POTUS? In a pig’s eye (euphemism intended).
“He [Obama] has little regard for, or understanding of, law enforcement or the military.”
BINGO!
On Face the Nation, Senate Intelligence Chair, Richard Burr said, “We’ve got to have a strategy. We don’t have a strategy in Syria as it relates to ISIS. The president talked the other morning about ISIS being contained. America learned within 24 hours that it’s not contained, it’s rampant.”
What more need be said? Obama is a fool.
“If Clinton or Sanders get elected expect more San Bernardino’s.”
Expect more as long as Obama is in office.
How will Clinton differ from Obama on foreign policy?
So your bottom line is that if the uneducated vote for anyone other than Sanders or Clinton we will have fewer terrorist attacks inside the United States. Got it 🙂 I’ll vote the way you want so I don’t have to educate myself. And thanks! I no longer need spend hours listening to Rush and Fox. This is the best Christmas gift ever! And I didn’t get you anything, except for my uneducated vote. Happy Holidays!
Talk talk talk. This is the “strategy” of Obama and Clinton. Bernie too. He can’t wait to shove passed the issue to expound on the dangers of global warming, income inequality and campaign finance reform.
Your front runner for the last several months has been Donald Trump. Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Chris, We don’t have the power to “judge.”
Like you, we do have the power to evaluate and make decisions based on what we have observed. We have the right to share what we have observed and our opinions and thoughts. Free speech.
If you’d like to share your thoughts about Trump, be our guest.
My point was that if Jack is going to judge all Democrats as “low information voters” due to Hilary and Bernie being the front runners, then he should make the same judgments of Republicans for the ascent of Trump.
Actually he could do it based on the republican votes for Obama as well. And the Republicans that stayed home last election.
Not sure you can judge in the same way. Bernie and Hillary have very questionable political records. Trumps record is one of support for both parties.
As much as I despise Trump, I’ll take him over any Democrat candidate. I only hope it does not come down to that.
As far as judgement goes, people without it are lunatics or fools. I judge all the time. I judge a person who asserts by way of argument in the political realm “Judge not, lest ye be judged” to be a pompous fool who pretends to be Jesus.
Nowhere in the blog post did Jack “judge” or assert all Democrats are “low information voters.” I would venture to guess that the vast majority are low information and the rest are vacant ideologues with an axe to grind.
Pie: “Nowhere in the blog post did Jack “judge” or assert all Democrats are “low information voters.”
Yes, he did, in literally the first two sentences:
Jack: “Maybe ol’ Al Hamilton had it right, that the administration of a nation like ours is too important to be left to common voters (dems). He felt they (low info voters) often acted foolishly and he wanted to raise voting qualifications.”
Is English your second language, English major? To a low intelligence stooge like you those two sentences read all Democrats are low information voters?
Idiot.
The absence of a qualifier implies “all;” you’re educated and intelligent enough to know this, so I don’t know why you constantly pretend not to be.
If I said “Republicans are low information voters,” that would obviously imply that all Republicans are low information voters. (For the record, I wouldn’t say this, because I don’t believe it.)
I love how Obama, himself, is your personal nemesis, and any deficiencies at the DHS merely incidental.
Libby does it occur to you that this is Obama’s DHS.
I know if Bush were in office, and you were being critical, it would be his.
You are in the hot seat. Surely you can do better…or can you? The overall record is pretty bad.
Yep Lib fair is fair. Bush owns all that happened on his watch as does Obama.
Tina, I’d like to know your thoughts on handling ISIS. As it is today, never mind how we got where we are. If you support our nation taking point on this mess how do we clean it up?
Also, I’d like to read your take on the shooting in Paradise.
Re : “any deficiencies at the DHS merely incidental”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jm3zV1pCTQ8
Really good article.
Transitioning to the Post-Obama Era:
“How will the country wake up from its coma in 2016 to reality in 2017?
Next year the lame-duck, legacy-starved Obama administration will double down on its executive orders, bureaucratic fiats, and circumvention of the law. Obama will seek to fundamentally transform America, contrary to law, effecting change in ways he was not able to by adhering to the law.The media, as it has the past seven years, will not only ignore the illegality, but also rationalize and commend it.
Then comes 2017.”
Continued..
https://pjmedia.com/victordavishanson/the-post-obama-era
Pete I’m not an expert in military or diplomatic strategy, as you know. Asking me to speak specifically to this problem has to be, therefore, considered within that context. My overall political position is that we have made a mistake in taking the appeasement route, particularly when it was vital to remain the strong horse after striking such a defining blow to al Qaeda in Iraq. We absolutely blew it when we backed away and took on a weak face. But I will try to answer your question anyway.
The first thing I would do is publicly speak in clear terms to articulate America’s intent to defeat ISIS. I would follow up periodically to inform the public on our progress and any changes in approach. It’s imperative to have the public behind the mission and supportive of whatever troops are in the field. A leader, the president, has an obligation to do this.
I would dispatch our diplomats to assess damage with our traditional allies and determine their thoughts on the way forward as well as their level of commitment. I would follow up as a strategy formed. I believe many of our allies would be more willing now to participate in a plan to defeat ISIS and other terror organizations than they were after 911…also relieved that America regained a posture of strength and determination.
I would reverse the PC language in training manuals so that those who need to exchange information and train won’t have to spend energy being cautious in their communications.
I would change the rules of engagement so that our military can fight without their hands being tied behind their backs.
I would consult with top generals, the CIA and FBI and determine the best strategy based on what they advise.
The overall strategy should contain methods and tactics to cut off funding and support and demoralize the enemy.
Ideas I would consider:
I would try to draw on the mistakes of both previous administrations.
I don’t know specifics but I would do what it takes to damage ISIS’ funding and recruitment outreach. There has to be creative ways to achieve this end. Exposing the evil they perpetrate in the name of Islam would be one possible tactic. Use social media to specifically highlight cruel practices, attitudes toward women, and harm done to children. Expose the brutality and shame on the basis of the Islamic teaching about doing harm to even one person being as if it has been done to all of humanity.
Armed with a sensible military and diplomatic strategy I would seek to regain support from Sunnis in Iraq, Syria, and Turkey to eradicate ISIS and possibly the Alawite regime in Damascus.
I would intensify air strikes.
I would reverse Obama’s “no boots on the ground” policy and send in targeted special forces units. As one adviser noted, “Experience shows that “combat advisers” fighting alongside indigenous troops are far more effective than trainers confined to large bases.
I would create a no-fly-zone over part of Syria and announce that no Syrian aircraft would be allowed over these “safe zones.” That would signal our commitment to Sunni’s and help garner assistance from Turkey and other Arab states.
At this point it would take an enormous effort, but I would determine to engage and gain support from and mobilize Sunni forces. Addressing Sunni fears of betrayal, the United States should promise to indefinitely maintain advise-and-assist forces in Iraq. If the Iraqi government objects I would maintain that presence in the
Kurdish area. The goal in Syria would be to ensure that Syrian territory is not controlled by Shiite or Sunni extremists.
Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution has suggested, “[T]he U.S. should provide most of the muscle, the Gulf states most of the money, and the international community most of the know-how.”
This basic approach would require a long term commitment. The alternative is money, lives and treasure spent anyway without a way forward to an end.
I don’t think I know enough yet to speak about the shooting in Paradise. I will say that news reports certainly seem to point to a need for further investigation.
Once more we have a post that combines Obama, Islam and ISIS (or ISIL, Dash, whatever) and the inevitable resulting death’s on our soil should Obamas ineffective policies continue.
The following is from a recent article read that really ask some good questions about why Americans are being scolded by Obama for just being victims.
“Muslim terrorists have been killing Americans with regularity going back to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, continuing through 9/11, the Boston Massacre, Fort Hood, the Beltway Sniper, San Bernardino and many other attacks in between.
Obama isn’t lecturing Muslims to stop attacks on Americans. Instead, he’s lecturing the victims not to retaliate, not to think mean thoughts about the perpetrators, not to show any signs of what he likes to call Islamophobia.
He said, in his weekly address to the nation last weekend, Americans should not turn against one another by letting this fight be defined as a war between America and Islam, because that’s what ISIS wants, because that attitude will undermine national security.”
“Terrorists like ISIL are trying to divide us along lines of religion and background,” he said. “That’s how they stoke fear. That’s how they recruit. And just as Muslims around the world have to keep rejecting any twisted interpretation of Islam, all of us have to reject bigotry – in all its forms. I’ll say it again, prejudice and discrimination helps ISIL and it undermines our national security.”
(My thoughts were yet he has had no problem in dividing this country in a social political manner himself, interesting parallel)
Not only is Obama not taking the fight in any meaningful way to ISIS, he’s blaming the victims here at home for being angry and scared about the attacks.
Why is he being so condescending to Americans like this?
Americans have been taking in the shorts from Islamic terrorists for more than 20 years, and they show no signs of going vigilante. There’s no evidence of “hate crimes” being perpetrated against Muslims in America, which is astonishing when you think about what we have endured. Yet, Americans are lectured constantly about their predilection toward bigotry.
How about some attention directed toward the Muslim world and its tolerance of, if not direct support for, terrorism as a means to an end?
Instead, let me tell you some of the statements Obama has made about Islam in recent years:
• “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”
• “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer.”
• “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world – including in my own country.”
• “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.”
• “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”
• “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”
• “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”
• “I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.”
• “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.”
• “In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.”
• “Throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”
• “Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality.”
• “That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”
While Obama has been sucking up to Islam for all these years, maybe it’s time to ask the following questions:
How has the Islamic world responded to all the flattery, adulation, obsequiousness, boot-licking and appeasement?
Could it be that Obama’s see-no-evil, hear-no-evil, speak-no-evil approach toward Islam just isn’t working?
While Obama warns Americans not to turn on Islam, is it possible he hasn’t noticed Islam has turned on us?”
Agree or disagree, there are some interesting questions in this article
Harold: “Obama isn’t lecturing Muslims to stop attacks on Americans.”
No, he’s not lecturing “Muslims,” but neither did Bush; he does speak often against groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda.
Many of the quoted statements from Obama about Islam are very similar to what Bush said about Islam. I had my problems with Bush, but at least he understood that a war between Islam and the West is exactly what the terrorists want, and that cultivating a positive relationship with moderate Muslims is an important strategy in the fight against extremism. If both Bush and Obama can agree on that, why can’t you see it?
“There’s no evidence of “hate crimes” being perpetrated against Muslims in America”
Whoever wrote this is an uninformed idiot. There have been numerous attacks on mosques and Muslims since the Paris attack.
https://www.rt.com/usa/323148-muslims-attacks-violence-america/
Excellent point Harold! You ask:
“While Obama warns Americans not to turn on Islam, is it possible he hasn’t noticed Islam has turned on us?”
After reading the long list of kind words for Islam, and after enduring years of abusive criticism both as an American and as a conservative, and after watching attacks on the police officers and disdain shown to our military (refusing purple hearts to victims at Fort Hood, egregious betrayal of Glen Doherty, Tyrone Woods, and Chris Stevens, stupid rules of engagement…) I have trouble believing he is on the side of America at all. Instead he seems to be a man with a private agenda, and a vindictive one at that. It does not please me to be saying that about the President of the United States…not one bit…but here we are at the end of 2015. The record is there for anyone who has paid attention. Next year, an election year, he will do what he can to shore up a positive legacy and appear to the voters as a winner. Smoke and mirrors for the low information voter.
Tina, while I will agree that attacks on Muslims is a growing concern in America since Paris and now San Bernardino, (most all being reported after San Bernardino) and after this writer posted his article, calling the writer a uninformed idiot is just a attempt to degrade the message of “Who is Obama”. The timing of the writers comment immediately seemed to follow San Bernardino and prior to now reported attacks that took place later.
If anything it pointed out the restrain Americans have shown up to now, considering the increased numbers of these murders on our soil
Clearly Chris attempted to misdirect the writers message, by using immature statements,;
It should be noted for a awhile Chris stopped this practice, mostly governed by fear of being excluded from the PS blog I would guess, but of late he seems to be ramping up again, sad to see someone who claims to have such a high degree of intelligence resort to such childish name calling.
Chris use of a out of context quote about “No, he’s not lecturing “Muslims,” is weak attempt PS readers will see through immediately, the incomplete statement of “Obama isn’t lecturing Muslims, but neither did Bush, suggests to me that “it’s Bush’s fault” is still a favorite retort of liberals not being able to accept it really was Americas problem as a whole, and Bush did something to contain it and prevent more slaughter on American soil, Obama has let it esculate
At some point they have to accept once Obama accepted the oath of office what happens after that is the failure of Obamas approach to Jihadist Islamic haltered toward America.
Had Chris made a comment about the complete statement he would not have been able to inject Bush into it. Well maybe not, tempered Liberals find a way
The complete sentence “Obama isn’t lecturing Muslims to stop attacks on Americans. Instead, he’s lecturing the victims not to retaliate, not to think mean thoughts about the perpetrators, not to show any signs of what he likes to call Islamophobia” (and that comment has nothing to do with Bush) ,is a stand alone cometary about how Obama is ineffectively dealing with rising tension of safety in America.
Obamas failed forging policies and now refugee importation will only fuel more of these murders anywhere and at anytime in America.
The more I read certain replies that contain snippy misdirection, the more I realize the article touched another raw liberal nerve.
Harold is right on target. Americans have shown the greatest restraint possible given the numbers of Muslim fanatics that have attacked us. But, that doesn’t stop the liberal handwringers from obsessing over fears that somewhere, someone might attack a Muslim in retaliation. The liberals have shown more concern over the possibility of attacks on Muslims than for the real attacks on American citizens that took lives! Stupid liberals – they always have the wrong priorities.
Harold, I didn’t take anything out of context. Here’s the full context of the quote according to you:
“Obama isn’t lecturing Muslims to stop attacks on Americans. Instead, he’s lecturing the victims not to retaliate, not to think mean thoughts about the perpetrators, not to show any signs of what he likes to call Islamophobia”
And my point was, as described, this was exactly the strategy of George W. Bush.
Now of course Obama’s overall strategy hasn’t been exactly the same as Bush’s, but this particular criticism applies to both of them.
I’m also clearly not saying it’s “Bush’s fault;” I think it’s a good strategy! “Lecturing Muslims,” as a group, would be completely counter-productive, and play right into the hands of ISIS.
As far as “lecturing the victims not to retaliate,” I don’t agree with that phrasing. We as a country have retaliated, and we should–against the terrorists, not Muslims as a whole. It makes sense to speak against both the terrorists and those at home who would do harm to Muslims (or even those who look Muslim to ignorant people–let’s not forget the Sikhs who’ve been attacked by idiots who thought they were Muslims) under the guise of “retaliation.” Both are wrong, and both should be strongly condemned, and both Bush and Obama have done so, frequently.
Islamophobia is a real problem. Not quite as big a problem as radical Islamic terrorism, of course–but that doesn’t mean we should ignore it. One of the few things I admired about Bush is that he also thought that problem was worth addressing. I’d hate to see the right fall so far that Bush is seen as “liberal” in his views on Muslims, but that’s exactly what will happen if Trump has his way.
Chris says: “Harold, I didn’t take anything out of context. Here’s the full context of the quote (post of original sentence) according to you”:
yes Chris you did cherry pick the words, and if you claim it was not an attempt to misdirect, why not post the sentence completely in the first place, then comment on it.
(Rhetorical question)
First, I am not disagreeing that Bush made several positive statements about Islam the religion, and that there are a common similarity between Bush’s and Obama’s remarks, and that hate crimes toward others of any beliefs has not been tolerated by either of them. I will point out that due to timing, Bush made them first. :)
However, I do not recall (and I am positive if they’re out there you will correct me) Bush sounding “critical” of Americans being overly alert to any reoccurring danger from any possible attackers.
Today, possibly more so than in Bush’s term, we have good reason to be concerned of danger here on our soil, the most critical is we are not as united now as then, and for this I do blame Obama.
I agree with the articles author that Obama’s words are condemning Americans about so many things, currently is it is a fear of far left Islamic based murderers .
Obama’s has demonstrated a thin skinned scolding of Americans, and it has been well documented, his remark regarding islamophobia was just another of them.
Anyway, the only reason I addressed your reply about your selective use of sentences is, and I do believe this to be creditable , you try to redirect the meaning of others comments for reasons other than a point counter point discussion.
Your style in numerous replies seems to more of a game with you, more so than a meaningful discussion about the post.
Tina, Thanks for your thoughts on Isis. I’m still trying to decide if it’s a cause worth sending my children to die for. For me Iraq never came close to meeting this basic standard for war, but that’s water under the bridge. Isis would love a WW lll and that’s something I’d rather avoid.
No opinions on Paradise? You should watch the video. It’s really a sad story where all involved are cut down by their mistakes.
Pete, something has gone terribly, terribly wrong with cop training in this country.
They don’t take time; they don’t think … and it would only take one breath, and three seconds, to realize that maybe you’re not going to need your gun to deal with a drunk guy who’s just rolled over his truck.
It would seem they are not trained to take that breath.
Lawyers and doctors, even fire fighters do “continuing education”‘ but cops don’t. Chiefly cause we won’t pay for it. If the all had to do a week here and a week there (at one of them resort places the radiologists go to) physically, and emotionally, running scenarios, this would be good. But we won’t pay for it.
Lawyers and doctors, even fire fighters do “continuing education”‘ but cops don’t.”
Are you sure about that?
Jack can you clarify.
The public needs major retraining. Most of the incidents, if not all, involve people who have not been trained to be civil much less aware of the proper behavior when confronted by the police. Or they involve people on drugs or alcohol who do stupid erratic things. Kids are especially vulnerable because they get their training from movies where being a bad a$$ and taking on “the man” is to be admired.
There are undoubtedly a few bad cops. There are thousands of uncivil, ill-mannered, ignorant, criminally minded people whose parents and peers have made excuses and refused to grow up. There are 33,000 gangs operating in America and there are thousands of subset gangster wannabe’s and low life’s running around acting the part. It’s criminal what we’ve allowed to happen to the youths of this country.
Putting this all on cops, who put their lives on the line every day, is ridiculous. As usual the left looks for a cause to cover for the mess they’ve made in our society: generally having low expectations, indulging and excusing bad behaviors, encouraging risky behaviors, celebrating perpetual youth, and blaming the good responsible guys by creating a class (blue) to turn against instead of treating each incident individually AND telling the truth about what happened.
We on the right in America are saying enough! If we want a better outcome much more needs to be done than retraining for cops.
Tina, how many times do you have to be reminded?
The Viet Cong got “intensified” for years … ten, I think.
Who won that little skirmish?
You do not think.
Or, you are simply insane … whichever.
(Now, she will tell us that if we had bombed North Vietnam for 20 years, it would be a happy bastion of the free market today!)
Insane.
Remember, Libby, Vietnam was totally justified. As was Japanese internment, rejecting Jewish refugees in WWII, McCarthyism, torture, indefinite detention, spying (but only under Bush), and of course, the Iraq War.
Anyone who says otherwise just doesn’t love America hard enough to see the truth.
Stupid ***holes are like birds, they flock together. They conflate, they scorn, they lie, they misrepresent. They think their sh** smells like roses.
No need to remind me of anything Libby. You can keep your hippy dippy version of Vietnam. I remember what was done by a bunch of long haired radicals, their drug addled followers, and a leftist anti-war media to undermine our efforts, an astounding betrayal to the young men and women who fought that war. And I remember a CIC who, like the current occupant of the WH, attempted to micromanage the war from the oval office! That would be democrat, LBJ.
Bui Tin, former colonel on the general staff of the North Vietnamese army in a Q and A with the WSJ in 1995:
Q: How did Hanoi intend to defeat the Americans?
A: By fighting a long war which would break their will to help South Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh said, “We don’t need to win military victories, we only need to hit them until they give up and get out.”
Q: Was the American antiwar movement important to Hanoi’s victory?
A: It was essential to our strategy. Support for the war from our rear was completely secure while the American rear was vulnerable. Every day our leadership would listen to world news over the radio at 9 a.m. to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement. Visits to Hanoi by people like Jane Fonda and former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and ministers gave us confidence that we should hold on in the face of battlefield reverses. We were elated when Jane Fonda, wearing a red Vietnamese dress, said at a press conference that she was ashamed of American actions in the war and that she would struggle along with us.
Q: Did the Politburo pay attention to these visits?
A: Keenly
Q: Why?
A: Those people represented the conscience of America. The conscience of America was part of its war-making capability, and we were turning that power in our favor. America lost because of its democracy; through dissent and protest it lost the ability to mobilize a will to win.
Q: What else?
A: We had the impression that American commanders had their hands tied by political factors. Your generals could never deploy a maximum force for greatest military effect.
It’s the same old song.
You do not think like a person who realizes there is evil in the world. You do not think like those who are called to fight for you, have seen that evil up front and personal and know what they are like. In fact you have disdain for them. You believe in a fairly tale, that magical thinking will create “peace” in the world even when chaos and despicable acts are being perpetrated right before your own eyes. You are either a child, insane, or just another typical American enamored with communism. If you were ever forced to live undr that system You’d soon change your mind. it’s a bit troubling that you aren’t moved by those who have and express their experiences. How well have those governments performed over your lifetime? How stupid to make capitalism and freedom the lesser of these choices.
Your arrogant lecturing is amusing but tiresome.
Tina: “I remember what was done by a bunch of long haired radicals, their drug addled followers, and a leftist anti-war media to undermine our efforts, an astounding betrayal to the young men and women who fought that war.”
The “betrayal” of those young men and women was sending them into an illegitimate war of aggression in the first place. And then we made the same mistake in Iraq.
But you’ll never accept that.
You’re welcome to your opinion.
Tell me Chris, is their anything worth fighting for or are you one of those who think just being nice will stop the death march of tyrannical maniacal zealots?
Your nice approach has been in force for seven years…we still see death, we see the expansion of the tyrannical force, and we are not safer or living more peaceful and free lives. I’ll bet you even believe that bad things could never happen here. That’s much like the adolescent who thinks he can get away with being reckless because nothing bad will happen to him.
You weren’t alive in 1963 so the atmosphere of the times is misty and your education decidedly influenced by left thinking.
The communists won the Democrat party, the press, and education in America…not bad. Radicals more sympathetic to the tyranny of communism than the God given right to be free now lead your party. They are pushing for control over all aspects of your life AND UN AUTHORITY! And you pathetically defend and encourage them, buying into the idiocy that conservatives who stand for freedom and equal rights (not special rights for special interests) and justice for all (not justice based on a race or class) are the real threats.
Wake up. Grow up, Chris. The world presents dangers to the most valuable of human rights…freedom! Without that all the others are meaningless!
Tina: “Tell me Chris, is their anything worth fighting for”
Stupid, irrelevant question. Believing that the Vietnam War was unjustified does not indicate belief that all wars are unjustified; off the top of my head, the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, and WWII were all what I’d call “just wars,” or at least the closest things to them.
But you ignore that the war was, as a historical fact, pointless. We did not win the Vietnam War, and yet communism fell. What say you to that? If the Vietnam War was so crucial and just, then why did our lack of victory in said war ultimately mean so little to the overall struggle?
Jack, is a cop to expect restrained behavior from a drink guy who’s just rolled over his truck?
Don’t think so.
The cop, the sober participant, is supposed to be trained to acknowledge and quell the hormonal rush of pursuit, and give the situation some tactical consideration. But, easily, once a week we get another example of that not happening.
Once a week is too often. We can’t make something right until we acknowledge the wrongness.
Oh, and to finish off the other thread … for all that the couple indulged the radical Islamist thing, this was still more “workplace shooting” than anything else.
As long as unhappy people have access to private arsenals, you’re not putting a stop to that.
But if you want to slow things down, make impediments, which party do you support?
Does anyone else notice how simple it is to solve problems for Libby. Just say stop gun violence by removing the ability to buy or sell guns and BINGO the world is a safe place.
How does she explain Chicago?
She doesn’t.
That city, run by Democrats who adopted strict gun laws, demonstrates Libby’s pie-in-the-sky thinking. It makes her feel enlightened and erudite. But Chicago is reality, baby and Libby don’t do reality.
Also notice we must DO SOMETHING about dangerous cops but terrorists we’ll just have to learn to live with.
Workplace violence my Great Aunt Fannie.
City Journal:
December 4, 2014
Irresponsible Presidential messages, militant activism, false newspaper headlines and accounts, non-factual sloganeering (Hands up don’t shoot), and grand proclamations by “experts” in liberal rags all come together and gel to create a false impression. This is a radical progressive tactic in the war to destroy America from within and supplant our Constitution and government with a governing world body. Libby is either a fellow traveler, which she has gleefully claimed in the past, or a willing dupe.
Tina: “false newspaper headlines”
Well, false newspaper headlines are indeed worse than false blog article headlines, but both are awful, wouldn’t you agree?
“NASA: Cutting Down trees and Burning Fossil Fuels Cause Global Cooling!”
http://www.norcalblogs.com/postscripts/2015/12/21/nasa-cutting-trees-burning-fossil-fuels-global-cooling/#comment-63190
Wait a moment Tina, maybe just maybe Libby has knowledge of something
for us to reflect on, maybe these are not just jihadist inspired murders, or workplace violence, they might be serving a higher calling.
Those slandered in America might just be serving a duel purpose.
We Americans, as recently discovered are all nothing more that walking living breathing donors to the faith of Islam.
“The Islamic State’s religious scholars have ruled that taking the organs of non-Muslims is permissible under Islamic law to save the life of a Muslim, because killing apostates to eat their flesh has previously been allowed.”
The revelation comes in a January 2015 document that was captured by U.S. special forces in Syria in May and obtained by Reuters.
The news agency posted a U.S. government translation of the document attributed to the Islamic State’s research and fatwa committee.
“Allah almighty knows what’s best and knows what’s right and what is wrong and there is evidence from texts and Islamic principles and laws supporting the notion that transplanting organs from an apostate’s body into a Muslim body in order to save the latter’s life or replace a damaged organ with it is permissible,” the document reads.
So there you have it, another possible passage which needs to be found and READ (per Pelosi) as a undisclosed part of Obamacare. We have medical importance and as such are necessary through the act of harvesting of our parts ,although heads seemingly to be the exception.
Sarcasm aside, The more we find out, the more vigilant we need to be until these believers to the far left side of Islam are found and eradicated from the face of the world, this type of hatred, pitting one against another or even suggesting using people a medical donors in any sense needs to be a priority of any US administration, and if Obama wont acknowledge Islamic driven terrorism, terrorist or war like acts on our soil, we need to replace him sooner that 2017.
If our safety is nothing to Obama but hyperbole, then he should be even less to us.
Gotcha gotcha gotcha…do you EVER address the point?
Does it interest you at all that NASA found “the earth cooled” in industrial areas where they expected to find warming? What do you think about that?
Does it interest you at all that the AGW “theory” has been placed in doubt?
Are you willing to admit that you have bought the AGW hoax and continue to push the lies associated with it even after being shown evidence to the contrary?
Are you willing to admit that you disparaged ethical, highly educated and qualified people to push the 97% of scientists myth?
See I can play your game too. It’s such a boring game. I’d rather hear your thoughts on NASA’s findings. I wouldn’t even mind considering your correction IF you weren’t such a nasty little snot about it.
When I have a full blown agenda to destroy freedom, our Constitution, our nation, and our way of life I’ll take your niggling abuses to heart. Until then give it up, you’re sounding like a spoiled child demanding a cookie.
Enjoy this adaptation of Rudyard Kipling’s, “The Gods of the Copybook Headings.”
https://www.yabberz.com/post/new/85785495/?highlight=85785495
Tina: “Does it interest you at all that the AGW “theory” has been placed in doubt?”
The findings about aerosols you posted do NOT throw the AGW theory in doubt. This is from the WAWT article you linked to:
“In a NASA first, researchers at GISS accomplished such a feat as they calculated the temperature impact of each of these variables–greenhouse gases, natural and manmade aerosols, ozone concentrations, and land use changes–based on historical observations from 1850 to 2005 using a massive ensemble of computer simulations. Analysis of the results showed that these climate drivers do not necessarily behave like carbon dioxide, which is uniformly spread throughout the globe and produces a consistent temperature response; rather, each climate driver has a particular set of conditions that affects the temperature response of Earth.
The new calculations reveal their complexity, said Kate Marvel, a climatologist at GISS and the paper’s lead author. “Take sulfate aerosols, which are created from burning fossil fuels and contribute to atmospheric cooling,” she said. “They are more or less confined to the northern hemisphere, where most of us live and emit pollution. There’s more land in the northern hemisphere, and land reacts quicker than the ocean does to these atmospheric changes.”
Because earlier studies do not account for what amounts to a net cooling effect for parts of the northern hemisphere, predictions for TCR and ECS have been lower than they should be. This means that Earth’s climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide–or atmospheric carbon dioxide’s capacity to affect temperature change–has been underestimated, according to the study. The result dovetails with a GISS study published last year that puts the TCR value at 3.0°F (1.7° C); the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which draws its TCR estimate from earlier research, places the estimate at 1.8°F (1.0°C).
“If you’ve got a systematic underestimate of what the greenhouse gas-driven change would be, then you’re systematically underestimating what’s going to happen in the future when greenhouse gases are by far the dominant climate driver,” Schmidt said.”
In other words, the new findings show that aerosols have a more localized effect than previously thought, and the warming effect may have been underestimated.
Scientists have always known that aerosols have a cooling effect, they just hadn’t spent a lot of time measuring how much. The answer, according to this study, is not a lot.
That’s literally the exact opposite of what you and others in the right-wing blogosphere claimed the study said.
Pointing out that a study said the exact opposite of what you claimed it said is not “niggling.”
Your claims about climate scientists lying are unconvincing given that the only person here who has been caught perpetrating a hoax is you. Even if you didn’t know originally that NASA said nothing about global cooling, you do know now, and you still won’t correct the story. If it wasn’t an intentional lie before, it is now.
You even say you would “consider” correcting it if I weren’t so gosh darn mean about it. Those are six-year-old ethics. You’re saying the actions of others justify you refusing to tell the truth. You’re saying if I just let you lie with impunity, then maybe you might consider not lying as much. Outrageous, and undignified for a woman your age.
First tell me, 1. What happened as we slunk away from a “won war, Vietnam” and 2. Why “communism fell.”
Hint: It looks very similar to what is happening now in the ME. We see chaos and death and the rise and expansion of ambitious tyrannical regimes. As we appease our enemies and allow ourselves to be bullied by communist left radicals who fight for the other side we become the weak horse.
More Obama appeasement fallout:
Vladimir Putin Sets Stage for WWIII Expands Russia’s Nuclear Weapons Defenses Near Europe
Remember when Obama pulled our plans to place defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, an appeasement move that was supposed to look like a friendly gesture. Instead it emboldened Putin and put several free nations in danger. Obama, and you, believe in the magical thinking of “trust but don’t bother to verify.” A colossal mistake.
Putin Casts Covetous Eyes Sweden and Greece.
The American Thinker – China Warns that War is Inevitable
PBS:
Putin is Developing an Underwater Drone with Nuclear Weapons that Can Target US
Tina: “Remember when Obama pulled our plans to place defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, an appeasement move that was supposed to look like a friendly gesture.”
No, that was not an “appeasement move.” You are, once again, promoting a lie.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/03/28/the-gop-claim-that-obama-scrapped-a-missile-defense-system-as-a-gift-to-putin/
“Those are six-year-old ethics.”
An appropriate foundation when responding to a petty, nasty, unrelenting, out of control six year old bully. Undignified for a man of your age.
You always forget, Chris, that you are defending the biggest liars in the world, even in the face of counter arguments by equally qualified scientists. What does that say about your ethics.
I’ve told you before Chris, I will not bend to your will. I will respond to you in kind.
Your pronouncements about me are a reflection of your lousy attitude.
Can someone tell me who is suppose to pay for all this corporate war…..all they want is more tax cuts
Liberty would be to free me from paying for fake corporate wars #foundingfathers
Tina: “You always forget, Chris, that you are defending the biggest liars in the world, even in the face of counter arguments by equally qualified scientists. What does that say about your ethics.”
I’m not “defending” anyone. All I’ve said in this conversation is that your claim about what NASA said was not true. You haven’t even tried to rebut this, because you know it’s not true. You won’t correct the headline because you’re trying to save face, but you’re just digging yourself a deeper hole. It’s embarrassing.
And your argument still amounts to “Other people lie, so it’s OK for me to lie too.” Do you really believe this? If you don’t, why do you keep saying it?
LOL!!!
Democrat busted for the second time.
Disgraced Democrat Caught With $1 Million In Cash Hidden In Safety Deposit Boxes:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/12/24/disgraced-democrat-caught-with-1-million-in-cash-hidden-in-safety-deposit-boxes/#ixzz3vGIzblxy