Obama General Discussion, vol. 5 - Page 3 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-06-2013, 07:13 PM   #31
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,386
Local Time: 05:59 PM
Don't mind healthcare for everyone. We are paying for it regardless (those who don't have ins). It should be a basic right for any us citizen. Other countries do it, and while not as large as us, I think we're smart enough to figure it out.

I don't really see any issues with freedom of speech. I think we have it set up correctly but that's not to say that sometimes we can overstep in regards to protecting it with hate speech. Common sense should prevail.

As for the big gulps and other crackdowns, isn't that a state or local issue which is what I thought conservatives yearn for. Obviously a more liberal state is going to have some laws like these where more conservative state would seem to have a more lax law in regards to health or environment.

I think the law is silly and there are better and more dangerous topics to go after
__________________

__________________
BEAL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 05:13 PM   #32
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,837
Local Time: 01:59 PM
Huffington Post

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange weighed in on the brewing controversy surrounding the Obama administration's targeted killing program Friday night during an appearance on "Real Time With Bill Maher."

Assange railed against the revelation, made by NBC News earlier this week, that the U.S. government reserves the right to extrajudicially kill U.S. citizens, as long as they are perceived to be "imminent" terror threats -- with "imminence" being given an especially broad definition.

Said Assange:

You can be killed by someone in the White House, the president on down, completely arbitrary reasons. You won't know you're on the kill list until you're dead.

Lawyers, if you have a suspicion you might be on this kill list, they can't even represent you. That was the case for our lawyers, the Center for Constitutional Rights, trying to represent Anwar Al-Awlaki -- who was discovered to be on that kill list, and his son -- wasn't even allowed to be his lawyer, because he was part of a proscribed organization.

Anwar Al-Awlaki was an alleged al Qaeda militant whose assassination by drone strike in 2011 engendered a significant amount of controversy, as Awlaki was a U.S. citizen. His 16-year-old son, Abdulrahman, who was also a U.S. citizen, was killed two weeks later in a separate drone strike in Yemen.

Assange continued to hammer away at the U.S. government, saying:

...When an executive can kill its own citizens arbitrarily at will, in secret, without any of the decision making becoming public, without even the rules of procedure, without even the laws behind it being public -- that's why we need organizations like WikiLeaks.
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 08:55 PM   #33
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:59 AM
From Sen. Marco Rubio’s Republican response to the President’s State of the Union Address

Quote:
And the truth is every problem can’t be solved by government. Many are caused by the moral breakdown in our society. And the answers to those challenges lie primarily in our families and our faiths, not our politicians.

Despite our differences, I know that both Republicans and Democrats love America. I pray we can come together to solve our problems, because the choices before us could not be more important.

If we can get our economy healthy again, our children will be the most prosperous Americans ever.

And if we do not, we will forever be known as the generation responsible for America’s decline.

This dream – of a better life for their children – it’s the hope of parents everywhere. Politicians here and throughout the world have long promised that more government can make those dreams come true.

But we Americans have always known better. From our earliest days, we embraced economic liberty instead. And because we did, America remains one of the few places on earth where dreams like these even have a chance.
Clearly hateful, bigoted, xenophobic and anti-science.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2013, 09:13 PM   #34
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,347
Local Time: 01:59 PM
No, just vapid and self obsessed and platitudinous.

If he's the great Soanish speaking hope of the GOP, Hillary can start buying new pantsuits.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 12:29 PM   #35
Resident Photo Buff
Forum Moderator
 
Diemen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Somewhere in middle America
Posts: 13,155
Local Time: 12:59 PM
Rubio: "More government isn't going to help you get ahead. It's going to hold you back. More government isn't going to create opportunities. It's going to limit them."

(later that same speech)

Rubio: "I believe in federal financial aid. I couldn’t have gone to college without it."

It seems Republicans think their only issue is image.
__________________
Diemen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 08:03 PM   #36
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,194
Local Time: 12:59 PM
Exactly.

Plus, more government in our lives is bad. Unless, of course, they're being used to make sure we live up to "good, moral Christian values". Then the government can get involved and run our lives all it wants!

But otherwise it's bad and we need to not rely on it so much.
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 09:20 AM   #37
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 01:59 PM
Quote:
The clear implication here is that Obama and Reggie Love, the president's former personal assistant (also called a "body man") are dating. This is a claim that has been made before on various right-wing blogs, including the ultra-conservative WorldNetDaily (WND), which also claimed Love had been photographed "engaging in a homosexual act" at a party at the University of North Carolina.
Lively last year claimed Obama had once been married to a man and used a video and op-ed by tea party conspiracy theorist Jerome Corsi to back up his claim
Scott Lively, 'Kill The Gays' Bill Supporter, Pushes Claim Obama Is Gay, Dating Reggie Love

I don't know if the hate for Obama has gotten funnier or more pathetic. Yeah, pathetic works.
__________________
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2013, 09:40 AM   #38
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BEAL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: San Diego
Posts: 3,386
Local Time: 05:59 PM
It is quite amazing. When Bush was in office most you would hear is how dumb he is, draft dodger, war monger....

But nothing to the extreme of what Obama has seen thrown his way.
__________________
BEAL is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 06:00 PM   #39
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:59 AM
Quote:
Sixth-graders at St. Paul's Lutheran School in Waverly, Iowa, had their coming visit canceled as the White House suspended all tours under across-the-board government spending cuts in a partisan budget battle. The disappointed class put a video on Facebook asking for the tour to be reinstated. “The White House is our house, please let us visit,” the children say in unison.




Do not arouse the wrath of the great and powerful Obama.

Go away !!
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 07:00 PM   #40
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:59 AM
Obama Foodorama: Sen. Collins: No Food 'Taster' With President Obama, So He Didn't Eat At GOP Luncheon

Quote:
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Sen. Collins: No Food 'Taster' With President Obama, So He Didn't Eat At GOP Luncheon

President Obama was offered a feast of Maine treats, including University of Maine lobster salad and Wild Blueberry Pie when he visited Senate Republicans for a Capitol Hill luncheon on Thursday. But he didn't touch a bite, Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) told reporters following the 1:30 PM eat n' greet. That's because the President didn't have a food "taster" with him, said Collins, who was responsible for the menu.
So now we find out our lawful and beloved Sovereign needs a royal food taster? But yet can't find the money to fund White House tours for the peasants.
__________________
INDY500 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 09:25 PM   #41
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,174
Local Time: 01:59 PM
Quote:
According to a Washington Post article from July 1990, George H.W. Bush ate out at Washington restaurants a lot by presidential standards, about once a month, and when he did he brought along his own condiments, bottled water, and a taster. On at least one occasion the taster was seen to personally wash all of George and Barbara's tableware before use and subsequently monitor its whereabouts, sample the food, supervise its service, and uncork and taste the first couple's wine.
But let's not let facts get in the way of your outrage, INDY.
__________________
anitram is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2013, 09:35 PM   #42
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 01:59 PM
I would think any head of state would need a food taster - especially the President of the United States. If they're at risk for being shot by anyone, why aren't they at risk for being poisoned?
__________________
Pearl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 07:15 PM   #43
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,243
Local Time: 01:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BEAL View Post
Didn't our government push through the Patriot Act? Do we not hold prisioners in a prison with no due process because we consider them enemy combatants? Do we not call for assinations of US citizens abroad because they might be linked to terrorist organizations? Wire tapping?

Notice I didn't label a specific group in the goverment being responsible for doing this, as both GOP and Dems have signed their names to the policies above.

Slippery slope. We want our country to be safe, but at what costs to our liberties?

I agree.

I did not vote for Bush. He trampled on our freedoms, increased big government, and went on a spending spree.

Obama has just continued this horror.





“Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.”

~Benjamin Franklin
__________________
the iron horse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2013, 10:53 PM   #44
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
U2DMfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: It's Inside A Black Hole
Posts: 6,629
Local Time: 12:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by the iron horse View Post
I agree.

I did not vote for Bush. He trampled on our freedoms, increased big government, and went on a spending spree.

Obama has just continued this horror.
What administration do you feel had the right amount of spending?
In other words, what is the proper size of government?

You say you want a smaller government but do you (in practice)? Honestly?
I deal with this issue ALL the time in discussing politics/economics with some of the people I know. Almost all of them are of some libertarian variety. And they all want a smaller government and bitch about welfare spending and public unions, etc. Some of it is legitimate criticism, but a lot of it is ignorant to the REAL issue here. Revenues versus the Govt EVERYONE wants, even if they say they don't.

You should measure spending relative to GDP. That cancels out the inflation and population growth. In other words, saying X-trillion in 2012 doesn't really speak to 2002 or 1992 or 1982 or 1972.

But if you measure it relative to GDP, you really get an equitable sense of how big the spending was in any given fiscal year as a part of the whole.

The basic conservative mantra for the last 30 years has been 18% of GDP is ideal. And yet no President in 40 years (or perhaps more?) has kept spending that low. We simply can't operate on such a low amount of spending.

If the President is Reagan, Clinton, Bush or Obama, we are going to be at no less than 19%. And given increasing life expectancy and dealing with Social Security and Medicare, no serious future conversation should be below 20%.

I would say 20% (spending) is about right.
And in those same 40 years, we've hit 20% (GDP) revenues only ONCE.
We aren't even giving ourselves a chance to balance the budget.

It is a math problem and a revenue problem.
And of course 24% (the current number) makes it a spending problem too.

Bush's spending wasn't out of line with Clinton's 4 consecutive balanced budgets. The biggest difference? They cut taxes twice. Revenues. The patron saint of conservatives, Reagan had higher spending (of GDP) than W Bush.

The personal liberty issues are a different thing.
I just feel like I am constantly at war with 'popular' libertarianism.
It's not fighting the right battle. I blame Ron Paul for a lot of this.
__________________
U2DMfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-18-2013, 02:10 AM   #45
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,779
Local Time: 01:59 PM
I like your post.

I am a Libertarian at heart. I think government is just a small part of my life.

Who's to say government is a certain size?

~ My estimation of Iron Horse's response.
__________________

__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com